7th December 2004, 10:54 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 126
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KennyVictor
...
The funny thing is year after year the system performs badly at some courses (Ascot for e.g, always -10%) and year after year it performs well at others (Belmont nearly always +10 to 15%). Not only that, some courses have pretty consistently good months and bad months. Pinjarra for example Nov +30%, Dec +40%, Jan +25% and the rest of the year crap.
You need a lot of results to work a system on a by month basis (which is why I stick to WA - easily available data) but (if you haven't already) you may want to consider the time of year and course when you run some of your systems. It could explain some runs of outs.
I have a few theories on the whys and wherefores of this up and down performance but I would be interested to hear what you guys feel the reasons for this may be.
|
Well I've been twisting the grey matter around this question, and I haven't really come up with anything that would hold water. Obviously some horses are suited to some tracks, going, etc, but this does not account for the figures in the way you've broken them down KV. Why do you think the results pan out this way?
Also would I be correct in assuming that "well-tweaked" margins refers to something other than the 'standard' measures most often used - ie 1.5 kgs to a length?
|