Thanks for your constructive thoughts becareful. I don't have the advantage of a large data base. I'm surprised by your results. I tried treating the high raters as the "value" runners but in my trials hit a wall. So I tried the opposite tack to much better results.

I agree on the general observations regarding last start position - a third last start can mean many different things -, but it remains a statistically useful fact that most winners finished 5th or better last start.

A top requirement in my schemes is easy-of-use. In this case all info can be taken from the TABQ at a glance. The info available is:

*Radio Tab tips. (very useful tips in my experience)
*Last starts.
*Barrier
*Weight
*Ratings from 60 to 100
*Prices

My thinking is that this is ample info from which to design a simple, reliable "selection generator" to which you then apply some critical judgement in staking. Many of Bhagwan's posted schemes are models of this.

Other more subtle factors like distance from winner are more telling, I agree, but it takes time to look them up or you have to outlay money to have such info neatly packaged for you. My challewnge is to design winning selection schemes from the free, readily available data on the TABQ webpage. For a long time I kept multiplying data. This factor. That factor. Position at home turn, etc. My inclinatioon now is to *simplify* - fast, reliable systems for the busy punter. Preferabbly set-and-forget.

From your analysis, becareful, it doesn't sound like this one has legs. Back to the drawing board I guess. :smile:

Hermes