I tried that also and they came up similar to the over all result - i.e. a loss of around 20% loss on turnover

can you run through what you have - because - hey - maybe my data is incorrect.

I got...

24%SR
32% POT

We changed field size to 11-14 runners
All the rest the same.

There were 161 selections for the System
There were 38 Winners for the System for a strike rate of 23.6%
There were $214.57 returned for WIN (after 5% commission) which means a Profit or loss of $53.57 or a percentage profit/loss of 33.27%

Test Another System

The Rules used were : lastStart = 1 and donScottRank = 1 and careerRaces >= 11 and runners >= 11 and runners <=14

for clarification:
I wasn't using UB's data - i was using my own independently.
i was just asking if someone else had some independent data to see if they got a similar result to mine.


cheers
aussie

Hi aussie, what is meant by "Don Scott number 1"?

Rated as the first in what category?
Or by Tab number?

Thanks

Hi lomaca

(Don Scott Ranking based on defaults from Racing and Sports Website)

yep - that's right - the first one in the DS rankings.

cheers
aussie

I don't know what's happening but I can't even get near enough to the results you guys were getting.

Let's make the rules crystal clear;

First I selected all the races where there were more than 11 runners
after scratching.

Then selected Don Sct top rated. meaning I selected the lowest "DIV" thinking that it's the "top rated"

If this horse was also tab number 1 then I looked if it finished first at its last start and if it did then I looked if it had at least 11 carrier starts.

Complied with all of this, then I looked at the results to see if it won or placed.

For this year I only had 81 qualifiers for 16 winners and 37 for the place (1-2-3).

Win loss -29.9 place loss -18.4

The only way I could get the qualifying numbers close to what you guys got, if I selected ALL the horses with Tab number 1, regardless where it was in the ranking, all other rules complied with of course.

It is disturbing in serious way, I don't mind being wrong but if we can't get these results within a ballpark of each other then what and who's research-results can we trust?

Cheers

Iomaca,

rules were:

The Rules used were : lastStart = 1 and donScottRank = 1 and careerRaces >= 11 and runners >= 11 and runners <=14


No TAB Number 1. Its any TAB number. That should open your results a bit.

All the above but any TAB number:

Qual: 646 won 123, placed 270
win loss -87.1 Place loss -86.7

Still far from being a winner, I used NSW dividends, can't be that much of a difference can it?

It varies and is hard to say because you might get double the price about a $10 chance but only 5% on a short priced selection. The standard most people use is 15% though to get a rough idea which would have returned 642.74 so almost breakeven on your figures.