19th October 2008, 03:37 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 4,432
|
|
Ratings Discussion
Thought I'd open a discussion on ratings from members.
A common ratings benchmark is to get the highest strike rate from whatever method is used. This becomes the top rated horse and then there is a big distance between strike rate and accuracy, the further one goes down the field.
Surely from my point of view, if one comes up with a rated price and unders is offered, then one should be able to make a profit laying said horses.
Vice versa, if overs are obtained one should be able to make a profit backing.
Often with a rated price, the shorter the odds, the more you make, the longer the price the more you lose - this is the conundrum.
I don't subscribe to the view of distribution, frequency or strike rate as an indicator, it is the value offered by overs or unders of that rated price that reflects the accuracy.
What stands out is the All The Good horse.
Surely 40/1, 50/1 etc was complete overs and the favoured horses should have been a point better odds, yeah all fine in hindsight, but even a class 2 horse who had proven itself over the distance and had been imported by a top UK trainer to contend a Group 1 had to be further clues.
Hindsight too easy after the fact.
My question is, has anyone found accurate ratings anywhere, or been able to make them from scratch, and by accurate I mean, horses starting over the price provide profit, horses starting under the price provide good lay profit?
This is the true indicator of accuracy.
|