Indeed. Study the market for long enough and you can toss your formguides, rating and databases in the bin.



Having a system (in the context Barny was referring to) and using a systematic approach are two distinct things.



Absolutely. There's profits to be made in both directions. The stock market punters have been doing it for ages.

__________________
Pixie

"It's worth remembering that profit isn't profit until it's spent off the racecourse." -- Crash

I wouldn't exactly go that far.
You are quite correct, there are many market based approaches, that generate profit on their own.
Ratings and databases can add a lot of value to those approaches.

For example, not all $2.00 into $1.70 horses are the same.
Backing them all might be profitable at best tote or BFSP.
But really delving into race replays, trials, stewards reports, formguides, ratings and databases can really avoid many losing bets, which in turn generates greater profit.

If one can extract why a movement is happening and make a decision based on facts we have rather than facts we don't have, then at least we can rule out a percentage of furphy's.



I think it depends on your definition of a system.
A system does not necessarily have to select one two or three horses a race.
It doesn't necessarily have to rely on form filters.
In fact in my book any set of filters is a system.

Perhaps we each have our own interpretation of what a system actually is?

I do not for example think a system is based on staking, that's yet another distinct thing as you say.

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 417,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 30/04/2025
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

I suspect this is the case.

Yes any set of filters would be part of a system in my book also. Not sure I agree about staking though. My interpretation of Wikipedia's definition of a system is that a system has STRUCTURE - we'd call them filters. INTERCONNECTIVITY - i.e. if filter 'a' is true then we move on to filter 'b' otherwise we move on to filter 'c', and BEHAVIOUR - i.e. what we do. Staking could arguably be placed here.

On the whole though I think racings systems are poorly or impatiently researched; as suggested above system users tend not to have a "business plan" i.e. what do I do if things turn against me; unrealistic user expectations as to how they'll profit from the system; and many a far too complex.

__________________
Pixie

"It's worth remembering that profit isn't profit until it's spent off the racecourse." -- Crash

This is a top question you pose Barny. Here's my thoughts.......

I was thinking that maybe we could group these systems and this is what I came up with. ( You've got to do something when there's ************ all races )

I've been down all three of the following roads and I can only make one work. Not knocking the other two, just that I can't make them work.

The three system roads.....

1) Purely mathematics and divvies....maybe Marks' forte? This method is unlikely to suffer over time because dividends by their very nature take all things into account.

2) The approach that maximizes form analysis and then seeks to find best odds to make a profit. This method is subject to the availability of odds and may suffer from competition as punters become better informed.

3) Grail territory. These are the systems that have such an advantage (usually strike rate, less often a repeatable high price concept) that an impressive profit is gleaned whatever the odds available. These little beauties have so much leeway built in that you can look at years of profit with no tweaking.

Time to cook the evening meal now so I'll toddle off. love to hear from those making this game work as to where they fit into the scheme.

__________________
"Not winning on a horse that came first is one thing.....Losing on a horse that didn't come first is something else entirely!!!"

sort of,
I would add strategy with mathematics and divvies.

Pure mathematics is what works for me. No form analysis, just statistics and probability. Take the emotion and decision making out by using an automated bot.

Combination of mostly 1) & a little of 2)

But I often wonder if I have taken the more difficult route, as I can honestly say I do not recall the last time I went to the races with just a pen & a bit of cash, paid $5 for a racebook & came home with less in my pocket than I went with.

If I could find a way to get myself to the races most days of the week I reckon I would have this game down cold...loan of a helicopter anyone

There are so many derivations within those three, but I reckon I'm in the first category.
It is very hard to make this game pay from a punting angle, those that do are yards ahead of the field.
Crunching numbers is my thing, I like the challenge of finding viable methods using strike rate and average odds.
It's actually a much more complicated matrix than it appears.
Added to that, unless you're standing next to the horse, one has to realise that there will always be someone else who knows more about it than you do.
Sometimes, one will see value, snap it up, only to see the price blow like a north wind.
Vice versa.
It's the overall picture that counts.

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 417,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 30/04/2025
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

What a cracker thread Barny. Here's another little separation that has had me up at nights.

There are those that believe you MUST look for value or you simply cannot make it work and there are those that believe the dividend is the most accurate representation of a horses chances.

At the end of the day those of us lucky enough to have a winning system in their pockets are in essence beating the general opinion of the masses because that is the nature of dividends.

BUT.....here I am using a clever little collection of simple rules that has a strike rate that few would believe and yet it doesn't work if I ignore the popular opinion of the masses. In some people's eyes I would be looking for poor value.

Personally, I feel this simply underlines the fact that this must be the most sophisticated, complicated and wonderful way to make a cracker.

__________________
"Not winning on a horse that came first is one thing.....Losing on a horse that didn't come first is something else entirely!!!"