Amended Metro System
 

Metropolitan Races Only
TAB Number: 1 - 7
Weight to Carry: 53.5 - 58.0
Career Starts: 8 - 21
Last Start Finish Posn: 1 - 3
Win S/R >24.99%
Distance Winner
Track Winner

Any result input would be greatly appreciated

Just go to http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
and you will see how you can obtain an inexpensive program which will give you the answers you need.

Moderator.

Day of Week: 7
Venue: SMBAW
Horse Win %: 25 - 100
Career Starts: 8 - 21
TAB Number: 1 - 7
Weight to Carry: 53.5 - 58.0
Last Start Finish Posn: 1 - 3
Won or Okay at Distance: Y
Won at This Course: Y

Over the past two years (Saturdays only) there were 580 races, with a winning S/R of 26% and a POT of 5.5%

If you have a minimum distance of 1200m, the POT improves to 13%

If you have a minimum price of $3, the POT improves to 21%

If you have "metro last run" as well, the POT improves to 28% (343 races)


Monkeyinjapan

Might be on to something there Panther. As long as you are happy with 3 to 4 bets per week.

And if the strike-rate is dropped to 20%, along with the changes above already recommended, then the POT improves to 32% (408 selections for 104 winners).

DATA BASE
 

I have the data base that MODERATOR 3 Mentions and it is very ,very good.

I am extremely pleased with it.

Cheers.
darky.

A little more tweaking and the strike-rate rises to over 40%, but I'll keep tweaking to see if the method can be further improved.

duck
 

keep that pot going up la mer and you will gang tackled before you no it...

...............cheers..........slowman............ .........

Actually, I meant to say that the POT rise to over 40%, the strike-rate also rises but not as high as I stated, the correct strike-rate is 28.4%.

After tweaking all the criteria one way & the other & introducing one addiitional, I've come up with the following as probably be the closest to the optuim:

Race Distance: 1200m- 3200m
Day of Week: Saturday
Venue: All Metro venues
Horse Win %: 22%-100%
Career Starts: 4-18
TAB Number: 1- 7
Weight to Carry: 54.5kgs-57.0kgs
Last Start Finish Position: 1st-3rd
Won at Distance
Won at Course
Metro run @ Last Start
Max Last Start Beaten Margin: Less than 6 lengths
SP Price: $ 2.0-$21.0

It is worth noting that had the SP price been open, that is no upper limit of $21, the profit as indicated below would have been a lot higher, as the two largest priced winners started @ $46 & $33, which represteted approx 45% of the overall profit. The largest priced winners included in the results is $18.

WIN PLACE
Races Bet: 322 321
Races Won:105 195
S.R./Race: 32.6% 60.7%
Outlay ($): $355.00 $354.00
Return: $467.10 $363.70
$ Profit:$112.10 $9.70
% POT: 31.6% 2.7%

If anyone is interested, I can supply a slightly different criteria with a higher strike-rate, but with reduced profit & turnover.

great work la mer.............
............cheers.......slowman.............

Thanx for that La Mer--looks like we might be onto something here

Kenny Victor (a lonely soul who doesn't get out much) went to a seance where he and his computer controlled a beer stein in the middle of some letters cut from a racing form. We surprisingly contacted someone who identified himself as Punter57 and:

Quote:

Originally Posted by (the ghost of) Punter57 .....is there any reason that both monkeyinjapan and La Mer (and I suppose all the members watching) are happy with NUMBER OF RACES instead of NUMBER OF HORSES BET when assessing the SR and POT. Or is there only ONE horse per race?? No point going into why La Mer finds the inclusion of longer priced winners MORE PROFITABLE but then excludes them, I suppose. Cheers,....

The spirit that spoke was restless, presumably, if it was indeed P57, from his sojourn in the netherworld that is two weeks solitary outside the forum but I lost contact with it before I could identify the exact cause of it's restlessness. (The timbre of the last quoted sentence suggests to me that the spirit was indeed who it stated it was). I'm hoping the source of this restlessness was caused by this thread as it's Monkey's only post in the last week.
I see in looking back over the posts that La Mer did in fact specify selections at one point which may settle him slightly.
Anyway, a weight is lifted from me by sharing this with the family that the dismembered P57 so desperately misses.

KV

Not really sure what that last post was all about, but here are some figures from my database. I went back only the last two years because I don't have meetings from Perth before 2004. Thus the test is from Jan 1 2004 to Nov 30 2005.

Races = 82
Races won = 30
S/R = 36%
Outlay = 89 (the number of bets)
Return = $220
POT = 147%

Rules are as follows:

Race Distance: 1200 - 3200
Race Field Size: 6 - 14
Max No 1st Uppers: 5
Day of Week: 7
Venue: SMW
Horse Win %: 25 - 100
Career Starts: 5 - 20
TAB Number: 1 - 7
Weight to Carry: 53.5 - 57.0
Runs this Preparation: 0 - 3
Last Start Finish Posn: 1 - 3
Won or Okay at Distance: Y
Won at This Course: Y
Metrop Last Start: Y
Av Prizemoney Rank: 2 - 24
SP Price: 3.0 - 999.9

Running the same rules for 2003 -- Sydney and Melbourne only -- came up with 2 wins from 23 bets and a loss of $14.

Monkeyinjapan

.

Nice one KV

Sat. 7th. Jan.

Using La Mer's 'tweaked version' of the original system:

Race Distance: 1200m- 3200m
Day of Week: Saturday
Venue: All Metro venues
Horse Win %: 22%-100%
Career Starts: 4-18
TAB Number: 1- 7
Weight to Carry: 54.5kgs-57.0kgs
Last Start Finish Position: 1st-3rd
Won at Distance
Won at Course
Metro run @ Last Start
Max Last Start Beaten Margin: Less than 6 lengths
SP Price: $ 2.0-$21.0


I came up with one bet only for this system. I'm not sure if I missed any[?]:

Syd. R4/1 Old Mystique [$2pp] SP might go in either direction.

I'd be interested to know when the majority of the selections for a year came up. Would it have been during the main carnivals? Also what is the rule if more than 1 qualifier?

Cheers, Crash

Welcome back Crash.

Good to see you too Kenny. Still kicking a few goals I hope.

Crash, I make it a total of four qualifiers - the other three all had non-Saturday metro meetings @ the previous start but in two cases the meetings were of 'Saturday' quality.

The results included multiple qualifier races but I think they only amounted to a total of 33.

SANDOWN
MR 7 #5 KEPOLA
RANDWICK
SR 4 #1 OLD MYSTIQUE
SR 7 #3 PELENNIUM
ASCOT
WR 5 #3 ZAMBANE

I'm all for tweaking but only if there is some logic to it. What logic is there to the weight tweak? Or are we drifting from tweaking to b*c*f*t*i*g?

KV

I agree KV, but what is illogical about changing the weight rule down from 58kgs to 57kgs? It really doesn't matter what rules you have of this nature the line in sand has to be drawn somewhere.

Also what is a logical rule and what isn't, can you answer that simple question for me please?

Well, it seems to me that this is one of two sorts of systems often seen on this forum. One sort is where people have picked a set of parameters out of the air more or less because over a set number of races they have shown some advantage. As an extreme example, "Over the last month a lot of horses starting with A have won so I'll start a system which bets on horses starting with A". This is a rule having no particular logical basis that I can see.
The other sort is one where a rule might be "I'll bet horses which are down in class and weight". I can see some logic in this, if a horses is carrying less weight and racing against weaker horses it might do well.
This thread starts, as do many, with a set of rules and no explanation as to what they are based on. So, I did what I do usually and that's try to see if there is any logic behind the rules or if it is some backfitted nonsense to be put on my threads not to bother with list.
All the other rules if stretch my imagination I can find some logic for. Tab 1-7, horse possibly one of the better horses in the field (tenuous). Career starts 8 - 21 and Win strike rate combined mean horse has proved some ability and isn't worn out, etc., etc. But weight 54.5 to 57Kg, I'm sorry, I can't find any logic there. I thought perhaps it was something I hadn't thought of so, ever seeking enlightenment, I thought I'd ask.

KV

Fair enough KV, I can understand where you are coming from. But given that weight is a major factor in handicap races and given that the more weight a horse is handicapped the less chance it has of winning (at least in theory), then I would have thought that a rule with an upper limit on how much a horse has to carry would be logical.

What makes 58kgs such a critical point in determining the cut-off? Unless that has been explained, which as you pointed out it wasn't, then it is not a magic number, it could well be 59kgs or 60kgs, or for that matter 56kgs or 57kgs.

IMO, I see nothing illogical about this particular piece of tweaking.

OK an upper limit is fair but a range of weights? It has to carry a weight within a 2.5KG range? Still my missus thinks she can feel a pea underneath the mattress so I guess anything's possible. :-)


KV

Interesting banter about logical rules guys.

57kg. is a fair upper limit. I was recently informed 27% of all Sat. metro winners carried 57kg or more [probably a lot lower for non. metro and especially during the week]. However, I think most of that 27% would have carried 57kg only. I don't have the figures but it would be interesting to know[?]. Can't see the logic in 54 1/2kg. lower limit [why not just 54kg?], but as the rules were a 'tweaked' version of the original the weight at least has perspective as the rules[naturally] had to be b...f.... to be tweaked.

Within reason b...f..... is no big deal and does supply pointers to the right direction when seeking to fine tune a system or even create one. However, when they are tweaked to include a few long shots, that's when the exercise goes into la la land. I don't think this was the case here though Kenny.

I don't know the WA result, but a bomb out for the rest of the selections
yesterday for the system.

I agree with you Crash, KV has raised an interesting point about logical rules & I guess we all have them, even if they are not formalized into a system as such.

For instance anyone who compiles their own ratings works to a set of rules of some description, even if those rules are only loosely adhered to.

KV fails to see the logic in having a lower limit weight, and while I'm not sure what Panther had in mind when he started this thread, having a lower weight limit appears to be quite logical for mine.

As an example, at Ascot on Saturday of the 78 starters, 29 of them were limit weight horses, of which only one (City of Ruins) won, so while the limit weight horses represented 37.2% of all runners, they represented only 12.5% of winners.

Now I know that this is just a one off example, and certainly not unique in nature as this is a very common outcome re limit weight horses, certainly in Perth, but any rule that can eliminate so many no-hopers is IMO quite logical.

BTW, for those interested in analysing Perth races, the handicapper provides a very useful tool with the publication of their ratings in the racebook.

La Mer, if its not to late, i am interested in the different criteria, thanks

Unfortunately, I've ditched the alternative criteria out of my database, but I'll see what I can do over the next few days.

Has anyone got the results for this system since Jan 1st?

i did enjoy good success with this last saturday.

Got to watch out for this boyo [Feather], He is a system pilferer and scoundrel. $5 for any more of my systems Feather. No more Mr. Altruism from me Sony Jim [and stop rolling your payments down my lawn into the lake, the Brake is jack of all the scuba diving] !!!

Mark


For interest I just plugged in these criteria and results for Jan only

17 Races - 18 bets - 2wins - 10 place (incl w)

Win Return: $5.40
Place Return $14.40

Just running a test back to Jan 2002 to get a fair dinkum indication. Personally not a fan of this type of system with due respect to LaMer etc. Throwing in SP criteria makes it even more unfriendly in my book unless you can and want to devote every Sat arvo to the punt.

Will post 2002 results shortly.

Grub

These are the results I got for last four years. Let me say IMHO any mechanical system with over 700 bets that stays in profit is quite an acheivement but 2005 has really saved the day, patience would be tested with a few spells of a month between drinks.
	Bets	Wins	Return	Outs	% S.R.			$ Profit	% POT
2002	173	41	186.50	18	24			13.50	8
2003	217	42	167.30	17	19			-49.70	-23
2004	217	44	189.80	20	20			-27.20	-13
2005	275	86	368.50	14	31			93.50	34

Place Bets

	Bets	Wins	Return	Outs	% S.R.			$ Profit	% POT
2002	173	86	149.02	5	50			-23.98	-14
2003	217	109	183.28	6	50			-33.72	-16
2004	215	104	188.60	7	48			-26.40	-12
2005	275	166	290.74	6	60			15.74

+6%

Grub, i admit i make mistakes in looking for selections, but for me so far this year, using only the newspaper. 11 races for 6 wins returning $22.20.
10 of the races placed. i did change two of the rules though. (one knocking 8 selections)

That is a big discrepancy. Remeber my results are for January only and include WA. These are the rules I plugged in and results are calculated after scratchings.

If you like I'll copy the selections I had and you can compare?


SYSTEM SELECTOR RULES FOR: LA MER (at 10:04:59 on 12/02/2006)

Day of Week: 7

Venue: SMBAW

Horse Win %: 22 - 100

Career Starts: 4 - 18

TAB Number: 1 - 7

Weight to Carry: 54.5 - 57.0

Last Start Finish Posn: 1 - 3

Won or Okay at Distance: Y

Won at This Course: Y

Metrop Last Start: Y

Max Last Start Margin: 6.0

SP Price: 2.0 - 21.0

hi grub, i did try to be very careful about this system, i have it on a spreadsheet and a column for each of the rules - to avoid making mistakes - plus one for the type of race. also i deleted any horse under $3.00.
those results are from the 7th january to yesterdays, and are sat only,
have you got a email so i can contact you?
this sytem made a profit in brisbane (only that i know of ) for last year sat only. no regard for price or last start margin. 44r - 15w $68.40

I'd say your selections are correct, last year was good for the system and you eliminated many losers this year with your personal filters by the sounds of it.

mate my email is jdas7601 at bigpond dot net dot au. Give me a snappy email asap then I'll delete this and take my address off the open forum.

cheers

Grub

Hi!
I wouldn't worry about it too much, I have a proper Email address as well and having been a member of this forum for a few years and disclosed my address a number of times, I did not receive any unwanted email.
I beleive the company running this forum does not sell addresses.
Good luck with your system.
Cheers

Thanks LM appreciated.Grub

will do,.....
done