OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums

OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums (http://forums.ozmium.com.au/index.php)
-   Horse Race Betting Systems (http://forums.ozmium.com.au/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Neural Data Help - Please? (http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=22471)

Stix 11th September 2011 11:41 AM

Neural Data Help - Please?
 
Hi All

I'm working on something where the top rater has all the neural settings set = 0, except TA and JT that are set to default (3).

Last couple days have found winners @ $14, $11, $7, and $4 with a reasonable(?) strike rate.

I was wondering if anyone might have the last 3, 6 or 12mths worth of data with these settings?

I would be very appreciative and would be happy to share my findings - as I have in the past with Chrome, Wesmip1, Michaelg and others....

Contact me: stix_hotcopper at aanet dot com dot au

Some qualifiers today are:
Bendigo R1-1, R6-14...back with some more soon...




Thanks In Advance

Stix 13th September 2011 03:11 PM

Anyone? :eek:

Bhagwan 13th September 2011 07:58 PM

I dabbled with that setting some time ago & what I found is that it went really well for some days, then fell into a total hole other days .

Very hot & cold.

I found the std settings worked as well as anything else.

With some very good paying winners.

Looking at the Neural forum , a lot of the chaps seem to compare their various settings with one another , on how well their top 2 selections performed as a combined percentage, so as to judge whether their settings had any legs or not.

Rather than just relying on their top selection only.

I feel if one wants to get the best out of the Neurals , I found its a good idea to target the top 2 of whatever favourite Neural setting one is using.

Then separate those top 2, using ones favoured separation method & go from there.

The separation method does not necessarily have to be all that logical, if it's shown to perform in the past, that way , the better payers can be snared.

Try & keep the separation process as simple as possible.
That way it has a greater chance of repeating itself into the future.

Stix 13th September 2011 08:13 PM

Thanks Bhags, I've got a method already which picks up selections using Neurals and 100 pt raters, which is doing well since I started in October last year - and thanks to some of Wesmips data he provided - but he's gone AWOL...

Often on a lazy Sunday will look at top two neural raters and "normalise" the CF and CP figures to get a selection. For example Top rater has 185 points (CF 80 CP 15) and 2nd Rater has 130 pts (CF 20 CP 25) - i look at the combined CF and CP points (95 vs 45) where there is a big discrepancy between two values - in this case CF points - I look at the 2nd rate and if it's CF was 80, would it out rate the original top rater, which it would in this case (130-20+80=210) then it becomes the selection.

This works pretty good and don't have too many races before you hit a winner, small staking plan until a winner hit and then either stop or start again...anyway again something to think about and play around with.

I was looking at TA and JA setting in conjuction with Unitab and got some decent priced winners, although Sunday was not the best day...

Anyway if someone has the TA & JA settings for any period of time, it would be appreciated!!

Be Good...





Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhagwan
I dabbled with that setting some time ago & what I found is that it went really well for some days, then fell into a total hole other days .

Very hot & cold.

I found the std settings worked as well as anything else.

With some very good paying winners.

Looking at the Neural forum , a lot of the chaps seem to compare their various settings with one another , on how well their top 2 selections performed as a combined percentage, so as to judge whether their settings had any legs or not.

Rather than just relying on their top selection only.

I feel if one wants to get the best out of the Neurals , I found its a good idea to target the top 2 of whatever favourite Neural setting one is using.

Then separate those top 2, using ones favoured separation method & go from there.

The separation method does not necessarily have to be all that logical, if it's shown to perform in the past, that way , the better payers can be snared.

Try & keep the separation process as simple as possible.
That way it has a greater chance of repeating itself into the future.

Bhagwan 13th September 2011 09:44 PM

Thanks Stix, that looks interesting.

So one would take the combined CF+CP then add that to its original rating , is that right?
e.g.
1st rated say 180 + CF25 + CP45 = 250
2nd rated say 170 + CF 40 + CP 45= 255

The 2nd rated becomes our selection?

Bhagwan 13th September 2011 09:49 PM

Sorry , I just re-read what you said.

I think I got the jist of it..

Stix 14th September 2011 12:17 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bhagwan
Sorry , I just re-read what you said.

I think I got the jist of it..
Example:

CP for Oratrice is 65 v Black Tycoon 10

If Black Tycoon's CP rated 65, its final rating would be 151.5 - replace the CP of 10 with 65 (96.5-10+65-151.5) - Black Tycoon's adjusted rate is 151.5 and is > Oratrice's 107.5....hence it becomes your selection....it works sometimes ;)




TABHORSENRHCPCPCFTIMJATAJTBPWETCRSD$DLR
9 Oratrice107.5 65 3 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 10 6 16
5 Black Tycoon96.5 10 21 0 0 0 18 11 0 0 5 16 16

Bhagwan 14th September 2011 07:45 PM

Thanks for that .

I got it now.


All times are GMT +10. The time now is 06:18 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.