Wesmip.
What does CP stand for ?
Thanks .
darky

CP - Past Form - Find this one of the most important factors, and essential at all distances, but moreso down at the shorter race end.

CF - Current Form - Often a disaster from 1000m-1200m, and perhaps out as far as 1400m. If used, in a race with first uppers, the neural system tends to give them no hope. Yet first uppers win between 19% and 33% of all races, depending on the distance.

(Both CP and CF, need consideration race by race. As an example, where there are lots of first uppers in the race, you may use something like CP3/CF0, perhaps CP3/CF1, then as distances increase, and first uppers go missing, to CP2/CF2, and perhaps from 1500m or 1600m onwards, to CP2/CF3).

TIM - Time - I personally find TIM provides more distortions, than it is of help. It will find the occasion long priced winner for sure, but I leave TIM on 0 at all distances.

(I may be wrong, but I do not understand how the neurals can differentiate between times from different tracks; generally there is about two seconds difference between track records at Flemington and Moonee Valley. Hawkesbury is one second faster than Canterbury, and so on....)
I also set my neural factors down the lower end of the points scale, and TIM1 often tends to over-power other points allocations.

JA - Jockey - One of the most important. Go back over past results, and you will find JA either on top, or near top for most winners, all distances.

TA - Trainer - No among the winners nealy as often as JA (or JT) but important enough to give it more than a zero.

JT - Jockey/Trainer combo - seems to fit somewhere between JA and TA - definitely has its moments.

BP - A medium range performer. Go back over past results and you will find it valuable one race, not worth a bumper the next. , don't set too high.

(And beware of BP on bush tracks. Watch what is actually coming up on the BP points allocations. The neural computer takes winning barrier statistics far too literally. You may find barrier 8 with 20 points, barrier 10 with 20 points, yet barrier 9 with no points - because barrier 9 has not won a race at that distance at that track. Totally illogical - then what happens when the runner in barrier 7 is scratched!) So beware of BP. Sometimes you may be better without it.

CRS - Course - Have found this to be of more importance in races of 1400m and over, and use it accordingly. Not sure why, but when I have checked past results, it has panned out that way. 1400m/1600m seem particularly relevant distances to apply CRS.

WT - Wet Track - I tend to use WT very sparingly, and generally only when tracks have been on the good side for a some time, then become rain affected. In mid winter in Melbourne for instance, doubt WT adds anything to neural accuracy. But a WT1 or WT2 probably doesn't do much harm either.

Think about how you will use WT, on the day the wet track happens.

DIS - distance - Checking past results, distance has never stood out as a major neural factor. I use DIS1, but at around 1400m, I tend to increase it to DIS2. There is a feeling that 1400m, is perhaps more of a specialist distance than some others. Feel that DIS, set low, doesn't impact overall results, one way or the other.

$ - prizemoney - In the early days, I always set $ very high, but have now dropped it back somewhat. Definitely doesn't feature in the profile of winners, as often as CP or JA, for instance, but remains important.

DLR - Days Since Last Raced - this one is important - to leave out of contention in all races up to around 1450m. DLR anything, tends to send first uppers to the sin bin. From 1500m and beyond, yes, it becomes important. However, you will find the DLR points allocations, across the scale 1-5, are so tightly grouped, that you need to actually look at the figures in isolation, to get value from them. (for example, should I dismiss all runners, which have a DLR allocation, of say 14 points, on my setting).

The neurals are obviously applied differently by everyone - there are so many combinations - then to use the information to advantage.

The neurals do find winners at longer prices, and from that point alone, perhaps have their advantage and place, over the pre-post or starting price markets.

In fields of 8-13, for instance, my neural setting can find the winners of 2 races in every 3, in the top four selections. (At certain distances, it is slightly better). The pre-post market can do much the same thing. But rarely will any market order, snare that $20, $30 or $40 winner, in the top two or three selections.

Taking the neural selection order to the next stage, and using it to a profitable advantage, is another matter altogether.

The neurals, are not the be all and end all to selecting winners, but they are different, they are fun, and they are enormously accurate for a computerised selection method.

They are an interesting challenge. And they are FREE

Wesmip1 has provided some very good information. I also like Trained at Track and only horse in the race to have won, Speed Maps and horse settling important and days last start

G'day Mate

Have just emailed you the neural work I've been working on......My Holy Grail if you like......crazy? I don't know....time will tel.....l when it's being sold in a glossy race mag

Nothing like a bit of faith shown by a forum member, and hope what I've provided has repaid in kind.

Stix

__________________
Stix
.......Giddy Up..... !!

Thanks Vorteck,
Much appreciated.
Cheers
darky

Agree --- valuable for me and many others I,m sure.

Thanks Vortech

I personally use CP, CF, JT, BP, D, $, DLR settings only, all others are always set to 0.

Good Punting...

__________________
Stix
.......Giddy Up..... !!

thanks stix and vortech.

Stix,

Sent you an email.

Vortech,
That was a very good run down of the neurals.

I agree JA is a good one to use and I find it a good filter to apply to most ratings.


I also agree with the speed maps. I record them as well. I can say that if a horse is classed as a OM on R&S then you should avoid it. For some reason they perform even worse the BK. Leaders and Pacers are the ones to be on. OP are overbet and provide little value. Midfeild goes ok though.

Anyway thanks for your take on the neurals. Very intersting info which I will go play with now.

yeah good summary vortech i guess the only problem that i saw with the (j/a)(j/t) rating in the neurals was the fact that putting it online two days in advance the actual jockeys that r+s had down to ride weren't the actual jockeys that rode the horses thus the rating would be different you know the spiel jockeys unable to ride due to illness become indisposed during the day etc etc but for all that they are definetly a great alternative for those who want a different approach to the traditional weight ratings i guess the only other service that provides neurals are the gtx ratings from the t.r.b run by dennis walker this service is (A1) but with everything comes at a cost for a free service you really can't beat the neurals on the R+S website
cheers
garyf

the anomalies vortech was explaining with the barriers scratchings (OBVIOUSLY) could also be explained by the starting prices of the horses that actually contested those barriers when i do a survey on barriers at certain tracks i split them into an odds group(odds on)(2.0-3.0)(3.1-6.0)(6.5-11.0)(12.0-26.0)(26.0>) this then gives me a clearer guide as to the barriers worth as you find certain barriers continue to have starters that start at long starting prices where other barriers tend to throw up horses at the lower end of the market thus giving false readings of a barriers actual worth talking straight statistics only here no form or assessments taken into account
cheers
garyf

i used a neural system last year sometime but didnt have a chance to continue it. ill post the raw picks. i was excluding maidens and races with less than 8 starters these picks wont exclude.

from the time i started it had
68 bets
44% strike rate
POT 75.1%
profit with $1 bets
$55.10

these are the picks for today

sale r7. 2

ipswich
r2. 6

moonee valley
r1. 1
r2. 4
r4. 1
r5. 6

sunshine coast
r2. 11
r7. 1

taree
r4. 3
r5. 1


hope this is a good place to post this