Horseracingman Site

[betjack]

I hate "review" sites like this one, same old story...
how can they be unbiased reviews when they are affiliates of the systems they are meant to be giving honest opinions of?

[mark1703]

It has always appeared quite an honest site to me.

Perhpas they are they are using the affiliates partly as payment the work they are doing?

[loud]

betjack, I have almost all of the systems which he are tested there. And I can fully agree with him about recommended systems. There is no cheating :)

[ExcitableBoy]

Betjack,

I wouldn't say this Horseracingman was an Adrian Massey in terms of independance but to be fair he does seem to be pretty honest in his opinions. He certainly slags enough systems off, which he wouldn't do if he was just after your referral dough!

EB

[topbombing]

Maybe the ones like winnerstolosers get the best reviews because they pay the most commission ;-)

[ricarte]

And at the end of the day results and the green is all that counts. I would want verified past history - and lots of it. In fact, when it comes to the horses I work with a 3 year rolling window of past result data. Things are always changing but they don't change that quickly.

..

[betjack]

The site is no different to all the price comparison sites, they give their "honest" opinion on prices of goods but only if they can be affiliated with the sellers.
If sites with affiliate links were to have a banner across each review stating that they are affiliates then at least they would be more open and honest to people who are looking for genuine info on some of these expensive systems.

[betjack]

Also see that the Horseracingman site has removed my comment asking how they could be trusted to give honest opinions about systems when they are affiliated to them.
I wonder how many other comments get deleted of people who have different views about some of their "recommended" systems?

[ExcitableBoy]

Also see that the Horseracingman site has removed my comment asking how they could be trusted to give honest opinions about systems when they are affiliated to them.
I wonder how many other comments get deleted of people who have different views about some of their "recommended" systems?

Hmmmmm, yes, well that is unfortunate to say the least as it does make you wonder (I'm assuming you were polite).

I see Horseracingman posting here, perhaps he can clarify?

[rafe245]

Betjack

Is your whole vent about this site because he removed your comments, it does seem this way to me. I have found this site to be one of the more honest unlike onlinebettingexposed that recommend everything. Horseracingman recommends far less than he doesn't and i personally own most of the recommended ones and am happy with them. Maybe its you who is the problem and your hurt pride about having your message removed (and i bet you were abusive) has made you inititiate a rather dull topic. If Horseracingman even acknowledged this thread it would mean he stooped to your level.........thats why he has not responded

[betjack]

Betjack

Is your whole vent about this site because he removed your comments, it does seem this way to me. I have found this site to be one of the more honest unlike onlinebettingexposed that recommend everything. Horseracingman recommends far less than he doesn't and i personally own most of the recommended ones and am happy with them. Maybe its you who is the problem and your hurt pride about having your message removed (and i bet you were abusive) has made you inititiate a rather dull topic. If Horseracingman even acknowledged this thread it would mean he stooped to your level.........thats why he has not responded


Or maybe he has not responded because he wants this post forgotten and buried?
As for me being abusive, no, that is one bet you have lost, anyway thanks for contributing to "a rather dull post"

[horseracingman]

I have just seen this discussion now. Certainly not surprised that we would receive some negative feedback since there are lots of people (system sellers) angry because we don't recommend there systems.

WE HAVE NOT DELETED ANY POSTING FROM YOU BETJACK. I think it is your post under "The Snare System" 27th January 12.53 - It has been standing there since and I have also replied to it.

ALL COMMENTS must be individually confirmed by me before they appear on the site since we receive tons of spam from people just wanting to link to there own sites. That could be the reason why you thought that your comment was deleted, but I can say that it has NEVER been deleted. I have to do other things than confirming "comments" every minute of the day, and sometimes I'm on holiday so there it will take longer time before comments are shown.

Hope it clarifies things :-) And glad that you feel my site is so important to you that you join a discussion forum to write about it - and nothing else ;-)

[betjack]

I have just seen this discussion now. Certainly not surprised that we would receive some negative feedback since there are lots of people (system sellers) angry because we don't recommend there systems.

WE HAVE NOT DELETED ANY POSTING FROM YOU BETJACK. I think it is your post under "The Snare System" 27th January 12.53 - It has been standing there since and I have also replied to it.

ALL COMMENTS must be individually confirmed by me before they appear on the site since we receive tons of spam from people just wanting to link to there own sites. That could be the reason why you thought that your comment was deleted, but I can say that it has NEVER been deleted. I have to do other things than confirming "comments" every minute of the day, and sometimes I'm on holiday so there it will take longer time before comments are shown.


Hope it clarifies things :-) And glad that you feel my site is so important to you that you join a discussion forum to write about it - and nothing else ;-)


Thanks for taking the time to reply Horseracingman, your explanation of where my comment had gone is accepted as a very reasonable set of circumstances as to why it was missing.

Regarding your shite being important enough to start a thread about, well maybe its not that important, unless you are one of the people who purchased a "lousy" system on your recommendation, and no doubt it is important to you as you earn commissions from those that purchase via your site, and no, I am not a previous victim of yours who has bought a system.

[rafe245]

Hi Betjack

And you said that your post was not abusive, look above dipstick. This shows that your whole attitude is rather repulsive and negative. Somehow i dont think you are capable of positive comments, so i still believe and quite correctly that you were abusive and no doubt rude. So in reply to your earlier response, i believe that is a bet i won and twice.

Go and bore some other forum you loser
Martin

[betjack]

Hi Betjack

And you said that your post was not abusive, look above dipstick. This shows that your whole attitude is rather repulsive and negative. Somehow i dont think you are capable of positive comments, so i still believe and quite correctly that you were abusive and no doubt rude. So in reply to your earlier response, i believe that is a bet i won and twice.

Go and bore some other forum you loser
Martin

Here is my comment that I left on Horseracingman's site:

"Why should we believe a word this site says as you are affiliated to these systems, you earn money by reviewing them!"

I think anyone reading the comment I left and your comments rafe245 will be able to determine who is rude and abusive.

[scott61]

Well, after reading through this thread, I had a look at Horseracingmans site, and comments on this system.

They only started testing the system on the 4th of Feb, and did say on the 23rd of Jan not to rush out and buy it until it had been tested.

Horseracingman did say that he was "skeptical" about the system and "could see no mathematical reason" should work.

There has only been one system bet so far, on the 5th, which resulted in a 5pt loss. So, as the system is still under test, it cannot be classed as "Recommended".

I honestly can't see what Betjacks argument is.

[betjack]

Well, after reading through this thread, I had a look at Horseracingmans site, and comments on this system.

They only started testing the system on the 4th of Feb, and did say on the 23rd of Jan not to rush out and buy it until it had been tested.

Horseracingman did say that he was "skeptical" about the system and "could see no mathematical reason" should work.

There has only been one system bet so far, on the 5th, which resulted in a 5pt loss. So, as the system is still under test, it cannot be classed as "Recommended".

I honestly can't see what Betjacks argument is.

My argument is not with any particular system that Horseracingman does or does not recommend, my point is that the site does not let the reader know that they are affiliated to the systems they review on their site, not everyone knows about affiliate marketing sites.
They may well say the majority of systems they review do not work, this gives the site some credibility which in turn is a good way to sell the dozen or so they do recommend, which might also be the ones that pay the highest commission?

[scott61]

Fair point Betjack.

[Ixion]

My argument is not with any particular system that Horseracingman does or does not recommend, my point is that the site does not let the reader know that they are affiliated to the systems they review on their site, not everyone knows about affiliate marketing sites.
They may well say the majority of systems they review do not work, this gives the site some credibility which in turn is a good way to sell the dozen or so they do recommend, which might also be the ones that pay the highest commission?
yes, you have a point. It's very difficult to find unbiased reviews of any betting systems. Most of them are affiliates of the systems they're "reviewing". Byt probably Horseracingman is one of the better ones.

[mrchisel]

people should show all their tips and results