Some really nice results

The interesting thing is if someone where to have started using this system around Jan 2011 through to Aug 2012 you would have a sufficient loss if I read correctly. How does one continue with a run of outs with any confidence it will swing upwards again?

I'm always curious Michal on what methods you might use to check the viability of a system. You are correct with the market price being the best indication of the true chances of a horse. With slight altercations you can make profit with a lot of work.

A major problem I found with many ratings assessed against large pools in Metro races is they often show limited advantages (rated price vs market price). Then you have smaller pools with some value but harder to assess races due to limited form of horses.

This is where I find the best to be a combination of smaller pools but races with horses of a min 5 starts of more.

Keep up the good informative posts

Significant loss is a subjective opinion Vortech but it’s a great point to bring up. I think that it largely depends on the expectation of the user. The sad situation is that most punters have rose-coloured glasses and are not at all prepared for the reality that sets in. Especially when punters realities are inflated by small sample (boutique) systems that are sold or produced which create unrealistic expectations. We can advise and teach, which is what we do for the benefit of our clients, but at the end, if one is serious about profits and success then one must realise that this is a long term game, always has been.

Just like the stock market, whose returns long term have been solid, would have seen someone that started just before the GFC still licking their wounds today, and someone that bought after and experienced only the recovery must be thinking that this is the easiest money ever. Both of these oposing results are NOT indicative of the long-term performance.

Perseverance, and the lack there of, is one of the reasons that most don’t succeed. You only have to look at the number of posts each month that brings something ‘new and exciting’ to the forum, generally based on a small sample size, to have it disappear and replaced next month by something ‘new and exciting’. In fact it was you, Vortech that did the work of collecting a huge load of systems here, how many good ideas laid abandoned in that lot?

Let’s address that loss:
If someone bet using this system over the period that Vortech quoted using the odds that we show (which are conservative) then the POT is still only -1.53%.

• Take a scenario of 10,000 bank and a 1% investment using our odds (NSW/SP) POT -1.53%, Profit - $2,005.00, Highest bank risk 40%

• Take a scenario of 10,000 bank and a 1% investment using better of BT/SP/ISP POT 1.40%, Profit $1,837.00, Highest bank risk 25%

The above profit was achieved using BT/SP/ISP which is comparable to likes of Best of Best, Betfair prices or fixed price shopping, in other words a dividend achievable with a little initiative. In fact the difference between the loss and win scenarios was as a result of a simple 10c improvement on the average win dividend.

Im going to go out on a limb, and say that the term ‘significant loss’ was only a figure of speech, or based on just a glance over the results. And that is perfectly OK; because Vortech is probably right or not far, from what a mediocre user of the system might have been thinking around this time, regardless of the REAL RESULTS or the results that could be achieved with price initiative. As you probably well know, most people don’t keep accurate results so most punters perception would be that this is going nowhere!

Reasons to persevere
That’s a great topic of a new thread by itself Vortech, I would like to know what others make their decisions on, there is always something new to learn, but to answer your question;

• System is Not under-pined by a single or a few large winners,
• System has a Bank risk threshold within realistic norm
• Large sample in the results over time
• System is based on just one major idea (ratings based) + horse being SP1 and a few others which have insignificant bearing on the results to trim the extremes in weight and distance rises and so on.
• System is partly based on the best long-term predictor of winners – the market. Isolating those that should be favourites and betting them when they are is a great way that one can utilise favourites to make profit.
• We check and correct all the errors we find for all tab meetings in terms of: race times, distances, track conditions, in-running positions, finishing margins and others, there are dozens of errors each day. So I have confidence in the ratings produced. I know this sounds like a sales pitch, but you ask what would propel me to continue, confidence in the ratings with rock solid performance over long-term, created by my program, would be a major factor personally.
• The above also addresses the issues that you raised, this system is for all races Metro, Prov, Country or Rural tracks, and concentrating on favourites ensures that the prices and profits remain REAL.

I do have to agree with you, that it is easier to find value in the non metro circuit for someone whose bet size is reasonable, in my opinion it’s simply for the reason that the big mathematical/computerised syndicates can’t be bothered to operate there due to pool sizes and a smaller punter can take advantage of the corporate bookmaker prices. However with the ever improving computer knowledge and usage of the mainstream punters, this is also shrinking.

At the end let me just finish with this, creating this system was not a hard work at all, in-fact there were a few systems I could have gone with that produced similar results and sample size. Something that is echoed by our client, with R2W Axis the edge is just easier to find.

Thnks Michal.

Michal
You may be interested in an exercise I did with your SRSS results for May. By using the much neglected exacta bet type I increased your profit for the month by 170%. I used VICTAB prices to select the second exacta leg in each case. Your second and third rated horses in each race probably would produce an even better result but I don't have access to those.
I have changed a column heading in the attached s/sheet to Ëxacta and showed a comparison with your win prices.
All the best
Speedy

Hi SpeedyBen

Thank you for your innovative post. So as to explain the strategy that is used to bet the SRA selections contained in the spreadsheet you attached to your post, we do not bet or recommend betting at level stakes. All recommendations made to clients are staked in proportion to our r2w$ value assessment to collect 4% of your bank.

You are correct in identifying the additional value that exists in exotic pools however the way in which we go about that is a matter probably best discussed in a separate thread.

If you require anything specific that we might be able to provide, we would be more than happy to assist.

Michal, do you by some chance have the place dividends for the previous data set you attached, using the same format?


Cheers LG

LG,

The system printout is specific for our display purposes, which is to show win only. The place portion uses NSW tab because there are no SP place divs. It shows a loss of 1.41% POT if that is what you are asking.

Michal

HI Michal, just to clarify.. are you able to source the individual NSW Place dividends which equate to the overall loss of 1.41% and list them to the RHS of the WinDiv field? It would help me assess the usefulness of your good results here with regards my own systems, strategies i.e. as a base/bulk method = starting point



Cheers LG