Hi Guys,

Just wondering if some one could check this for me seems to be going very well over the last six months, belive it ham potetional.

Consider horses who have a win strike rate of over 35% with more than ten carrer starts.

That have placed at there last start.

That are either down or in the same class as previous start.

That have no more than 60kg's.

That have won over the prevailling course and distance.

If first or second up need to have won first or second up previously.

Seems to have produced about 40% win strike rate and dividends ranging from $1.50-$14.00

Any assistance or stats would be much appreciated.

Thanks.

Ran it over past 7 mnths deleting the paper PP Fav .To reduce the loss situation.
17% SR
-6% LOT
It seemed to attract a lot of short payers
because of the last start placing rule.

I then modified the rules to read

1-6 wins at dist
11-40 career starts
35%-45% career wins
Fin Position last start 4-9th
Hcp Wt. 57Kg
Drop in class
Field size 10-14 (so as to get value).
Spell count, 2-6 starts after a spell

Result for last 7mnths operating 7 days a week.

21% SR
300% POT
34 bets
Longest run of outs 10

O/L $340
Ret $1357
Prof $1017
4.8 bets a mnth
Largest div $48.00

Thanks Bhgwan,

Do you belive this can have some merit?

I have thought about making the win strike rate between 30-35% seems to also have some good returns.

Your thoughts, if any?

Thanks for your help as well just a novice looking for some different angles.

retro-fitting....again

You bet its retro fitted ,because the future does`nt exist yet.

It amazes me how many people like to use that word as a derrogatory term when in effect that`s exactly what one is trying to do when studying the form guide, in the hope it can repeat a certain performance, based on a certain characteristic.

I also ran the system over 4 years ,which was not so called retrofitted ,& it still showed a profit.

The figures can be guaranteed ,but its the warrantee that can be the problem with systems in general.

Only 34 bets could not be considered as a reasonable sample to have future faith.

I would expect a minimum of 1,000 bets to make an assumption and 10,000 to have any real confidence.

But that's just the way I treat statistics.

Nothing wrong with what you've offered Bhagwan, it's up to the individual how they interpret your results.

Sorry Bhagwan, didn't mean to offend, but fitted rules on past results seldom keep on winning. Exact rules, such as finishing between 4th & 9th last start just make no sense. Why would you prefer to back a horse that ran 4th of 4, beaten say 20 lengths, over a horse that either won, or ran 10th of 20 beaten 2 lengths, simply because the "rules" say so?

Just a thought. If your system is based on winning form during previous campaigns, then why not add a rule that the horse must have won this time up. Lotsa nags don't come up. Also I would avoid backing a horse in it's first campaign. eliminate 2yo's.