Ultimate Value Betting is a horse racing betting system developed by Graham Cook.
What does the product offer?
Ultimate Value Betting comes in the form of an 8 page PDF guide which Graham Cook says is easy enough to follow. He claims that Ultimate Value betting has proved successful with average win odds of 8.79 BSP and only one losing month in eleven (and even then the loss was minimal at 8.16 points).
How does the product work?
The Ultimate Value Betting Manual that Graham Cook provides will allegedly teach you how to make your own selections for the races. These operate in a small niche dealing only with All Weather handicaps. Actual details about the selection process are sketchy so it is difficult to deduce the methods used for selection.
What is the initial investment?
Graham Cook has made Ultimate Value Betting available for a single payment of £47 down which is a massive reduction on the initial costs of £147. There is a full 60 day money back guarantee available as the product is purchased through ClickBank.
What is the rate of return?
At the time of writing Ultimate Value Betting has allegedly produced a 389.94 point profit for 2013. Based off of Graham Cook’s recommended staking of £10 per point this equates to £3,899.40.
Conclusion
There are a few things that put me a little on edge with Ultimate Value Betting. First of all, I am always a little wary of any betting system that claims to teach you how to make your own selections as it can be difficult to know if your choices are correct. Secondly is that there is no information available at all on the selection process. Although I don’t expect sellers to divulge the ins and outs of their systems I don’t see any harm in saying if a system is form based or is built around a backing system. I don’t even feel that Ultimate Value Betting is cheap enough to warrant a gamble.
The results provided by Graham Cook are great but unless you know that you too will obtain them (which there is no guarantee of as you will be deducing your own selections) I’m of the opinion that it is better to err on the side of caution.
