Thanks for the link Sportz and sorry about the distance suggestion but it was just a thought (and not much good either it would seem).

__________________
Regards

That's okay, there's absolutely nothing wrong with making suggestions and offering opinions. :smile:

Sportz,
I found 1 bet today which won well but too short for me, do you agree????

Cheers

Are you talking about Strictly Fast??? It wasn't actually a selection because there were TWO horses in the race with 100pts. To be a selection, the horse must be the ONLY 100 rater in the field after scratchings.

By the way, that other 100 rater ran 2nd. There were also two 100 raters in Race 7 and they ran the quinella as well.


[ This Message was edited by: sportznut on 2004-03-02 18:50 ]

Shaun,
I've researched another 2 months results and while the results have still been pretty good, they haven't been quite as good as the last 3 months. I'll keep looking a bit longer to see if I can find a definite pattern. At the moment I think metro racing might work best. What do you think is a reasonable period of time to test something like this, 6 months? 12 months??? By the way, in my original 3 month test, even betting on ALL sole 100 raters first up showed a profit, only around 20% but still a profit. While I haven't kept track of those figures, I think that trend has continued.

Jacfin,
While I was going through the results, I kept noticing all the good priced winners from the 100 raters 7 days a week, and I think you really could be onto something with your idea. :smile:


[ This Message was edited by: sportznut on 2004-03-03 09:38 ]

Sportz i use this method when testing races because i don't have a data base....can't remeber who posted it they deserve credit for it

1. First sample = 150 recent races (or bets) If this shows miserable results, forget it. If it gets near to break even or pays POT continue. This sample will include at least one period of three consequitive days.

2. Second sample = 100 races from the same season in previous years (not recent races) but with NO consequitive days. If its near to break even or in POT, continue.

3. Third sample = 100 random races from all seasons trying only one or two races per day from here and there. If its near to break even or in POT, continue. A system MUST pass this test. (If you only sample consequitive days you can hit distorting cycles and mini-cycles. You have to sample against this phenomenon.)

4. Fourth Sample = carefully tabulate results over the last week's races, going back over some days covered in sample 1 but writing it up on a spreadsheet to examine results more closely.

i have tested jacfin system before and the recent results are good the past results are not so good....the only thing i can say to this is that the ratings have changed in recent times and are much better than before here are some results with out going in to to much information

TEST ANY RUNNER RATED 100 ON QTAB OVER $8.00 IN BETTING

Saturday, 14 February 2004 42 RACES 9 SEL 1 WIN 2 PLACES
2.5
17.4-3.7
3.30

Saturday, 07 February 2004 39 RACES 6 SEL 2 WINS
11.60-3.60
8.80-2.70

Saturday, 31 January 2004 41 RACES 8 SEL 2 WINS 1 PLACE
16.20-4.70
12.50-3.60
2.90

Wednesday, 11 February 2004 35 RACES 3 SEL 1 PLACE
1.90

Thursday, 12 February 2004 33 RACES 3 SEL
Friday, 13 February 2004 37 RACES 3 SEL 1 WIN 1 PLACE
3.10
10.40-3.10

Thursday, 05 February 2004 40 RACES 11 SEL 2 WINS 2 PLACES
3.70
9.60-2.50
2.70
9.00-2.60

RACES 267 SELECTIONS 43 WINS 8 (18%) PLACES 15(34%)
AVE $11.93 $3.10
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, 29 January 2003 39 RACES 10 SEL 2 WIN 1 PLACE
8.80-2.60
11.80-3.70
3.20

Saturday, 01 February 2003 40 RACES 5 SEL 2 PLACES
1.90
2.80

Saturday, 08 February 2003 40 RACES 10 SEL 1 WIN 3 PLACES
16.00-4.20
3.10
2.60
2.80


RACES 119 SELECTIONS 25 WINS 3 (12%) PLACES 9 (36%)
AVE $12.12 $2.98

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MELBOURNE CUP CARNIVAL TEST
Saturday, 01 November 2003 RACES 43 SEL 9 PLACES1
2.50

Tuesday, 04 November 2003 RACES 42 SEL 8 WINS 2 PLACES1
9.10-3.80
17.00-5.30
3.20

Thursday, 06 November 2003 RACES 40 SEL 4 WINS 1
43.40-9.30

Saturday, 08 November 2003 RACES 42 SEL 6 PLACES1
2.30


TOTALS SEL 27 WINS 3 PLACES 6
AVE $23.16(11.1%) $4.40 (22.2%)
OUTLAY $100 UNITS $2700 RETURN $6950 PROFIT $4250 T.O.P 157%

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RANDOM TESTS
Saturday, 02 March 2002 RACES 41 SEL 12 PLACES1
3.70

Monday, 25 March 2002 RACES 22 SEL 1

Wednesday, 26 June 2002 RACES 41 SEL 4
2.70

Sunday, 26 May 2002 RACES 58 SEL 6 WINS 1 PLACES 2
2.30
3.30
9.10-2.90

Wednesday, 10 July 2002 RACES 40 SEL 5

Saturday, 06 September 2003 RACES 41 SEL 3

Saturday, 13 September 2003 RACES 41 SEL 11 WIN 1 PLACE 4
2.60
2.60
17.30-4.20
4.90

TOTAL RESULTS
SELECTIONS 137
WNS 16-----11.67%
PLACES 39-----26.27
TOTAL$ $137
TOTAL R $228
PROFIT $91
TOP 66.4%

TOTAL $137
TOTALR $129.10
















[ This Message was edited by: Shaun on 2004-03-03 10:04 ]

That system testing idea is a bit strange, but I guess it would work. Anyway, I've compiled my first-up system results back to Sep15 and this is what I've got so far:

Selections 102
Wins 32, Win return $167.10, Win profit 64%
Places 59, Place return $115.20, Place profit 13%


[ This Message was edited by: sportznut on 2004-03-03 11:43 ]

Yeah, I really think there is merit in Jacfin's idea and I do agree that I think the ratings have probably improved in recent times. I'm currently working on a few things using these ratings and considering they're free, I think they work very well indeed.

sportznut
when you have checked back results did you notice if any 100 pointers were racing at their home track ?
cya