Crash wrote in another thread...
Quote:
If I asked if you used a mechanical system for your great NFL results Panther, you'd probably think I was a wacko [as would anyone else]. Too many variables involved.
Am I saying something here [to nobody in particular] about irony and horse racing systems ?
|
Hi Crash,
sounds like we need to crank up the old "mechanical systems" debate once again.
I am a systems man through and through, and before we get stuck into this debate we really should have an idea what we mean by "mechanical system". To me, a "mechanical system" is one which does not rely on ratings. It's the "horse must have 2121 in it's formline and started within the last 28 days" type rules. "Ratings based systems" are those that are based on ratings. They are most likely "mechanical" in every other sense of the word, except that they also include a ranked ratings selection.
I have made a profit each year for the past 3 financial years based upon systems, both mechanical and ratings based (my first year was only a few months so not a full year). I have doubled my turnover each year as well, again based purely on systems. I couldn't support the level of turnover that I currently have without being even a little bit profitable.
At last count I have some 50 systems currently in work, with about another 10 in the sidelines waiting to prove themselves. Of these 50 systems, about 10 of them are purely mechanical, 10 were purely mechanical but have been "tightened up" a little with ratings, and the rest are ratings based - sensible filters applied to a ratings "top rater" which produces a profit.
Of these 50 systems, only about 20 of them were actually being bet 12 months ago, and only about 5 of them were being bet 24 months ago. I monitor each of my systems (I prefer the word strategy but will stick with system for this thread) very closely, and at the first sign of trouble chuck them.
It's interesting that Nick Mordin in his book "winning without thinking" concluded that mechanical systems *DO* work, it's just that most of them have a use-by date. I have found that 99% of systems support this theory (with many of the use-by dates predating their release).
I note with interest that Davez also said in another thread
Quote:
|
if one doesnt enjoy the effort required to do a bit of form now & again, then one should probably be off doing something else
|
I find doing the form tedious - but I can sit up till all hours designing a new system, pulling it to bits and finding out how it works and trying to predict how it will go into the future. Seeing all that hard work come to fruition and picking some good winners is just as enjoyable to me as backing the winner based on form study.
Cheers,
Chris.