hi tony

i'm glad you gave me all the rules

1. ppp does not allow 1.5kg over wt etc, i can do an approx

2. my stats, like all ppp users only go back to 30/6/1 for sat. price or rank stats. i go back to 1/1/2000 for all other stats

i will run what i can, but sorry for getting your hopes up

regards

dinodog

hi tony

probably the same or similar results to your own

Meetings considered : 2901
Win Strike Rate/Seln. : 32.3%
Plc Strike Rate/Seln. : 62.0%
Average Win Dividend : $2.83

WIN PLACE QUINELLA EXACTA TRIFECTA FIRST FOUR
Races Bet : 384 384 384 384 384 247
Races Won : 124 238 158 102 84 40
S.R./Race : 32.3% 62.0% 41.1% 26.6% 21.9% 16.2%
Outlay ($): 384.00 384.00 2282.00 2282.00 11338.00 28920.00
Return : 350.70 341.86 2435.60 2659.50 16353.40 46414.20
$ Profit : -33.30 -42.14 153.60 377.50 5015.40 17494.20
% P.O.T. : -8.7% -11.0% 6.7% 16.5% 44.2% 60.5%

Test Duration = 00:06:16

regards

mal

Thanks Mal. The relative weight search is achievable with ppp, will email you privately so as not to bore the non-ppp people here.

tony.with your weight rule wouldnt you be excluding the best horses in the race.for example.-50=0.1 pc of runs=0.1pc of wins.50.5-51.5=1.4pc of runs=0.7pc of wins.52-53=34.8pc of runs=21.3pc of wins.its only when the horse reaches 55kg up is there an advantage.in fact.runners carrying 55kg up account for 36.5pc of runners but provide 50.6pc of winners.the point being that lower weighted horses(contrary to popular opinion) have an appalling win record.

Darkydog, your stats are undeniably right and my reason for using the 1.5 filter is not an irrational attraction for lightweights but purely because applying it resulted in a profit wrt favourites.
ie Pure curve fitting over the past 18 months data which is why I am keen to test for longer and frankly sceptical it will hold up.
It does however remind me of an article sourced by the Inracing people, whom I know you respect, titled The Principle of Maximum Confusion where from memory they contend that if a horse is made favoutite without the obvious credentials (eg not near the top of the weights where most of the winners come from) they are favourite maybe for more subtle but often no less valid reasons and are so relatively underbet and more profitable than those obvious highly-weighted favourites which are then overbet.
I am extrapolating from the strict application of the article but I think am in keeping with its principle.(for what its worth)

tony.good luck with your test.good to hear from you.