Yet another system for someone to test...

[blocka]

Hi would really appreciate if someone could test the following system for me.

Rules:
1. The horse must have the highest win strike race in the race.
2. Must have finished 4th or worse at its last start, but not beaten by more than 4 lengths.
3. Must have barrier 7 or wider

If possible please do seperate results for country/provincial/metro as i think this works better on country and provincials than metro.
Thanks in advance for your help. There may be some more refining rules to come.

[Top Rank]

Blocka,

I'm sorry I don't have a data base, but just on taking the horse with the highest strike rate in the race. Try the horse that also has the highest average prizemoney as well the as the highest win strike rate. It is a slow burn method but you may be surprised with the results.

Good Punting

[crash]

Blocka,

Your not getting any takers to test this because I don't think anyone has stats, that cover beaten lengths. Check it out on paper for awhile to see how it goes.

I would also agree with Top Rank about changing to best average prize money as this figure tells you things about the class of the races the runner has won, where high strike rate alone doesn't. Watch out for runners who have gone 'off' the game [over 6yrs.old horses especially] and haven't won anything for 12mths. or more, but still have a high average.

Good luck.

[blocka]

I didn't realise peoples databases wouldn't have beaten lengths. I thought this would be one of the standard and perhaps most important figures.

Regarding average prizemoney vs strike rate, that is probably a fair point. I think this may be why it worked better on country racing, as there is probably less horses with the top strike rate running in races above their class.

As for the horses who haven't won anything for a while this is probably true, but the beaten by less than 4 lengths indicates they may not be totally past it. Maybe add a win or placing rule in their last five starts, barring the last start.

Anyway would like to see the raw results before i begin tweaking.

Thanks again for you input.

[Bhagwan]

Area Bets Win Plc WOut WRet WPrf W%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Country...........164 21 54 1640 1301 -339 12
Metropolitan.....150 17 49 1500 1160 -340 11
Provincial.........226 33 74 2260 2943 +683 14
>>> Totals >>>540 71 177 5400 5404 4 13


Top Ran Method Modified

RACE RULES:
include if Area = Provincial only.

HORSE RULES:
include if Barrier between 7 and 24

HORSE RATING RULES:
include if Place% between 5 and 49
include if Win% Rank between 1 and 1

HORSE STATISTICS RULES:
include if Career Starts between 4 and 40

HORSE FORM RULES RUN #1:
include if Days Ago between 1 and 27
include if FinPos Last Start between 4 and 24

SR 17%
POT 45%

[blocka]

Thanks Bhagwan.

I take it you don't have the beaten lengths data?
Why is the place % limited to 49%. This may be limiting the number of selections. Do your place % include wins or only 2nd and 3rd?
Anyway some interesting stats.

[crash]

Place of 49% is a 'working' system standard. If the selections turning up have much less than this it has a good chance of being a looser.

The problem with data banks is they often lack things that would be very important to a Handicapper. 3 'placed' horses can finish with a head or 20 lengths between them and the last runner may only be a length away [or 20] from the winner too. The last 4 starts for example finishing position of a runner is often meaningless.

Running a system through 5 or even 10yrs. of past data and showing a reasonably good win can often be very misleading, as the majority of wins might have been strongly clumped, meaning the system might have only 2 very good winning years and 3 loosing years. Doesn't help you much if the year you start betting is going to be a bad one !!!

Try and have a system tested through 70% of the stats and trailed through the other 30% [far more realistic] and see what happens to the claimed SR and POT. A far more realistic image of the system is then shown rather than just numbers that tell you nothing about how the system will perform in the first 6 months you use it.

My attitude to playing with numbers alone to find selections without any reasoning involved is well known here. I do use systems and make my own but my last rule is always to apply reason and check out the competition. A system can tell you it's selection for a race but tells you nothing about an OBVIOUSLY better horse in the race. Your reasoning can, so most of my serious punting efforts are Handicapping efforts.

[blocka]

Hi Crash,

You say that 49% is the minimum, but according to my reading of Bhagwans criteria place must be between 5% and 49%. So 49% is a maximum. I wanted to know if the place % refers to 2nd & 3rds, or 1st,2nd & 3rds?

[crash]

I should have said 49% is 'often' a system standard for 1st. 2nd. and 3rd. inclusive. I ignore win strike rate and I think Bagman does too.

[blocka]

OK then why would you restrict it to 49% why not 100%?

[crash]

Price.

[blocka]

Sorry crash but you are confusing me. Might be best for me to wait for Bhagwan to reply.

Cheers,
Blocka.

[La Mer]

Hi would really appreciate if someone could test the following system for me.

Rules:
1. The horse must have the highest win strike race in the race.
2. Must have finished 4th or worse at its last start, but not beaten by more than 4 lengths.
3. Must have barrier 7 or wider

If possible please do seperate results for country/provincial/metro as i think this works better on country and provincials than metro.
Thanks in advance for your help. There may be some more refining rules to come.

Not too many selections, but based on the last 12 months metro races on Saturdays only:

WIN PLACE
S.R./Race : 21.6% 51.4%
% P.O.T. : -24.6% -18.1%

[crash]

Blocka, sorry to confuse.

A horse with a 100% place rate [would be a very young horse], would have a shockingly short starting price and a system based on that rule would be worthless.

[Mr ed]

Blocka, for the same reason you have last start finished 4th or worse, to try and get some value into selections.

[Bhagwan]

Hi Blocka,
My data base can do margins.
I found the 4th last start without the margin rule to be more profitable in this particular exercise.

The place percentage refers to 1st,2nd,3rds.
The 5-49% was where the value was , admittedly I shoehorned the stats that were in front of me to create a profit at that point in time .

It probable shows a profit because it is a professional winner & not a professional place getter
Maybe this 49% rule should be scrapped. But that is where the value was.
Those results could change the following year , that`s the frustrating bit of system analysis.

The figures showed that higher the place SR the lower the dividend.
.

Crash has some valid points about system testing ,which I agree with.
Especially the 70% & 30% of the data base.
The margins makes for a logical argument but getting the value is another.
The plan pulled a number of double digit prices so it has some merit.
Why it works best at provincial rather than Country & Metro ,is a mystery to me , but thats how the stats fell.

The original stats I have shown had the margin left out because it did not show a profit, that was the only change to the original result of that +663 result which equated to approx 25% POT

[crash]

Going on Bagman's original 17% SR for this system you can expect from 1000 bets with a 99.99% probability chance:

26 runs of 10 outs [26 lots of 10 looses in a row].
10 runs of 15 outs.
4 runs of 20 outs.

These are a spread example of everything in between.

[Top Rank]

Blocka


Did you take the tip. The Big Ask today. Best win strike rate and best average prizemoney in the race. Home He comes.
Good Punting