If no such data base exists then how can anyone know whether at least "some aspects" of horse size, used in certain ways, regarding "certain types of events" have no impact? If this information is not available, surely a conclusion then, regarding size, can only be drawn on one's broad opinion based on one's personal view and casual observations...... and that would be hardly mathematical, hardly scientific and most probably not accurate.
Lets look at the various systems and methods usually propogated....... they all use EXACTLY the same types of data bases based on distance, weight, jockey, venue, prizemoney plus dozens if not hundreds/thousands of other factors. ALL this information is readily available if one searches it out. The various betting methods merely sift the exact same data in slightly different ways. Everyone's using the *same information* so it's no wonder that most schooled punters struggle eternally to just break even, and the tiny amount of highly successful ones (*permanently* successful that is..... being in profit for a day, a week, a month or a year or 2 or 3 doesn't count and means nothing when you eventually fall behind) scrape by with just several percent profit on turnover resulting from an immense commitment and diligent hard work.
There must be contributing factors to winners that people *don't* consider......... there wouldn't be many of them obviously, I think the well's pretty dry in that area. But I bet there's still a few areas that have an impact that punters in general never consider.
If a punter uses information, *good* information that is, that nobody else is using, then that punter has achieved an advantage over everyone else.
Sifting through the same old information that punters have used for decades and decades .... and even centuries, is for the birds.
I believe one needs to find an advantage, and if everyone uses the same information then they have no *genuine* permanent advantage.
Hope this makes sense.