i call this the 2000 plus 40

[mickthemiller]

this little system is working for me.
I thought I might share it.
self devised...

1. look at races 2000m or more ( just to save time ).
2. (number of wins plus number of second placings), divided into number of starts to be 40% or more. ( after time it gets easy to calculate. - add 1's and 2's and multiply by 2.5 )
3. last start odds SP of 10.00 or less.
4. number of wins to be equal or more than number of seconds.
5. todays odds under 11.0 ( or 10/1).
6. average prizemoney of horse to 2ooo or more ( most are ).

results march 2014 bets 25, wins 11, return 46.50
april so far 2014 bets 10, wins 3 , return 16.00

[darkydog2002]

Thanks Mick.

[partypooper]

mickthemiller, looks interesting, rule no. 5 though, is it fixed odds? if so when and where? I've found that with a rule like this you have to have a definite procedure and never alter from it. For example, you could say todays pre-post odds using Tab Form (or whatever) but always from the same source, otherwise you can get distorted data. eg if you're using SP. it could be showing $11.10c just b4 the off ( so no bet) and $10.90c after it has won.

[mickthemiller]

I JUST REMEMBERED ONE MORE THING...

only bet on races with open age racing.
races with only 3yo or only 2 yo, lead to too many qualifiers.



in rgds to rule5
I use best of three totes.
if one of them reaches odds 11.00 ( 10/1 ) just before the jump, then I pass on the horse.

[blackdog1]

mickthemiller,you can get distorted data. eg if you're using SP. it could be showing $11.10c just b4 the off ( so no bet) and $10.90c after it has won.Party even with my own system I'm very weary when a price limit is needed.
At $11 level I'd go up to $12 to $13 even, if the system requires such precision, given the volatility of the market it's not worth bothering about.
(if it had been proven that it never won over $11 then it's an different matter!!)
With prices at a lower level like $2 to $4 I might consider a 50 cents range.

Just my opinion! If anyone disagrees no problem.

[mickthemiller]

for further information....

I kept a record of all contenders.

those horses since 1st March to now
( last start 10.00 SP or more )
47 horses, 2 winners , return $6.
this imo, justifies this rule.

all horses who began at best tote odds of 11.00 or more....
61 horses, no winners....
this could justify this rule, imo.

[mickthemiller]

a further analysis gives a better POT.

one which I call the "specials"

apply this rule.. last start unplaced.

less action, however..
since march 1 to now...19 starts - 8 winners - $41.80 win return.

good luck
happy easter.

follow voleuse de coeurs, Sertorius, and boban if starting under 11.00 tote

[mickthemiller]

REGARDING POST #7
IGNORE RULE 4. FOR THIS RESULT

[Try Try Again]

Hi Mickthemiller,

If i have this correct then the qualifiers at Caulfield for the Easter Cup on Saturday are

Banca Mo - 23 starts 11 wins 3 seconds (60.8%) $4.60 last start expected $8
Saint Or Sinner - 13 starts 6 wins 1 second (53.8%) $1.80 last start expected $8.

Good luck with this system!!

[blackdog1]

all horses who began at best tote odds of 11.00 or more....
61 horses, no winners....
this could justify this rule, imo.I thought that's what I said. In fact seeing that they don't win a lot over $10, that could be the upper cut off limit.

[mickthemiller]

correct. good work.
how easy was it to follow ?

[SpeedyBen]

for further information....

I kept a record of all contenders.

those horses since 1st March to now
( last start 10.00 SP or more )
47 horses, 2 winners , return $6.
this imo, justifies this rule.

all horses who began at best tote odds of 11.00 or more....
61 horses, no winners....
this could justify this rule, imo.

Mick
Do you have the figures for a place for the rejects?

[mickthemiller]

after getting all horses which qualify under rule 1 and 2 and 6.
ignore rule 4.
from these qualifiers I eliminated those which don't comply to rule 3
i.e ls odds of 10.00SP or more.
( 47 runs, 2 wins $ 6.00 rtn..... 12 places $ 50.80 return )
of these those that began at 11.00 or more ( 0/29 wins, 7/29 placegetters for $ 40.10

worth noting is that 18 of these began under 11.00 odds ( 2 wins $6 rtn, 5 places for $ 10.70


now those further that began over 11.00 odds , but passed rule 3 were
32 horses ( 0 wins, 3 places $ 12.70 rtn )

thus 47 2 6.00 12 50.8
+ 32 0 0.00 3 12.7

= 79 2 6.00 15 63.5
less 18 2 6.00 5 10.7

equals 61 horses 0 wins 10 places 52.80 rtn

[Dennis G]

.....
from these qualifiers I eliminated those which don't comply to rule 3
i.e ls odds of 10.00SP or more.
( 47 runs, 2 wins $ 6.00 rtn..... 12 places $ 50.80 return )
...........Mick, I may have missed something or perhaps I'm just stupid, but if there were 2 winners at "odds of 10.00SP or more" how can the return be less that $20.00?

[mickthemiller]

thanks for your input Dennis.

this fact 47 runs, 2 wins $ 6 return

refers to horses which do not meet rule 3
( last start odds of 10.00 or more )

I may have made it difficult to understand.
ls odds of 10.00SP or more , should be last start odds of 10.00Sp or more.

Thanks
mickthemiller