11th June 2009, 07:43 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 335
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Stix
I did post the stats last night, but then thought again about it and removed them (not sure why, maybe this website has jaded me), but will say that a very large % all winners (all ages, All Metro tracks, all track conditions, all states) finished better than 5th at their second last start......
|
Just out of curiosity I had a quick look at three random Saturday's racing. What I found was that 50-60% of the winners had finished between 1st and 4th at their 2nd last start. That sounds great, but then I went through and counted up all the horses that had finished between 1st and 4th at their 2nd last start, which ended up being between 50-60%. With all due respect, isn't it a bit like saying that a very large % of all winners have four legs, and trying to build a system around it? Or did I randomly choose 3 bad Saturdays to look at? Please understand that I'm not questioning your statistic. I'm questioning whether it is a statistic worthy of incorporating into a selection method, given the similar ratios of winners to the field.
__________________
...time held me green and dying, though I sang in my chains like the sea. - Dylan Thomas
|