Calling Vortech
 

Vortech, try and find a system with no form ..... for instance NO Win%, p/money, last start placed or beaten margin, career starts and so on. I ask you 'coz you have said you now have many systems at your disposal, and it's my contention that if you can find a system or two with NO FORM filters you're on a winner. I have a couple of such systems and they're consistent through any test period, and indeed at any venue in Australia, Country or Metro.

I'm not asking that you give up your system so that all and sundry can see it, but maybe an acknowledgement that exclusively the NO FORM filters produce consistency that your other systems simple cannot compete with. It's what I've found anyway ..... ;)

Barny everything with the exception of barrier draw and colours is form related. I challenge you to prove that you have a NO FORM system that is PROFITABLE. Otherwise you are guilty of the very thing that you chastise others for. Beton

OK, Beton. I don't see allocated weight as form, nor the distance of the race about to be compteted in, nor the type of race. I see form, rightly or wrongly as how the horse has performed in the past ?! eg; 1st to 4th last 4 runs, ran 2nd beaten 2 lengths etc. What do you answer when someone says "What's the form for this horse ?"

Saddlecloth number is one of my NON FORM filters. My best system has four filters .....

I'm sure you can see where I'm coming from, the point is to get right away from the "perFORMance" of the horse in the past, indicators that are far too often used, almost exclusively, and result is the more popular ones being massively overbet.

Allocated weight is form. The allocated weight is the penalty or bonus given by the handicapper based on recent past form. Distance the race is a direct reflection of how the trainer views the horses recent form, same for the type of race- the horse must be eligible to run which is recent form.

You are saying that you have systems which do not consider the displayed FORMLINE of recent results. You however still do not consider past results IE API W% etc.

You are saying NO FORM. I am saying impossible and asking you politely to substantiate you claim. Beton

Saddlecloth number is biggest form indicator in the race. The handicapper has said that TAB#1 is the best horse of the field and has penalised it as much as he is allowed to in order to present an even race. similarily the lowest TAB# is the most challenged horse in the race and has given a bonus abeit in most cases insufficient.

All I am saying is that you are making a claim which is impossible to back up.

OK then, I don't agree with your in depth meaning of form. We can disagree on that point and still have an understanding of where I'm coming from. It's a pretty far fetched reason for you to find a nexus between race distance to be run and form tho' Beton ?!, and the race it's entered for. Most wouldn't include those as form, but it matters not.

I'm making a claim currently being shot down by semantics, and not taken in the true spirit in which it is offered Beton. I've explained myself, and I accept that your definition of form is different to mine, and might I suggest, others might have a different opinion too.

As long as I get my point across so that Vortech can have a look at his systems, and trial what I think is a helpful suggestion.

If you follow a horse's campaign you will notice that it comes back form a spell at a shorter distance than his last race and then builds up to it's capable distance. This is form related as the trainer and rightly so has said that the horse is not ready to run at a greater distance with competition, ie form. Trainer train a horse for a specific race, they enter into races to give the horse the required preparation to achieve that based on the horses current FORM

I honestly don't see the advice you have given is beneficial other than saying throw a dart at the racecard. All I am saying is substantiate your claim of NO FORM profitable systems. You have said look outside the box. That is a big field out there. I am asking you show that there is something outside the box.

I am sure that every post on this forum is proffered with true spirit. I also think every poster has a right to post as he or she sees fit. The purpose is to share. Whether the post is correct or not it is a starting point of discussion. That discussion should proceed in a civil manner. You have said that you have several FORMLESS systems that are profitable. I am simply saying that unless shown otherwise they are barrier draw system, colour of silks system, third letter R system or one of the variety of throw a dart systems. All I am asking is show us.

One system that sits nicely is

3-5 DLS
Won @ Track
4 Runs this Prep

Is this what you are after?

Beton, I've just spent some time googling the meaning of form relating to racehorses, and in all cases it refers to what a horse has done in it's prior races. I cannot find any reference that takes into account saddlecloth number for instance as "form" ..... So it appears that most people would understand "form" as how a horse has performed in the past.

Basically your seeking a system with factors that a majority of punters don't relate to performance and hence will not affect the price.

Barny, imagine if you had two lists.
One is the No Form Filter list, the other is the Form Filter list.

On which list would you place - career starts?

Going on your original post you see it as a form filter.
I would have thought how many runs a horse has had is no indicator at all of its past performance.

Barny tends to find factors that have zero bearing and zero influence on todays race.
I've yet to see a single post demonstrating that he is successful.

He is not alone.

[QUOTE=moeee]Barny tends to find factors that have zero bearing and zero influence on todays race.
I've yet to see a single post demonstrating that he is successful.

What was your profit in 2012? and what is the difference between factors today and factors years ago?

Vortech.
My Profit is irrelevant.
I don't claim to have found anything that anyone else before me hasn't , and then make as though I am winning with what appears to me to be irrational and irrelevant.

I made a Profit , and am currently at about 16% Turnover.
But that depends what Pool is being measured.
The bottom Line is I have more Bank than I had at the start of the year,

It is not too hard to determine the Factors that determine the outcome of a Race Vortech.
I don't believe those Factors have changed in 50 years.
Animals need to cross the Line first , and it is up to the Punter to determine whether the animal has what will be needed to win today.

That an animal has had 20 starts prior to today or 120 starts prior to today has absolutely ZERO to do with winning todays Race.
NOR has its sex.
NOR colour.
NOR whether it comes from 1000 kilometres away for this event.

I feel Punters sometimes that aren't doing too well start looking elsewhere for something that simply isn't there , but it was there in the first place , but the Punter simply doesn't have the skill to use and apply it.

Can you tell me the procedure of handicapping? Firstly there is the race classification and distance. For any horse to qualify for the race and nominate, it must have sufficient form to qualify. Then of the horses that qualify there are four basic categories. (1) staying at the same class and distance, (2) staying at the same class but changing in distance, (3) coming down in class and (4) going up in class. The handicapper must even the field up to cater for the different form of each horse. He can only do this by utilizing the formline of each horse. He has to make each formline relevant to this current race. Ultimately he says that TAB#1 has the best formline based on class for this race. FORM PLUS CLASS.

Barny, you are saying look outside the box. I am saying "WHERE" and show that we are not wasting our effort. All those newbies that you campaign for are saying where do we look

Beton, mate, I give up, truly I do. It's not too often I back away from a spirited conversation but you've done me in. I will say that you do have a point because when I was going to reply to Vortech I got stuck at his suggestion of "track winner" which I would not include, so your comment about handicapping has some merit ..... BUT your winning this argument on a technicality and a couple of my systems that have shown the best results in terms of consistency across the board, both in time frames and various venues, will not be able to be properly categorised as you would like. Probs time I wasn't here permanently .....

"All those newbies that you campaign for are saying where do we look"

Maybe you could start here.

Race Distance: 1400 - 1800
Minimum Starts: 3
Day of Week: 1347
Venue: X
Age of Horse: 4 - 7
Barrier Position: 1 - 9
Last Start SP: 0.0 - 2.0
2nd Last Start SP: 0.0 - 1.9
Exclude Fillies Races: Y
Exclude Mares Races: Y
Exclude F & M Races: Y



There are plenty of people around here that have far more talent and experience than I'll ever have so instead of bashing each other up verbally all the time how about you show us newbies how to turn the above 15 minute effort in to a non form system that has a 35-40% SR and far bigger POT.

My D I C K is bigger than yours is amusing for a while but it gets boring and doesn't achieve much.

Barny,

I am with you on this one. I do not do any form analysis. I don't even know the names of the horses that I bet on until I see the results. Using a commercial BOT for back bets there are very few form filters than can be applied. I rely on the market to get the prices right and determine the favourite. The rest is down to long term statistics.

There are two types of punters that visit this forum, the form guys and the statistics guys.

Thank you macs. I was going to move forums as have many talented and experienced members have done, for exactly this reason. Somebody has hijacked the entire forum, cut and pasting old posts and churning them. whilst doing so has boldly stated that all presently on the forum know nothing and only he has the secrets. And under no circumstances is he going to share. My question is "Why should I leave? Why did the others leave? and why do we have to put up with craaap and vitriol?" Until everybody is able to post without being set upon, then you are not going to get any quality. Unless there is some quality it is pointless to be here. Unless there is two-way sharing it is pointless sharing. There are many good threads started here only to go of the rails because of several people not agreeing and lambasting their position.

I, for one don't want to see Barny leave. In among some of his ranting has some very valid points. However I would like to see him pull is head in and see what has happened to this once excellent forum. EVERYTHING Barny knows he got from this forum. EVERYTHING.

Now Barny states that he can easily turn any system from a loser into a winner with his six magic filters. I am saying that boasting about them does not cut the mustard. Either put up or give us back our forum.

Had you moved Beton , which Forum would you have moved to?
I wouldn't mind reading posts from the talented and experienced members that moved there.

I do not really know how to reply to this conversation or if I can add anything to it.

But, here goes. The more I look at the race form pre race and study it after the race is over plus look at the betting market and the betting activity and the end race result I have to say that I am finding it difficult to see many common denominators.

We have talked on here in other threads of following the crowd. First fav wins more then the second etc. Number One saddlecloth wins more then number two etc. and so on. These statistics never change, and have remained constant all over the world and for over fifty years and more.

We hear that the Fav is under bet and the longshot is overbet for its correct odds. Yet,we still not tilt the table to our advantage.

We are told to only bet when we have value, like if we price a horse at $3 and you can get better , then it is a good bet.

Unfortunately, this is not all working out for me. Now, I have had a few systems going and keep tweaking them to the point where I feel I am close enough to where I can be on a winning system or at least not a massive losing one.

But one thing that I find strange is that looking back over my records, small as they maybe, the short odds eg Under $4.00 horses are no more successful then the $6 to $12 bracket.

The fact that a horse is say $3 does not give me a three times better strike rate then on paying $9. When I look at the horses that beat these short price horses I sought of see where Barny is coming from.

The only tweaking I am looking for now is to find some other mysterious factors that the public are ignoring and are ( not form related ).

All horses have some form, regardless of how unexposed it is, otherwise the owners and trainers would not persist with it. But for a non form related system to be successful it would only be able to survive by being market driven in reverse.

To be successful, you would have to have some real longshgots inthere to overcome the expected long losing streak. But as I have said earlier , in my experience the $3 shot is no more likely then the $9 one.

Making sense, probably not, possibly a lot of cobblers, but I feel I have tightened my selections up enough, I just need to release the brakes a little to find a few more elusive longer price winners that can turn a struggling system into a winning one.

If we tighten up to much we cut our chances considerably especially, in my case, when the shorter priced ones do not have a better strike rate than my longer priced ones.

That is the reason I was interested in what Barny was saying. We all have different view points, but I know, if I keep doing what I have always done then I know what the final result will be. Just a slight tweak is what I am looking for.


Star

Thanks for that Beton but my post was not pointed at anyone in particular nor was it a challenge for just Barny. I hope someone takes the time to improve it and post the results, we might learn something!

I've noticed over the 18 months that I've been coming here many regular posters have disappeared and unfortunately a large percentage of them are the very people that I formed the opinion were very successful punters that we could learn from.

I've been using forums for 10-15 years for different personal interests and I've seen plenty come and go. The problem with agro on forums is that it makes them become irrelevant and eventually disappear. The masses here, like any other forum, are lurker members and if they see agro garbage every time they log on they go elsewhere, it's of no use to them.

I know we're talking about money, the root of all evil but the best forums I've ever belonged to were all about learning and sharing. You don't have to give your shirt away here, just make it a pleasant experience, it's not that hard.

Exactly. You are waiting for Barny to impart his promise to you. For him to give you a glimmer of light. We all are. We have all got our little secrets that we hold close. However we still point people in the right direction and help them. Barny IS NOT GOING TO SHARE PERIOD. and while he scoffs at all that try, then there will not be much said. Go back to when Barny started on the forum and take a list of posters. and ask yourself where have most gone? and ask why. DON'T ASK. DEMAND THAT A SENSE OF DIGNITY REMAINS IN THE FORUM. I am not asking for any one to leave. Just pull their head in a bit.

PS If I get booted I don't care. It will show that the management is blind and prepared to good go elsewhere in support of craaap.

Well said macs. It is exactly why I fired up instead silent protest. I am asking Barny to put up or shut up. He made the boast. Beton

Beaton, You and I and Barny have had good discussions previously. I remember when I started the Pareto Principle thread. Which apparently was Mark11 because their was one of a similar name many years ago.

I know that Barny is not going to share, he told me that a long time ago, but, he still does get one to rethink their stratergies even if he does spesk in riddles and sometimes appears to contradict himself when we read back or remember some of his posts.

To me, nothing really wrong with that, my position is never constant. Although, I think I am right in saying that many times in his threads and replies that for a system to be successful the rules must have some logic in them, buggar if I can see any in his latest "No Form " system, hence it would of been good for him to explain his thinking a bit better.

Star

Star All I am asking him is to explain better as well. He does not have to give his six secret filters away. All he has to say "look at the saddle numbers" look at days last start etc. At least then he may start doing good instead of beating his chest and shooing evrybody away.

Star, you are closer to your answer than you think.

You already seem to have a good rating method created. I would recommend you use this to find a good horse where everyone else isn't doing the same level of work as you.

Do you think the public pays more respect to a BM55 at Gilgandra on Tuesday over an Open race at Flemington on Saturday? The focus on major races is intense by both public and bookie. As a result they trim the markets perfectly. The focus at Gilgandra would be a few knock-abouts at the local. Even the bookies are too lazy to frame their own markets for these races. You get quite a head start here.

On the races I prefer, horses in the sharp end of the market (up to $5.00) have paid 5.5% more than quality races so far in December. That's quite an edge and it's not form related. It's mob related.

Perhaps if you apply your rating skill to true handicaps (no maidens, mares only, colts only, etc) in events up to BM72 or CL2-3 you may put your systems into profit.

Your skill at rating a horse will beat a non-focused recreational punter every time. And the added bonus is there are more poor quality races than good races all week long.

That's eleven vitriolic posts Beton ..... enough ??

Barny
You have been on the receiving end. It does not feel good. What I have said is felt by many others. You are welcome here. But to quote yourself "do it the true spirit of the forum." If you don't like somebody's post ignore it. If you have something to say about somebody's post then say it in a civil manner and if you do not get your point across then walk away. If you are going to post something about a thing that you are not going to share then don't post it and boast about it. LET'S GET SOME QUALITY BACK IN THE FORUM. Please Barny stand in the third person and read your posts. In the meantime Happy New Year Beton

Star ..... everyone has days last start as a filter don't they ?? It's always <15 or exactly 14 days or backing up quickly in 7 days or it's tailored around the individual horses optimum number of days between races. All have their limitations. < 15 days includes horses backing up quickly and it's fairly well known that most sprinters don't back up all that well seven days later, so why would anyone have as a filter < 15 days for instance ? I'm not telling you anything you don't know am I ?? Think $ dividend always. Let's look at horses backing up quickly, say 7 days. Run all the different distances through your database with a horse backing up within exactly 7 days and you'll wonder why the heck trainers ever back their charges up 7 days over sprint distances. There is a system that has shown a profit of backing up over 7 days over 1200m exactly with another rule or two thrown in, but in general it's better that you avoid sprinters backing up over 7 days, but the punters seem to love these conveyances, maybe look at geldings ?? .... Maybe horses could back up over 7 days if the distance was a little longer than a sprint, it's worth looking into, especially a handicappers favourite. But do you look for a last start winner backing up, or maybe a horse that didn't run into a place, I don't know, there's plusses and minuses for both but the bottom line is that you must steer clear of the punters favourites 'coz all you'l get is skinny odds regardless of the price. There's a case to be made, incertain circumstances, to look at a horse that's been freshened. Give this a try sometimes. As with all filters it cannot be broadbrushed over your database and be expected to shine, nor should it be tailored to suit each individual horse .... These beasts change markedly from one campaign to the next (one week to the next actually !!) and cannot be relied upon, but what can be relied upon are the punters who pick up on horses' individual traits and mannerisms and expect to have an advantage. Funnily enough, I've found the opposite. That's me over and out for good ..... see you later Beton ;)

Mac on a serious note - I usually only look at horses with a run under there belt at this distance range.

This improves the results

Hi Barny,

Good thought provoking stuff. I've always wondered about horses backing up within in 7 days. Another interesting "thought" was horses in sprint races (1000m) having several starts this preparation perform better than horses first up (or maybe even 2nd up). I don't have any stats but I do remember reading something to this effect.

Anyone able to confirm this?

Barny. One of your best posts ever. My hat off to you. You have a lot of good in you and you have let some shine out. This giving out a bit and pointing the right direction. 95% of people won't go there but you have helped those that do. Beton

You are exactly right Moeee - the Favourite strike rate hasn't changed.
More people have access to the same amount of data with the use of the internet now. At the end of the day there has to be many many losers for any one person to make profit.

Why do many 1st uppers have a low strike rate. Because they aren't fit enough to win the race. Does that mean we only focus on horses 2nd run in. Probably not! We should be looking at methods to assess how to measure each individual horses fitness levels. A tough challenge for anyone but one that needs to be applied.

Then there is speed analysis, velocity ratings, class etc... all good information and not much information discussed anyone.

TTA Horses do not tend to back up so fast. If it has been challenged in a race then no matter how good the horse is, it will generally take longer than 7 days to recover. No trainer will risk a horse if it has been challenged. However if the trainer does not think the horse has been challenged and it's fitness is still there then he will view it as an advantage to back up in exactly 7 days. Why 7 days. Because this will mean that the horse is backing up in exactly the same type of race 7 days later. If the horse was not a LSW then there could well be a bad start, some intefernce etc and mostly likely the horse coasted home behind the pack.

Of course people do that.
Book
"Fitness the key to winning" and the follow up.


Rem Plante's books.
Contaning chapter on
Acceleration/deceleration.

Bayer's books on speed etc.

Not discussed because it's too geeky.
And because you simply cannot apply it manually, just too tedious.

Easier to go with names and colours and tab numbers.