OK. Too many questions to answer in one post except to say this - there is no one answer. What ratings do is express ability numerically to cut out the comparisons of different tracks and classes against one another. If you have a horse who rates 70 (say expressed in terms of lengths) and another across the other side of the country who rates 68, both at their best, then you know that the first one is two lengths better. Then, of course, comes the arbitrary judgement about what you think they will rate given today's circumstances. This is where your questions are coming in - what do you give them as a rating tomorrow?

There is no answer that is right, as you know the market is not the true expression of what's going on, merely the expression of what the mass conglomerate of punters out there think. And remember, they're influenced by a billion different factors.

So, the rating you give it is UP TO YOU.

As a guide, though, look at what it's best rating is at the moment (say last two or three starts) and if in your opinion it is more likely to be better suited today, bonus it a little or if otherwise penalise it slightly.

The important thing is to have reliable ratings. If you don't have them, you're stuffed. The next step is knowing how to use then. Start by reading Don Scott's book Winning More, it's a good start. Then ask me again, I'll tell you more.

Actually, that's EXACTLY what I was planning on doing. When I said 'doing ratings', I meant simply using Ozeform's ratings figures and adding a couple of small bonuses or penalties of my own. Above all, I want to keep it SIMPLE, because I reckon you can think too much about these sorts of things and get yourself all confused. If you keep it basic and simple, you lessen that confusion.

I've only been looking at them again for a little while and just using the horse's last run would have been quite effective in the races I've looked at. Now that seem's TOO simple to work long term. I'm going to have to look at it a bit more closely over the next few days, because I'm planning on starting to use something like this come January 1.

By the way, when it came to horses resuming, I was simply using the rating from their previous first-up run, providing it wasn't out of the ordinary from it's other first-up runs. I reckon there's probably a better alternative than that? With horses 2nd up, I looked at their previous 2nd up runs to see how much improvement they made after their first-up runs and then simply added that amount on to their last start.

As for that race yesterday, simply using the last run, Power And Faith came out on top and Valashka was only rated equal 5th. Rocketeer AND Parliament both rated fairly highly considering they weren't really given much hope in the betting. The first4 paid $20000 and it certainly wasn't impossible to get. Then again, it's easy when you're looking at them AFTER the race has been run.

Oh, are you sure about the apprentice jockey's allowances? How has that worked for you in your ratings? Has it been a big help?

Sports
I have found it is folly not to make adjustments for apprentices.
Why do trainers use them if it does not enhance the prospects of their mounts.
Would Dane's jester have won yesterday without the 3kg. allowance.?
If you look at how quickly top apprentices lose their claim and then the winners dry up, it demonstrates the advantage they have over other riders.
As I said in my previous post, the ozeform rating is based on actual weight carried after the claim, therefore a claim for today's race has to be factored in. (that's my opinion anyway. everyone to their own.)
Claims are probably more important with horses handicapped near the top of the weights.
Referring to yesterday's rating for Valashka, this horse was on an improving cycle and ready to produce, i. e. right race, right distance, therefore it is necessary to look for a rating pertinent to the event it was contesting today.
Had valashka won that race it would have returned a rating possibly 3kg. higher than it had produced before, a task that is probably beyond it.
The rating previously produced of 57kg. ws attained carrying 55kg. with the aid of a claim.
This is most likely this horses peak rating for all time. Who knows?.
One thing seems certain from watching yesterday's race,If Valashka had 3kg. off it's back it would have been fighting out the finish with Power and Faith.
Hope this helps. It's free.

Duritz,

Big topics!

I start out with a speed map and a set of ratings and first eliminate horses with poor form (cut them off at 5 lengths from the top rated horse) or horses who are going to settle back in a slowly run race. Position with 600m to go, pace of the race to that point, finishing speed and the weight to be carried are all important. Beyond that its a matter of experience, judgment and personal taste. I don't have any particular secrets or special way of doing things.

I think it's important not to rely on your initial rating assessment (i.e. the raw ratings figure). Give bonuses and penalties for your own particular likes and dislikes.

The staking method I employ is a variation in the standard dutch book. My view is if you have a horse rated $3, if the bookmaker gives you $6 you should have 200 on it, if he gives you $12 you should have 400. Once you escape the "bookmaker market intimidation" mentality you free yourself to make substantially better profits.

If I don't have a hangover after Christmas I might post boxing day at Caulfield, and then go through the staking horse-by-horse.

Cheers,

F

Those ratings no the Ozeform site are pretty much the same ratings that IAS use when doing the form etc, so you'll find no problems with using them. They're probably the best ratings you could access to be honest, and they're free, and you get the whole history of the horse too. The only qualm is the laborious nature of typing in every horse. If you could access them by clicking on them in the form part of the website it'd be excellent.

Remember one thing when you're doing the form with ratings - there's no rule about what you should do every time in any given circumstance, because (and though it might sound cliched it's true) all horses are different. There's no right or wrong either, the only measure of right or wrong is whether you end up winning or losing. Try different things, but always look back on what you did and see what worked and what didn't.

Duritz,

Just a question. I assume weight allowances for females are already factored in?

By the way, I'm having trouble accessing some of the ratings. It seems to be just horses with an apostrophe in their name like today for example - He's A Hula, Bosun's Piper and Dancer's Edge. I remember a few years ago, you had to do something different when typing in such names, but I've forgotten what it was. Could you possibly help me out here?

Hmmm, I just managed to get the form for Frisco's Harem, so I'm not sure what was wrong with those other ones.

Sorry to hear of your timeout Imagele.
But if it helps any,I appreciate the long over.
In fact the hair on the back of my neck is standing up and a head rush.
Can't wait to get to that site and suss out the ratings.
I used to play with ratings,but think I might have taken it much too seriously.
I like your simplified approach.I feel you can know too much whereas in my younger years I thought you could never know enough.

I didn't find no ratings on my first jaunty,so I'll try registering and see if they appear.

If you're talking about Ozeform, yes, you have to register.