Thanks CP, one year was a little inconclusive.

I re-run the Saturday Metro results and get very similar results to yours over my data.

It is interesting that the starting price rating is irrelevant in the strike rate of a horse winning long-term.

Basically the price is the factor and a horse can be ranked 1, 2, 3 or 4 in starting price rankings and yet the strike rate per win stays the same.

This data supports that the heavy favs are underbet and good value ($1.10 - $1.50).

I concur, UB. What might be best way to stake for these based on 3 different risk profiles, I wonder...

1. lower risk/return
2. medium
3. higher risk/return etc

???

LG

1.53% is not good value at all. It's only a few losing bets away from break even then there's loss chasing at ODDS ON !! Quick recipe for disaster !!! One Eddie Birchely tried and failed, and he was much more selective.

We needn't back every one of them, Barny - check TMV's post No. 7 above.

LG

LG, you've got to have a screw loose to contemplate any sort of method for backing at prices 1.10 to 1.50.

One man's loose screw is not necessarily another man's noose?

Please elaborate by way of example(s), if possible...

LG

LG, you know as well as I do the risks. How'd you go WHEN two in a row get rolled. How's you psyche for starters, not to mention that fact that you now need probs 8 winners in a row ..... You can look at this as much as you like on paper LG ..... It's not a Term Deposit we're looking at here !!

That's just 'the thing' here, Barny - as with all games of chance, the concept of risk is partly mechanical = stats,logic etc and partly subjective = feelings, thoughts, conditioning etc Which means I don't just know what is in your head on risk.. how can I when we have 2 different approaches, perceptions etc ??

Same as it ever will be.

However, if there is a structure in place to manage risk and clean execution on this PLUS the S/R is positive over the longer run for all selections i.e. before we get selective on the events we wish to follow, select etc, then there is at least some chance of coming out ahead at this end of the book OR at worst, the potential to make a smaller loss imho

LG

PS I dont have the longer term stats in front of me to concur on needing 8 winners in a row. From what I have seen to date (which isn't much), a run of 6 might just do the trick!

PSS don't get me started on TD's !! There are far more 'safer bets' with a higher probability of a 'real return' than these..You may find that for this reason alone, a TD is far more complex an instrument than what we are discussing here?

I'm sure you can often get 5 to 10 cents or more on offer to increase the POT.

With the large amount of bets I agree with LG on this one.

There are more risks taking on a large POT with 100 bets over 20 years than this.