21st July 2011, 03:30 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 4,429
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Try Try Again
Hi Shaun,
Very interesting approach - good luck with your ratings.
One aspect that always "worries me" is horses that have had no starts at track or distance. You can not really penalise them as they have not had any starts at the track or distance, so they have no history. Compare this with a horse that has had 5 starts at distance for zero placings - do they score that same rating?
Your comments?
|
Agree, this is where a lot fall down.
Tend to rate horses with good track or distance too highly, because 0 starts also means 0 failures.
A horse should be penalised for failures, rather than rated because of success when it comes to track and distance.
In fact I find more success, doing reverse ratings.
i.e. all horses start with a rating and deduct points for various failures.
Also gets around the pricing issue, as bolters truely become bolters and favoured horses come up shorter than the other way.
...imho  |