Couple of Systems that might Surprise You

[Barny]

Surprise (1)

(1) High % win S/R AFTER it wins - My research shows that the win S/R will diminish by approx 20% over time, so if you settle on say 45% AFTER it wins, then you can expect a Win S/R of approx 35% for a while.

(2) Minimum of wins allows a horse / trainer to at least have proven itself

Some really good winners here, and I can go back 10 years. A couple of decent filters to reduce races down to one selection (eg; Interstate visitor, most actual wins), or a filter or two to select the ACTUAL race to bet on .......... eg; Min prizemoney, 3 y/o only, or a filter to eliminate over raced 2 y/o ......... IT'S A GOOD 'UN folks

Surprise (2)

(1) 3rd up increasing in distance each time

(2) Metro or Equivalent

(3) Less than 10 starts

Doooo something (don't offer) for a family affected by cancer.

[darkydog2002]

Ok .Here,s my offering.
Betting 1 horse a race is a recipe for the poor house.

[Barny]

I'm not looking to bet every race, if that's what you're getting at. I have a pre-determined Win % S/R that the horse has to have (AFTER it's won) for it to be a selection. Some days only a few bets all around the country. during the spring carnival there can be several selections in some races and I use a filter of the origin of the horse to reduce the bet back to one.

Do you think I should be backing the multiple selections even tho' there might only be 4 or 5 races to bet on ??

[darkydog2002]

Hi Barny .
In answer to your question the answer is yes.
Cheers
darky

[Barny]

Hi darkydog2002,

Righto ..... thanks.

First thing that comes to mind is that you endorse multiple selections in a race which means to me that you don't endorse too many filters. The more filters, the less chance of multiple selections. Some of your systems don't end up with multiple selections eg; top rated with a price range ??? ..... Isn't this the essence of your favoured method to select a winner ?? Rating and price .....

barny

[darkydog2002]

The only time I,ll bet a single selection is with my spot play method as it based on the best proffessional asessment of 2 rating services which in my opinion are the best available and even then I,m taking a risk.
i.e It was down $1000 from my original $3000 Bank.
Contrast that with the last months multiple selections at +$28000.

The single selection Spot play method is a trial with a very small bank - $3000 which I,m prepared to write off if unsuccessful.
As that stands I still have 66 bets between now and a wipeout.

Cheers
darky

[darkydog2002]

Hi Barney ,
I,ve just got hold of a commercial system whose main premise is the best Win % over the last 4 - 6 runs in the current preparation (no less than 4 and no greater than 6.)
I cant really put the remaining rules on but there,s food for thought there if you like researching these things.

I personally love to play about with these things.

Cheers
darky

[Barny]

That's interesting, win% in last 6 starts or so .....

I've altered my set Win% system a little over the years. One of my rules used to be that it had to have won this time in ..... logic was that it is still going OK. I don't have that rule anymore, althought the Win% was closer to the predetermined Win% filter, the odds weren't as good.

I cannot go past a horse with a really good Win% S/R.

I must look at the multiple selections thread of yours darkydog2002 !!

cheers
Barny

[darkydog2002]

Feel free Barny.
I only bet on good TC.

Cheers
darky

[Barny]

Some amazing & consistent winners over the past month with the Win% system. Can't fathom why there is no more written on this selection method as it takes 5 minutes to "do the form" and results in the selection of a decent horse, a trainer who is having success with this horse, and more importantly a winning combination.

So, you don't have to worry about T, C or D, distance, track, track cond etc, etc ..... and the other 20 or 30 filters !! , because it's already a SUCCESSFUL combination.

Been throwing up good and consistent winners for decades ........... Yup !!

[peter m]

Some amazing & consistent winners over the past month with the Win% system. Can't fathom why there is no more written on this selection method as it takes 5 minutes to "do the form" and results in the selection of a decent horse, a trainer who is having success with this horse, and more importantly a winning combination.

So, you don't have to worry about T, C or D, distance, track, track cond etc, etc ..... and the other 20 or 30 filters !! , because it's already a SUCCESSFUL combination.

Been throwing up good and consistent winners for decades ........... Yup !! Is that looking at the win% after the horse's last win and subtracting 20%, or the win% over the last 4 to 6 starts Barny?

With the former doesn't that mean you subtract 20% off all the horses win% as its win% would be calculated up to the most recent run and including any last win..or not. Wouldn't that mean that the ratio of win%'s between each horse would be still the same?

Of course if you're looking at a certain win% 'must have' qualification, after a winner minus 20% I get your drift.

Sorry for being a bit thick .

Been looking at the third up, increasing in distance factor and it does throw up some good winners, definitely something to take into acount.

Thanks Pete

[Barny]

1) Select a predertimined Win% (can be the Win% the horse would be, after / if it won) .....

2) Choose a minimum number of race wins - this excludes horses who have had say 2 starts for one win etc, etc.

that's it .....

Over a period of time, you will notice that the Win% declines progressively to about 20% ..... before the Win% is too low to qualify

A couple of commonsense filters and away you go.

[peter m]

Thanks Barny, makes sense. So many angles, so little time to test them all...manually I might add.

[Barny]

peter m, Race 5 at flemington tomorrow has 4 qualifiers.

Brazilian Pulse
Mid Summer Music
Biancon Rose
Zaira

I like to only have one bet in any race ..... sometimes I might choose a couple of the best races on a Saturday to have a bet on. It might be one at Eagle Farm and one at Rosehill for example. there may be say 8 or 9 qualifiers on a Saturday and I will have maybe two bets. I filter for races, if more than one qualifier then I'll filter for where the horse comes from (eg; if it's an interstate visitor I'll back it) or maybe the horse with the most wins in the race.

I don't have the key to the vault, but what I do have is a simple base which selects a good horse and a good combination. I've found that some of these horses, esp from interstate, aren't given much credence for their good Win% S/R because they've run in inferior company. Also, putting faith in a winning combination makes it easier to filter out the NOISE.

cheers
Barny

Please go and support a family who is going through cancer. Believe me, they're doing it tough no matter how good a front they're putting on. Take the carer out fishing or for lunch. Put yourself out there, no matter how hard it is emotionally for you.

[darkydog2002]

Hey Barny.Why not put those 4 in a trifecta/1st 4.
You never know.

[Barny]

While I was doing the form you came to mind when I had all those selections confronting me. There were 4 qualifiers in Melb, two in Steak & Kidney, and one at Eagle Farm. One winner in Sydney at $5 does not look encouraging, but I filtered out 3 in Melbourne and one in Sydney because there were three in the same race Melb and two in the same race Syd. So we ended up with one bet in Melb, one in Syd and one at Eagle Farm for one winner on Saturday@ $5. The basis I picked the winner on in Sydney was not rocket science, and it also picked the 2nd placing in Melb out of the 4 qualifiers.

This system is due to fall over as it has had a really good run. Because of it's recent success, I didn't have a bet on Saturday. I'll keep posting on this !

[darkydog2002]

This system is due to fall over as it has had a really good run. Because of it's recent success, I didn't have a bet on Saturday. I'll keep posting on this ![/QUOTE]
Comes back to the fact that winning and losing runs come in cycles (A winning run is always followed by a losing run and vice versa)

Cheers
darky

[Barny]

Comes back to the fact that winning and losing runs come in cycles (A winning run is always followed by a losing run and vice versa)

Cheers
darky
Hi darkydog2002, yup winning and losing runs are a fact, but what degree of volatility do we expect with this system? There are methods of smoothing out the peaks and troughs, this is my next exercise. One could also "punt up" and make a squillion when we get a few good winners in a short space of time.

[darkydog2002]

Bazza (A System Seller) once had a plan where you doubled the stake after a winner on the next horse.
If it lost you went back to the original stake.

Cheers
darky

[Barny]

"Bazza" sounds like the type of person you'd want on your side as a guide to financial independance ......

[darkydog2002]

In terms of "successful systems" he was one you avoided like the plaque but in that particular staking approach I was interested and did that for awhile but for ONLY the next bet and no further.

Cheers
darky

[Barny]

Another winning weekend ............