STATS APPLIED

All systems of selection must involve some mode or mechanism for eliminating non-prospects in a race. I'm interested in picking placegetters. All systems of picking placegetters must at some stage eliminate those horses you think have no chance of running a drum. (In fact, if its a starter, it has a chance, but you know what i mean.)

Using the stats I've been working on (and others kindly supplied by punters in this forum and elsewhere) I've been designing some coarse filters. (I'm building a system from the ground up - that's what I'm like. I'm fantatical about this. I want a 100% strike rate!). In my system (still under construction) I begin (step 1.) by identifying a fairly broad group of qualifiers. This is the first filter. Eliminate the rubbish.

But its harder than you think. I want a filter that eliminates the rubbish without taking out too many placegetters in the process. I've tried numerous combinations of factors, testing them out on my sample of old races. You tend to either lose too many placegetters or not enough of the rubbish. But I have found some good combinations. Here's a couple:

*Top 8 average place percentages.
*Last start finished 1st to 6th.

This will usually reduce a field to 7 or less qualifiers and net about 80-85% of placegetters. Gets a race down to manageable proportions.

*Above 33% place average
*Within 4 points of the top Zip rating (in the Sportsman)

Depends on the calibre of the race. It will net over 75% of the placegetters but often it won't reduce the field much. Occasionally, very good results where only a few horses are within 4 of Zip and you've still got sometimes up to 80% of the placegetters. (That's two and a bit horses!)

Another good one:

*Top seven average prize winners.
*Top seven average place percentage.
*Last start finished 1-6.

Good results. Reduces the field and nets a reliable number of the placegetting horses.

(I might add that I'm not all for stats. I'm looking for coarse filters as guides. My approach is to reduce the field step by step, filter by filter, but the ultimate decision is not a mechanical one. I'm increasingly convinced that you also have to know something about horses....)

Cheers

Hermes