garyf,

The field size information is particularly helpful as I haven't really taken that into my account with my ratings yet. I think there's possibly some merit in adjusting staking based on field size but will have to run some tests once I have more data recorded.

In terms of the distances thats also very useful. I recently went through the process of giving my ratings an overhaul based on information i'd read on these forums. I've always put an emphasis on track conditions (Good/Dead/Slow/Heavy) but i've also combined this with distance of the race now to be more specific with my ratings. In particular I use this data for my fitness, barrier and turn variables the most. The distance splits I use in combination with track conditions are as follows:

<1101
1101-1201
1201-1401
1401-1601
1601-1801
1801-2201

For distances over 2201 i've found barrier/turn stats are negligble and apply my 1801-2201 variables for fitness.

CP,

Agree that breaking down stats too much can harm the sample size, i'd say everything still warrants investigation (if you have the time) but its important to be mindful of reading too much into small sample sizes.

In reference to track conditions changing throughout a day this is why my spreadsheet breaks my ratings down based on Good, Dead, Slow, Heavy. So that way if conditions change I can apply my ratings based on the given track conditions not just a generic rating for all conditions. Unfortunately this means I have to place my backs/lays manually before each race but I find doing it this way is more beneficial then a generic rating. Would be nice to find a bot that places bets based on track conditions.