Numerator's Method

[hermes]

Hi Numerator,

You posted me a minisystem:

RULE 1. Races of 9 starters or more at Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane meetings on Saturdays.

RULE 2. To be a selection the horse must have a 90 percent or more placegetting record from at least 9 life starts, and its latest start must have been within the last 18 days.

RULE 3. Be patient, really patient.

I was curious about your figures. Why 9 starts? Why 18 days? Has he researched these parameter's I wondered?

Took me a while to see what you're up to.

What about this:

HI STRIKING IMPROVERS

*87% average
*21 starts
*32 Days.
*Improving form figures last two starts. Eg. 87, 21, 32.

Works. Very low volume but a reliable road to about 80% place strike rate.

Can't fault youir method though. Working back through papers I'm on the look out for qualifiers. Not many, all strikes so far.

Like your number angle, Numerator. :smile:

Hermes

[Numerator]

G'day Hermes.
Why 9 starts? you ask. Well I originally went for 10 starts, then it occurred to me that it didn't make sense, eg I'd be including a horse who'd won 9 out of 10 but excluding one who'd won 9 out of 9. So, opted for 9. Also, lots of horses start out their careers very well and place 100 percent over a smaller number of starts, so 9 as a minimum was a good cleaner-outer for a super-cautious place method

Why 18 days? Simple, its twice 9! :smile: I'm a bit of an angler sometimes for fluid patterns in my little systems eg 9 starters, 90 percent, 9 starts, 18 days - all based in the digit 9. Helps me remember the rules of different systems too

Also the majority of horses running probably meet the 21 day rule so I made it a little tighter at 18

Research? No, I just think up numbers, cross my fingers, and throw it away if it doesn't work or if it looks like it's already had its moment in the sun. I like things to appear simple, not too complex, but still based somehow in a bit of reason. This little system was intended to be low volume, but it's probably too low on volume. You'd lose interest waiting

I like your Hi Striking Improvers idea, a really good combo. Not entirely sure about the 32 days - I lean towards lesser intervals only because I think it's more likely a horse will be race-fit. I'd be interested to see how it goes though

PS: in the battle between me and the TAB, the TAB's ahead by a few lengths in a very long race. I'm happy to acknowledge I'm on the wrong side of the profit line - it gives me way more scope to improve! :smile:

PPS: I would only play the "super-cautious" when it threw up a TAB No 5, 6, 7 or 8, but that's just me!

[croc]

Hello to you Numerator,

Just for a bit of a laugh I took your penchant for number 9 and put it through my not quite up-to-date data base for the 9 months prior to June 9 with the following selection criteria added;

Days to last start: 9
Last start finishing
position: 1-9

Meetings considered: 2232 (This is weird!)
Races selected: 1
Horses selected: 1
Win Div.(NSWTAB) $19.10

The winners was M6 19 ( Rubitano ) at Flemington on 09.03.02.

I can e-mail you my System Selector report if the above figures are doubted.

Maybe a numerologist could explain all this.

Ciao,

[Numerator]

WOW! Croc, that is amazing, almost SCARY!!!
Good on you for checking that out.