I'm just about out of ideas to throw in the air and I'm sure everyone is sick of my comments.

But with racing comes a lot of luck. Often a jockey can stuff up a ride by getting caught 3 wide etc... or the bob of the nose of the line can be the difference between a great day or a poor one.

Basically I'm looking at assessing horses that have won by 3L or more and saying I'm confident that with their prior preparation they are the best horse on the day and regardless about the other horses run, they still with luck on there side would not have won.

Also this is a stupid question too, but do any race tracks provide with data in relation to the actual weight of the horse? I'm trying to assess an edge in weight ratings in relation to ratio of weight of horse to weight of jockey.

Thanks guys

3.0=> lengths winner is a good "STARTING POINT" for a system.


To my knowledge they don't weigh horses and produce it,
As published information in Australia though it is probably,
Done privately think i heard it one time on sky channel
In between races for the greyhounds though.

Good luck with it.

Cheers.
Garyf.

3L being 4.5kg?

LG

__________________
The trick isn't finding profitable angles, it's finding ones you will bet through the ups and downs - UB

Yep i have tried using a sliding scale over the years for.
The longer distances but didn't improve things a great deal.
So came back to the tried and proven.

Cheers.

Hey there Vortech, I'm not at home at present, down in sydney visiting with the kids. The last few weeks before I left home I set up a very long drawn out spreadsheet where I could rate the last 3 runs of every runner.

Thinking this would give me an edge with races of say 1500m and beyond. But after a short while I tended to notice that the rating for the "last start" outperformed the rating for the "average last 3 starts".

I did of course for second uppers just use the "last start" and for third uppers use the "last 2 starts". First uppers are of course the problem. Races with to many of these just should be ignored.

Not having any bets yesterday (saturday), being driving in the car all day, my last betting day was last saturday. My program rated the last winner in melbourne on top in its "last race", paid around $30 for the win. On the average of the last 3 starts it was not on top. From memory it was a 1600m race at Flemington. It was the roughest horse in the field. So I am thinking why did it rate so well. It had its previous run at Mornington I think on a slow track over also 1600 and the time of the race was better than my par time for that track/distance/going.

CP's data base has allowed me to fill in a lot of blanks that I had for tracks here and there. On another thread somewhere recently which I think you also started, I commented that I am using the average of the best 10 times for track/distance/going. I think I now have well over 4,000 times in my vlookup columns. So for what its worth I tend to think anyone using ratings, that the last start rating outperforms what I originally intended to use, which was the average of the last 3 starts.

Paul

agree 100% Paul & of course all the form students will roll back their eyes at such comments

__________________
"Now let me get this straight - Whatever I do don't bet this horse?"

Basically the system will create the base rating by setting parameters that will look at runs in similar distance range to day and select all the runs then pick best of those, that’s the starting point, then apply

1form bonuses/penalty for ability to handle track conditions

2 jockey claims applied, deducts allowance from weight to do form analysis based on actual weight to be carried

3 Field strengths are applied

4 times bonuses are applied

5 trainer bonus

6 barrier adjustments

The problem is when to bet on your rated horses.
If your third rated horse is 6.00 but paying $25.00 do you back it a place.

Or do you only bet when your 1st rated horse when value and keep betting subsequent horses under that.

Its one I think I'll only get a feel for over time.

Might be able to help.

Group your ratings in order say 1-2-3-4.

Place each order into an Underlay, Same, Overlay graph.

EG.
Say you rated a race like this.
1=$3.5.
2=$5.0
3=$7.0
4=$11.0

A bit over 70%

On course market.
1=$3.0
2=$7.0
3=$5.5
4=$21.0

1 is an underlay
2 is a 1.5 overlay
3-is an undelay
4 is a 2.0 or double overlay .

Most would go and back their 2nd-4th pick as they are overlays.
But is it wise to bet in the race 'Against your top rated"
When it is an underlay?

Frankly until you have put all your ratings into something like,
The above only that will tell you when and how to bet.



Grouping them in some sort of order it is important to record.
The extent of the overlay.

For me backing top rated i price at $3.50 that open up $12.0-$21.0,
Means i stay out no matter what the rest of my horses are priced.

Defying the market nowadays is not my go.

Most of my profits will come when they are a little under,
Or a little over not massive swings either way.

Hope this helps some.

Cheers.
Garyf.

Thanks garyf. Just testing backing first two raters when both are paying $4 or more

Hi guys,

When following a ratings provider (many years ago) the advice was if you can't get an overlay on the top rated horse you stay out of that race. Also if the track was worse than Dead there was no betting on that meeting.

The races bet were very similar to those garyf put up as Good bettable races.

I would have to say the advice worked extremely well back then.