evajb001, mattio picked me up on a few things, one the $4 to $30 SP. Geoff Murphy only backed his horses if they were better than $4. He figured that with his S/R he was sure to win. On this very forum, many suggest they don't bet under $4. I don't like to take short odds so $4 it is. The $30 seemed a fair cut off point too. But that wasn't good enough for mattio, this was backfitted says he. He doesn't "know" how I arrived at any of my filters or how long they have been tested and how they've been tested. One system shows a brilliant POT each and every year over 12 years in both Melb & Syd, it doesn't have many selections each year tho', so the naysayers on here will tell me it's unproven. The race type filter reduces the number of selections down quite dramatically. Another system has filters including 1-4 last 5 runs, > 2 runs since spell, SP $4 to $30 and a couple more filters ..... too many filters ?? I'm looking here for a lightly raced horse with good recent form with at least a couple of starts from a spell in the Metro Area. Don Scott says when you find a good young horse down in the weights you should bet heavily on it. This system is nothing more than putting one of Don Scotts favourite type of wagers on paper. Perhaps my best system is one that looks for overseas, interstate, NZ horses with a decent Win S/R. Mentioned this one quite a few times too and over the Spring Carnival.

mattio, I believe, as I've posted is too close to the action, and he's concentrating on giving his horses the best possible chance of winning without realising that it's the dividends that allow you to show a profit. The better divvis come from going against the crowd and the worse ones from following "won at track", "won at distance" ..... everyone is on those filters, have been for ages and will continue to do so. All that does is give you an overbet horse, no matter what other filters you put in.