18th July 2012, 11:44 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 102
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Star
Thats an interesting point Barny. Infact, the more research I do, the more I find that things I considered fairly consistent are not proving that way with more detailed research.
I think our friend Mr Privateer has really opened up a Pandora's Box. I am now starting to get an inkling that we cannot accept anything as gospel and to me now, nothing is sacred and everything is fair game.
Thanks to all for adding to this thread.
Star[/font][/font]
|
Hi Star
So if Joe Public considers your same things are fairly consistent, but they indeed aren't, then they would have applied the same bias to them as you did. I think it was Woof43 who handicaps the handicappers! But it relates best to certain conditions including tracks & distances... you just have to find which ones.
It would be good if you could poll the punters ( sounds painful) and list their top dozen decision factors ranked in order for picking winners. Then, watch for the highest ranked to fail consistently in certain conditions.
This should flush out false favs leaving overlays to gather up in a net... backing or laying 
I like the way you get things rolling Star. Keep up the good work & inquisitive mind!
|