OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums - Anyone with a neural database....?

View Full Version : Anyone with a neural database....?

Stix

9th July 2009, 09:13 AM

Would anyone with a neural data base have the values for the following selections? (Set to 3)

Thanks In Advance

<TABLE style="WIDTH: 244pt; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=324 border=0><COLGROUP><COL style="WIDTH: 47pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 2304" width=63><COL style="WIDTH: 63pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 3072" width=84><COL style="WIDTH: 11pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 512" width=14><COL style="WIDTH: 16pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 768" width=21><COL style="WIDTH: 107pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 5193" width=142><TBODY><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD class=xl65 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; WIDTH: 47pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; HEIGHT: 15pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" align=right width=63 height=20>27/05/09</TD><TD class=xl66 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; WIDTH: 63pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" width=84>Canterbury</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; WIDTH: 11pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" width=14>4</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; WIDTH: 16pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" width=21>1</TD><TD class=xl68 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; WIDTH: 107pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" width=142>Floriade</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD class=xl65 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; HEIGHT: 15pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" align=right height=20>27/05/09</TD><TD class=xl66 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Canterbury</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">5</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">10</TD><TD class=xl68 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Avago</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD class=xl65 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; HEIGHT: 15pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" align=right height=20>29/05/09</TD><TD class=xl66 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Canberra</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">3</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">6</TD><TD class=xl68 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Skyrossa</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD class=xl65 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; HEIGHT: 15pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" align=right height=20>31/05/09</TD><TD class=xl66 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Gosford</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">1</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">1</TD><TD class=xl69 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Made it to the moon</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Stix

9th July 2009, 09:14 AM

...and these? (sorry wouldn;t allow me to put it in one post...)

<TABLE style="WIDTH: 244pt; BORDER-COLLAPSE: collapse" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width=324 border=0><COLGROUP><COL style="WIDTH: 47pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 2304" width=63><COL style="WIDTH: 63pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 3072" width=84><COL style="WIDTH: 11pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 512" width=14><COL style="WIDTH: 16pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 768" width=21><COL style="WIDTH: 107pt; mso-width-source: userset; mso-width-alt: 5193" width=142><TBODY><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD class=xl65 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; WIDTH: 47pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; HEIGHT: 15pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" align=right width=63 height=20>01/06/09</TD><TD class=xl66 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; WIDTH: 63pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" width=84>Taree</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; WIDTH: 11pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" width=14>2</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; WIDTH: 16pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" width=21>1</TD><TD class=xl69 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; WIDTH: 107pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" width=142>Master Danny</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD class=xl65 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; HEIGHT: 15pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" align=right height=20>02/06/09</TD><TD class=xl66 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Rockhampton</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">3</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">1</TD><TD class=xl69 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Graiglea Hummer</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD class=xl65 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; HEIGHT: 15pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" align=right height=20>05/06/09</TD><TD class=xl66 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Goulburn</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">3</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">8</TD><TD class=xl69 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Al Mateena</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD class=xl65 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; HEIGHT: 15pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" align=right height=20>05/06/09</TD><TD class=xl66 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Goulburn</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">4</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">9</TD><TD class=xl68 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Briolette</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD class=xl65 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; HEIGHT: 15pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" align=right height=20>05/06/09</TD><TD class=xl66 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Grafton</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">1</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">7</TD><TD class=xl68 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Subculture</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD class=xl65 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; HEIGHT: 15pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" align=right height=20>05/06/09</TD><TD class=xl66 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Grafton</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">3</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">4</TD><TD class=xl68 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Cabriole</TD></TR><TR style="HEIGHT: 15pt" height=20><TD class=xl65 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; HEIGHT: 15pt; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent" align=right height=20>10/06/09</TD><TD class=xl66 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Gold Coast</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">5</TD><TD class=xl67 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">11</TD><TD class=xl68 style="BORDER-RIGHT: #ece9d8; BORDER-TOP: #ece9d8; BORDER-LEFT: #ece9d8; BORDER-BOTTOM: #ece9d8; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent">Questionheir</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Stix

14th July 2009, 11:11 AM

Anyone please?

Stix

7th December 2010, 10:23 AM

Didn't get much help last time, but hoping this time might be different.....

Can anyone, who has records or a database of the neural top raters, be able to provide a list of worst performing tracks with regard to strike rates for neural top raters?

Looking over my results the following tracks are poor performers:

Armidale
Ballina
Bendigo
Coffs Harbour
Colac
Coonabarrabran
Coonamble
Flemington
Gawler
Geelong
Gold Coast
Grafton
Hamilton
Hawkesbury
Horsham
Inverall
Kembla Grange
Kyneton
Moe
Morphettville
Murray Bridge
Muswellbrook
Newcastle
Penola
Pt Lincoln
Queanbeyan
Randwick
Rosehill
Sunshine Coast
Tamworth
Taree
Wangaratta
Warrnambool
Wodonga
Wyong
Yarra Valley

Thanks In Advance

TWOBETS

7th December 2010, 11:20 AM

Morning Stix,

Sorry, can't help you with any records, but I do use the Neurals for my selections and I was just wanting to say that for me the thing with using the Neurals is that they are interactive. So what one person might see as the result on any particular race might be totally different to how you might be reading the Neurals for that race.
Or of course I might be totally wrong.:)

lomaca

7th December 2010, 02:52 PM

Can anyone, who has records or a database of the neural top raters, be able to provide a list of worst performing tracks with regard to strike rates for neural top raters?

Looking over my results the following tracks are poor performers:

Confused!
If you know them already, why do you ask?

Just curious.

Stix

7th December 2010, 08:15 PM

Confused!
If you know them already, why do you ask?

Just curious.The are my records for a two month period only.....hoping others with a larger database maybe able to concur or advise otherwise...

lomaca

8th December 2010, 08:45 AM

The are my records for a two month period only.....hoping others with a larger database maybe able to concur or advise otherwise...fair enough Stix, although it wasn't made clear in your post, specially since you were looking for data from May and June last year, indicating that you have at least a year's worth of data.

I'm sorry I jumped to conclusions, it's always dangerous.

Stix

8th December 2010, 09:18 AM

fair enough Stix, although it wasn't made clear in your post, specially since you were looking for data from May and June last year, indicating that you have at least a year's worth of data.

I'm sorry I jumped to conclusions, it's always dangerous.Yeah, my bad.
I actually gave up the neural last year as there didn't seem to be too many willing to assist, so wrongly or rightly, I thought it wasn't worth my time persuing...but now I have some promising (but limited) results.

I was just going through some extra analysis of the data I have and started looking at tracks POT and S/R for (my filtered) top raters, so not all top raters and found those track so far have performed well away from the mean.

I'm not looking at WA or TAS venues, but past experience says they don't perform well.

NSW venues, seems to be the most inconsistent with Metro, Provincial and country meetings as a group throwing up surprising numbers on the low side, but can be "massaged" with filters and dropping a few tracks, particularly the lower level country venues.

SA venues also seem to be very inconsistent and even with filters, I struggle to find a viable method.

Vic and Qld are reasonable, with some larger dividends being found in QLD, the Gold Coast track and neurals appear to be a natural fit for laying http://www.propun.com.au/racing_forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif Geelong synthetic also appears to not be viable at al with (filtered) top raters.

Anyway, just some of my observations from the inital two month results.

Hope to find my old data base and go over the same filters to see any "sands of time" type movements http://www.propun.com.au/racing_forums/images/smilies/cool.gif

All the best.

Anyone want to drop me a line on neurals, would be appreciated via pro_pun @ aanet dot com dot au

lomaca

8th December 2010, 10:07 AM

Yeah, my bad.
I actually gave up the neural last year as there didn't seem to be too many willing to assist, so wrongly or rightly, I thought it wasn't worth my time persuing...but now I have some promising (but limited) results.

I was just going through some extra analysis of the data I have and started looking at tracks POT and S/R for (my filtered) top raters, so not all top raters and found those track so far have performed well away from the mean.

I'm not looking at WA or TAS venues, but past experience says they don't perform well.

NSW venues, seems to be the most inconsistent with Metro, Provincial and country meetings as a group throwing up surprising numbers on the low side, but can be "massaged" with filters and dropping a few tracks, particularly the lower level country venues.

SA venues also seem to be very inconsistent and even with filters, I struggle to find a viable method.

Vic and Qld are reasonable, with some larger dividends being found in QLD, the Gold Coast track and neurals appear to be a natural fit for laying http://www.propun.com.au/racing_forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif Geelong synthetic also appears to not be viable at al with (filtered) top raters.

Anyway, just some of my observations from the inital two month results.

Hope to find my old data base and go over the same filters to see any "sands of time" type movements http://www.propun.com.au/racing_forums/images/smilies/cool.gif

All the best.

Anyone want to drop me a line on neurals, would be appreciated via pro_pun @ aanet dot com dot auWell I don't as such use the Neurals for betting but since I have them I automatically run them when I 'm looking at the results and the CP second selection without any filters shows a profit for the win almost any day.

In this case if someone was going to bet on them without filters, I'd say follow Baghwan's advice and stop betting when a good winner found.

And they score in the range from evens to almost any odds so no point in leaving any out, maybe the very short ones?

Good luck

lomaca

8th December 2010, 11:21 AM

Well I don't as such use the Neurals for betting but since I have them I automatically run them when I 'm looking at the results and the CP second selection without any filters shows a profit for the win almost any day.

In this case if someone was going to bet on them without filters, I'd say follow Baghwan's advice and stop betting when a good winner found.

And they score in the range from evens to almost any odds so no point in leaving any out, maybe the very short ones?

Good luckPS, just looked at yesterday's results, an exceptionally good day for the CP second selection.

betting all races all tracks win return $33.20 place $9.90

Place usually is in the red. I still say, when ahead quit, unless you can select the races to bet on.

michaelg

8th December 2010, 02:16 PM

lomaca, since Sunday I have been testing/betting the CP alogorithym using multiple Win bets. I bet on average half the field in chosen races which I know many people say a profit cannot be made because there are too many selections.

However, since Sunday there have been 22 races for 16 winners which is only a very small sample. Using TAB divvies the POT is currently 8.7%, but I have been betting with Betfair's S.P which is currently producing a POT of 25.9%.

The divvies are so good that I would not be surprised that if after an acceptable period of time and an acceptable number of races the method shows a loss with the TAB but is profitable with Betfair's S.P.

In fact, my calculations with Betfair are not correct. For example, if I back 4 horses in the one race and I strike a $5 winner I now apply Betfair's deduction of 5% to the winner's price of $5.00. This comes to the winner paying $4.75 which I record, and translates to a profit of $0.75. Because I bet Betfair's minimum allowable bet of $5 this comes to a profit on the race of $3.95

However, the correct way to calculate the result is to multiply the $5 winner by 5 then deduct that bet's outlay of $5 which comes to $20, and then deduct the losing 3 bets totalling $15 which comes to a profit of $5. Betfair now deducts their 5% fee on the race's profit of $5 resulting in an overall profit of $4.75 as opposed to my recorded profit of $3.95.

I hope I haven't confused anyone with this, but my quoted $25.9% POT is in reality even higher. I use this incorrect method of calculating the profit because its more convenient.

lomaca

8th December 2010, 07:50 PM

Typical ain't it?
I don't bet them just observe them, mention it on the forum and the bottom falls out!

But believe me they DO work even on last Sunday they were only down by -$1.90 betting all races, and a day like yesterday would atone for a lot of sins!
Find an angle for yourselves to reduce the number of bets and you are laughing.

Good luck.

beton

8th December 2010, 08:20 PM

Hi All
Carry them into NZ R6 $21.40 WA TAB puts it in front 10% POT even if you bet all the equal seconds and both when equal CP
Regards Beton

wesmip1

8th December 2010, 08:24 PM

Stix I can help.

I have the neurals just using default settings (3 for everything but wet) for a while going back.

If you want help just let me know where I can contact you (email).

lomaca

8th December 2010, 08:31 PM

Hi All
Carry them into NZ R6 $21.40 WA TAB puts it in front 10% POT even if you bet all the equal seconds and both when equal CP
Regards BetonGood man beton,
I only follow OZ races but have fun bets on NZ races when certain jocks riding horses I follow.

Good luck

wesmip1

8th December 2010, 08:42 PM

You are right in some of your tracks. I have run a quick test over tracks using a cut off of $15 for the top neural rater. $15 lay odds on betfair that is.

The following tracks had potential. The ones to the bottom are the better ones as far as laying (ie Albury is the best):

<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD>Flemington</TD></TR><TR><TD>Kembla Grange</TD></TR><TR><TD>Sunshine Coast Cushion Track</TD></TR><TR><TD>York</TD></TR><TR><TD>Nowra</TD></TR><TR><TD>Kalgoorlie</TD></TR><TR><TD>Cairns</TD></TR><TR><TD>Port Lincoln</TD></TR><TR><TD>Betfair Park Sandown Lakeside</TD></TR><TR><TD>Port Augusta</TD></TR><TR><TD>Penola</TD></TR><TR><TD>Kilmore</TD></TR><TR><TD>Geraldton</TD></TR><TR><TD>Albury</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

You will notice no Geelong Synthetic. Although Geelong Synthetic made a profit the likelyhood overall of a loss was higher as the odds on the nural top raters are just too high when at Geelong Synthetic. Same with the Gold Coast.

Stix

9th December 2010, 09:55 AM

Stix I can help.

I have the neurals just using default settings (3 for everything but wet) for a while going back.

If you want help just let me know where I can contact you (email).Thanks Wesmip1 :D
stix _ hotcopper @ aanet dot com dot au

wesmip1

9th December 2010, 12:30 PM

Sent you an email Stix and included a little extra system for you.

Stix

9th December 2010, 02:53 PM

Sent you an email Stix and included a little extra system for you.Got it, many thanks, replied with an email response with a outline of what I've been working on.

Bhagwan

9th December 2010, 06:47 PM

Hi Iomaca,
Thanks for sharing your findings.

I ran that CP plan today Thur 9th Dec.

Targeting the 2nd CP Neural selction.

It made a profit of 8% increase on bank.

Betting 1% of bank, level stakes.

That's an impressive result

Targeting one winner per venue.
Meaning you bet all venues but stop at the first winner for each venue.
4 venues = Target 4 winners.
1 from each venue.

beton

9th December 2010, 08:03 PM

lomaca

10th December 2010, 04:42 AM

Hi Iomaca
I followed this yesterday on paper. It made a killing on NZ. I followed it again today. I need a little clarity here. The second CP selection? what if equal top or in the case of 2, 3 or 4 equal second? Today on 41 races inc NZ there were 63 selections because of equal top or equal second. Yesterday there was 69 selections for 45 races but returned $83.30 on WA TAB results. They obviously need culling.This system could suit me.
Regards BetonHi beton,
I don't bet them just look at them when I check the results, it comes up on the screen automatically.
Only one selection even if more than one equal rating, what you can do is either leave the race alone, or check if they have higher points in an other category as a secondary criteria.

I would leave it alone, there are plenty of races to bet, besides I doubt if it is profitable when bet on all races, yes sometimes it is but there is also the danger of missing out altogether on some days.

Good luck

beton

10th December 2010, 10:09 AM

lomaca

10th December 2010, 10:46 AM

Thanks Iomaca
I figured that was the case. Obviously your software selects the second CP by default. This default selection process is what works. on the quick look I did there were up to 4 equal seconds and several equal top. This extra number of selections would be unsubstainable. On Wednesday there was 4 winners from 6 races in NZ giving a 20% POT on the day. It looked a good winner. Yesterday the opposite occurred. Too many extra selections. Reality bites. I will look at it differently with second CP as a guide.
Regards BetonActually no, I look at the first four selection and the second selection constantly outperforms the other three, although sometimes the first one or the third one is the better. (you can look at my screen here:http://www.flickr.com/photos/56869927@N07/?saved=1)

Have not done a thorough analysis yet, due to lack of interest (mine!) and lack of time, may do so in the future.

Good luck

beton

10th December 2010, 03:31 PM

Thanks Iomaca.
What program are you using?
at the end of the day most of the horses are capable of winning the race. Or at least the trainer thinks so and the handicapper if he has done his job properly has made it so. With everybody having access to computors the number crunching is easy. This brings up 3, 4 or 5 horses that everybody is sure to win. The favorite ends up an emotional choice and as everybody wants on the sure thing it gets overbet and loses value. The second best horse has as good a chance of winning at better return. The trick is to find that second best horse. This is not the second favorite as that too is emotional. I was looking at Best Form's second top rated. That showed promise but alas no value. Maybe the second CP will do it.
Regards Beton

lomaca

10th December 2010, 04:09 PM

Thanks Iomaca.
What program are you using?
I worked in IT, I roll my own.

The trick is to find that second best horse. Maybe the second CP will do it.
From what I have seen it wins at all sorts of odds, that's probably why it's profitable. The trick is to reduce the bets, in my opinion.

I used to bet on almost every race, now it is unusual for me to have more than 6-7 bets on day with 4 meetings.

Good luck

beton

10th December 2010, 04:32 PM

Hi Iomaca
(I worked in IT, I roll my own) Great LSB
Regards Beton

wesmip1

10th December 2010, 09:45 PM

Actually no, I look at the first four selection and the second selection constantly outperforms the other three, although sometimes the first one or the third one is the better. (you can look at my screen here:http://www.flickr.com/photos/56869927@N07/?saved=1)

Have not done a thorough analysis yet, due to lack of interest (mine!) and lack of time, may do so in the future.

Good luck
Don't know how many selections your looking at but your analysis is different to mine. The top CP outperforms the second rated CP over the length of my database. And with the amount of selections I have in my database I will happily stand by my figures.

Top Ranked CP = 89% returned at 21% strike rate
2nd Ranked CP = 84% returned at 16% strike rate
3rd Ranked CP = 86% returned at 13% strike rate
4th Ranked CP = 83% returned at 11% strike rate

Thats a clear 5% points in both odds and strike rate for the top rated CP over the 2nd rated CP.

The above is over thousands of selections.

lomaca

11th December 2010, 08:54 AM

Don't know how many selections your looking at but your analysis is different to mine. The top CP outperforms the second rated CP over the length of my database. And with the amount of selections I have in my database I will happily stand by my figures.

Top Ranked CP = 89% returned at 21% strike rate
2nd Ranked CP = 84% returned at 16% strike rate
3rd Ranked CP = 86% returned at 13% strike rate
4th Ranked CP = 83% returned at 11% strike rate

Thats a clear 5% points in both odds and strike rate for the top rated CP over the 2nd rated CP.

The above is over thousands of selections.Good.
Anyone stopping you betting accordingly?

Good luck.

garyf

3rd January 2011, 11:51 AM

hi stix i also used a setting of 3 all bar wet track set to zero from ist jan 2010 till 30th june 2010 betting on the top 4 neurals when priced at <11.0 top 4 only when the top 4 contained the opening fav (track opening fav only)providing all horses reached $3.0> top fluc i excluded all age related races as well as hurdles steeples and races with 1st starters (before scratchings) all vic syd adel qld races every day was painstakingly recorded on a spreadsheet with other features overlay underlay dist track top5 p/money w% plus a stack of others however after trialling different settings within that period i found a much more profitale way was to set c/p=5 c/f=5 j/t=5 all others set to zero from the 1/july to 31/dec 2010 i have recorded the same info abot 1800 races approx 6,000 > entries if you would lije a copy send me your email and i will send you the spreadsheet this is my first post and probably last as not too much about neurals are a huge subject enjoy the banter on the site and reading the post's
cheers
garyf

Bhagwan

4th January 2011, 02:59 AM

Here's a way to stake the top CP selection.

Only target races where the whole field has has 2+ career starts.

Have a Base bet amount of say $10 per selection

Target the Neural price of the Top CP selection.

Divide this price into the next lowest CP price you can see.

Now multiply that figure by our Base amount.e.g $10.00

Example.
1st CP 2.50
2nd CP 3.90
3.90 / 2.50 = Our multiple is 1.56
1.56 x 10.00 = O/L $15.60 for this selection.

If one wished to only bet the 2nd CP selection .
We would divide 2.50 / 3.90 = .64
.64 x $10 (Base bet) = O/L 6.40

This way we are placing more on runners which have the stronger rating difference chance of getting up.

garyf

4th January 2011, 08:28 AM

hi bhagwan
looks good will defintely add this to my armoury should improve the profits
cheers
garyf

Dale

4th January 2011, 06:06 PM

Dale

4th January 2011, 06:22 PM

An addition to this could be to have a base figure determined by taking the price away from a set amount,say 100 and then applying the above formula.

For example we take the first two numbers of the price and take it away from the said 100

A $2.50 favorite would convert to 35 which we take away from 100 which would leave our base bet of 75

A $5.00 favorite would convert to 50 taken away from 100 leaving a base bet of 50

Basicly youve got a higher base bet on your highest rated horses before applying Bhagwans formula.

garyf

4th January 2011, 07:38 PM

think you mean $2.50 would be 25 leaving a bet of 75.00 but i get the idea
will check it out
cheers

Dale

4th January 2011, 08:51 PM

lol yeah thats what i mean

Stix

14th January 2011, 02:01 PM

garyf

14th January 2011, 07:30 PM

hi stix have sent the data as requested hope the email gets through if not dropme a line
cheers
garyf