5th December 2005, 09:29 AM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 1970
Location: Sydney
Posts: 402
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Winston_Smith
Sorry but just because the stats comes from 1 million runs does not make them "signficant.". you said "significantly better" and I ask you again to justify how you can make that claim.
And the stats at the bottom of your most recent post are useless. please define how you "measure excess wins and places over expected:". until you have a valid measurement of "expected" then those stats are worthless. and you should know better than to ask us to accept them without such explanation. this is the sort of thing you berate others for so please dont fall into their trap.
Thank you. Winston.
|
Winston,
As you appear to be a newcomer perhaps you may care to check out some of my earlier material where I tried to discuss proportional staking and related topics.
As far as I can tell there are no errors in my posted figures. The strike rate of 16.2% refers to the new control sample of 110,487 runners mentioned in the preceding sentence.
I believe the concept of expected wins and places is reasonably well known. I notice that ignorance of Actual/Expected happens to be a favourite bugbear of Anomaly Nick.
If you accept places as 1st, 2nd or 3rd, then for a field of N:
Expected Win = 1/N
Expected place = 3/N
|