Hi Barny.
Major axiom =11 on stubborness.
The first 10 words paragragh=1.
Do you agree with those words?.
Bit harsh.

Barny, thanks for posting.

We can only publish non subscriber information.

If what you posted is public information then post a link please to where the information is made available to the public free of charge.

Hey Barny,
I reckon I,ve lived my whole life on those axioms and didn,t even know it.
A great set of commonsense principles.
Thank you.
Cheers
darky

wesmip1,
Could you just clarify for me what the expected winners number represents? For instance, if the average odds is 30 would I expect 37 winners from 1135 bets as per the original system or from the tweaked version? Or from some other number of bets?
Thanks
Ron

If your average ods were 30 then we would expet 1/30*1135 as expected winners = 37.83

So based on your 1135 bets chance alone (ie I pick a random selections at $30) would have hit approx 37 winners. As this is an imprecise science there is some leeway on the actual number of winners that chance could have hit (maybe 30 or maybe 50) but as more selections come in the closer to the mean would occur (which is 3.3% strike rate). In order to decide whether a system is better then chance (and thus will get a profit) you need a much higher strike rate then chance allows (based on the odds).

You can do a chi-squared test to work out the impact chance had on the results but without the real odds for each selections its not really worth going down to that level.

Hope that explains it.

Yes it does, thank you. I shall now take the time to analyse my bets more carefully to see if I can spot why I'm making a profit.
Ron

I’ve read 70 pages and made notes, and I’ve got to say there are some absolute gems hidden in amongst the hundreds of thousands of words.



So far, all bar a couple of the systems posted have been proven to have a LOT.



Some of the “undisputed givens in racing” such as weight and bad barriers might be insignificant in your assessment of a horse’s chances, and conversely, might actually add value.



Most of the ratings lead to the top few in the betting, and the value / advantage to be gained that may have once been there, is no longer there.



There appears to be only a few decent filters that may improve the SR without decreasing the POT.



Are the stats you’re looking at relevant ? Stats can be made to show exactly what you want to see and need to be treated with caution.



A selection method is probably better that a mechanical system.

I need a break. It's doing my head in reading most of these posts .....

Going to punt my %'s method, not mnay posts on this type of method is there ?

I'm well over half way though the posts and a couple of things stand out.

Weight seems to be over-rated, but can still be used as a guide to a horses class.

If your horse has drawn a bad barrier you'll be compensated by a better price. Some suggest that the price may be adjusted by far more than is deserved because of the perception of bad / wide barriers.

The number of days between runs seems inconsequential.

A horses odds seems to be a very, very good filter, and one that I had previously given scant regard to.

Be prepared for a massive run of outs.

Develop a system of "logical" rules then test. Don't backfit to find a successful system.