Recently it was said that Don Scott's ratings were up there. But because they are openly available and therefore overbet the value just is not there. While looking at Bestform I noticed that their top two picks had their share of winners but you had to cull the bets. Their third and fourth picks also their share as well. On a notable basis (recognising patterns) the first two came first and second or visversa. also noticable was that all four got up. Occassionly they were in the correct order. On Betselector you can see that this trend carries true. I was not looking at exotics so the exercise was moot.
As I have progressed I can see that good punters and the herd can pick the most likely winners and collectively destroy the value by overbacking those few horses.
In exotics it is different because most punters are having multiple bets per race which results in one winning bet and hundreds in some cases of bets against the winning combination. Adding to the value.
Simply put If you took a rating service ie Don Scott or the neural ratings or one of the many different free services and bet the top two on an exacta, the top three on a tri and the top four in that order and placed a single bet.
In that case for the same cost as large legged multi you can have a single bet in many races. There may be a long spell between drinks but there may be enough regular drinks.
Am I correct in this or is it the same as saying TAB#1 wins a lot.
Can somebody with a database and the knowhow check this please? and comments are welcome.
Regards Beton