![Old](images/statusicon/post_old.gif)
1st February 2011, 07:43 PM
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 1,096
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dale
Here's an example of the benefits of filtering to field size from a system im currently testing-
All races =
714 bets-201 wins -$700.40 return - 0.019% loss on turnover
Races with 7 starters or less =
104 bets - 33 wins -$72.40 return - 0.303% loss on turnover
Races with 8 starters or more =
610 bets - 168 wins - $628 return -0.029% profit on turnover
* so weve taken a losing system and turned it into a profitable one by simply ignoring races with less than 8 starters.
This is from well fancied horses,the situation is exagerated even more with longer priced horses.
Cheers
|
Thanks for that Dale, let's see what others think of this.
I personally never considered field sizes seriously, mainly because my rating seems to work OK in any field size, and for an other, I do not bet multiples at all.
Good luck
|