WHO WANTS TO TEST A SYSTEM!!!

[Duritz]

Think the title speaks for itself. Anyone help me?

Rules are

- either 3rd up or 4th up from a spell
- todays race is 1200m or longer
- placed first up this prep
- unplaced second up
- backing up within 10 days.....

Any helpers?

Thanks.

Duritz.

[Chrome Prince]

Think the title speaks for itself. Anyone help me?

Rules are

- either 3rd up or 4th up from a spell
- todays race is 1200m or longer
- placed first up this prep
- unplaced second up
- backing up within 10 days.....

Any helpers?

Thanks.

Duritz.

No good Duritz,

I got half way through the last 4 years and it was showing greater than 20% loss, so I didn't continue.

[crash]

Duritz,

I wouldn't give up on that one. What you [almost] have is some very sane form rules.

Just add this little rule to turn that nasty 20% LOT around:

- must start at $5 or less.

You could use $7 pre/post as a starting point to work out any runners for the day but only bet on $5 or less starters. Starting price is probably the most powerful form rule available that can be added to any system and if $5 doesn't show a profit I bet at some price below it [$4/$3.5/$3] your system will show a profit. Naturally your available bets will also decrease but system profit is the point here not a large number of bets.

[Duritz]

Thanks Chrome, Crash

[KennyVictor]

Just add this little rule to turn that nasty 20% LOT around:

- must start at $5 or less.

Starting price is probably the most powerful form rule available that can be added to any system and if $5 doesn't show a profit I bet at some price below it [$4/$3.5/$3] your system will show a profit.

Crash, I usually follow the logic of what you say and mostly agree with it but I have my doubts about your faith in this rule.
Cutting down your bets on a system by only betting on shorter and shorter priced horses seems to smack of an inherent distrust of the system itself. If the system is picking long priced horses that lose I would think there is something wrong with the selection method. Maybe it would be time to say, Ok I'll bet on favorites - but I'll eliminate the ones I think will lose thussly.
I'm sure you have good reasons to believe in this plan, no doubt based on more experience than I've had, I'd like to know what they are.

KV

[crash]

Kenny, my reducing price was just an aside for what might [or might not] be a poor system above and also to demonstrate just how powerful an SP price indicator can be. If those reductions were followed, a dramatic improvement in % of winners would be noticed. Of course price however is relative to % of winners as far as profit is concerned, but the 20% loss mentioned above includes all runners meeting the rule criteria, including those with unrealistic SP odds. A price rule would get rid of all those and give a better indication of the system's potential.

If you have a system [with regular high priced runners showing up among mostly moderate priced runners] that isn't performing, the starting price is telling you loud and clear that not only that these runner's form is suspect, but that there is something wrong with the system's rules. I would then be looking at why these rules are throwing up these inconsistencies and modify them accordingly. When the rules are sorted the starting price should then reflect this as being a moderate one [unless it is a long shot system].

An SP price rule in a system at least automatically puts your runners in the winners hit parade, as 80% of the time that is the price range of all winners. If the system is loosing, I would then have a hard look at the rules. A price rule apart from being a form indicator is also acting as a safety net against heavy loss.

[partypooper]

Crash, I have a "method" which has produced 32% wins and 66.41% palced over 4 years , and without ANY filters shows 3.15% POT(win) and 3% POT (place)

Just for interest sake I applied your idea to the basic selections without any other consideration other than PRE POST price (Tab-Form)

Reults as follows:
Above 5/1 29.17%w (25.75%POT) 70.83%P (29.17% POT)
5/1 + 22.86%W (19.11%POT) 71.43%P (35.43% POT)

3/1-5/1 26.36%W (1.98%LOT) 55.04%P (8.45% LOT)

1/1-3/1 37.16%W (7.85% POT) 71.56%P (4.62% POT)

1/1-LESS 38.89%W (29.28%LOT) 77.78%P (1.11POT)

1/1-1.5 40.58%W (10%LOT) 76.81%P (6% POT)

Of course, this only applies to my particular selections of course, but still its food for thought, the safest option seems to be 1/1-3/1, 5/1+ looks too good to be true, 1/1 or less seems like a BIG no no!

[Bhagwan]

I could`nt kick it into profit , the SP $5.00 & less idea produced a greater loss.

[crash]

I think you might agree that we where kicking a dead horse with the above system Bagman. Still, it is good to see that Duntz [or anybody] is having a go. Systems might not be my main betting interest but I love their challenge.

Party, well I know you are a very experienced systems tragic who can avoid the pitfalls of homemade systems and even come up with a profitable one without a price rule [which is no small achievement], but for the average Joe including this writer, I think the price rule is a good one as a system safety net and also as an early indicator of flawed rules being used by the unwary. Especially for those systemites without a data bank.

I agree with you about short prices, as I have also found that the short end of the SP range is definitely the profit end. Also considering that an average price of 1/1 has a run of outs prospect of 10, is another good reason to work the short end, but not odds on.

[crash]

Party,

Just checked some figures from a system I have been running for awhile that includes a p/post odds rule of $2.50 to $7. Interesting figures which show that not all systems do better at the low price end and I'm buggered if I can work out why except that my below $5.50 winners have returned far less value than my $5.60 to $7 winners [???]. Why this is so is a mystery to me.

Overall units bet 677. Returned 833.

Price $2.50 to $5.50
Units bet 440
Returned 502

Price $5.60 to $7.00
Units bet 237
Units returned 331

However, the above system results aside, when I bet by doing the form [I use a price line on my selections per race], I do concentrate on the below $5 price range mostly, as I have never had any success above that price.

[partypooper]

Crash, thought I'd save the best bit til last.
When I applied your distance rule across the same selections,
the results are as follows:

1400m+ only

34,58% W (14.88% POT) 68.22% P (8.85% POT)


1400m + but less than 2000


36.32% W (18.71POT) 69.43%P (9.38% POT)

[crash]

WOW Party, Now that is a turn around !!

I'm not sure if you are talking about your system or Duntz's ? Either way that is an impressive sleuthing effort to come up with those results.

If you are talking about Duntz's system, have you including a price rule with those calculation as I would be surprised at the figures if you haven't ?

Considering the 3rd. or 4th. up rule and 10 day turnaround, 1400m + makes sense from a fitness point of view [fairly meaningless rule for shorter sprint races]. When you say 'less than 2000m' are you saying no more than 1950m ? It would seem strange that the percentages don't stand up to 2200m or at least to 2000m regardless which system your figures are applied to [?]. Personally I concentrate on 1400m - 2200m in my punting but I might review that rule a bit downward from 2200m if your figures fall away above 1950m.

By the way, does your stats database include p/post prices for all week east coast races or just SP ?

[KennyVictor]

Interesting figures which show that not all systems do better at the low price end and I'm buggered if I can work out why except that my below $5.50 winners have returned far less value than my $5.60 to $7 winners [???]. Why this is so is a mystery to me.

Overall units bet 677. Returned 833.

Price $2.50 to $5.50
Units bet 440
Returned 502

Price $5.60 to $7.00
Units bet 237
Units returned 331


I Haven't got far enough in to my garage sale statistics book yet to speak with real authority but from experience I don't think that sample size of 237 bets is going to give you much more than a guide to the performance of a system. Still a lot of 'noise' at that level.

KV

[Duritz]

That wasn't my little system returning that profit was it? I'd be very surprised - the S/R also seemed too high

[crash]

No Duritz, that was Party's own system applying my above 1400m races only rule from another post. He has moved that discussion to a new post to be fair to you.

I agree Kenny about the 'noise' level and I am waiting for the loosing runs of outs to bring the system into reality as they always do with all systems.