Does anyone know of any Databases that I could use in researching a system that I have in mind.

Benny

Sorry that no one has answered your query.
What you are looking for will cost you plenty and the alternative of putting your systems on here for those that do have the data to check the system out will also cost you [you loose exclusive use and have no control over what happens to it].

It is a hot topic as to whether systems follow past trends anyway, so you may as well run with your system for small amounts and see how you go. As long as all the rules have a strong handicapping ingredient [reason to be a rule in the first place] you can't do much damage.

Cheers.

[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-12-21 13:48 ]

I have developed computer handicapping programs here in the US. Just pick a selective sample of races at selective tracks, which meet your needs, and bet them "on paper". I have done many theoretical studies in this manner. Good luck.

Glenn

It depends on what data you are looking for.
I developed my system by going to the State library and copying all the form guides and results for main venue races on the East coast of Australia for a period of 3 years.
I then entered every bit of data about the horses (55 items per horse !)into a datbase and then developed a program to add a weighting to each bit of data and try to match the winners of the races...it took 2 years to do that !...when I finished I had a formula that actually worked in real time and I was able to cut the number of data items to just 8 per horse..my system still works 5 years later..it's the only way to do it uless you are prepared to pay big $ for someone elses work...good luck.

Hi Gumboot,

So what are the 8 form facts just out of interest ?

Cheers.

I can't be more helpful either. I spent ages looking for such a database at a reasonable price. Costs plenty. Or it will cost you years in time to compile your own.

I once spent several months designing a software program that took in data and spat out selections. I added dozens of factors. It took forever to add the data and then, at the end of it all, the program usually selected....the favourite.

I wonder at the validity of testing ideas over 20,000 races anyway. My proceedure is to develop sound principles (strong handicapping ingredients) and test them on 150 recent races. Then batches of 50 races from previous years. If it holds up I test on at least 100 live races on paper. If it still holds, I start with small bets.

Its alarming the number of systems that work on recent and past races and then fail on live races.

In my own experience I find that bigger databases don't necessarily yield better results. The thing that helps is a better understanding of principles (handicapping rules) from the outset. For example, beginners at this will often look at win strike percentages and include that in their selection systems. But in fact, as experienced system developers know, place strike percentages are far more important and a more reliable guide to winning potential. No database however giagantic will turn win strike percentages into a meaningful statistic. If your theory is flawed a bigger database won't help.

Hermes

Hi there Crash,
The 8 form items are :

1:Has it won at this distance
2:Has it won at this track
3:Is it a mudrunner
4:The rating (either from the form guide or from another good source.
5:Last race finishing position
6:2nd last race finishing position
7:3rd last race finishing position
8:4th last race finishing position

Hi Benny!
I do have a database going back at least four years. It includes the form of horses, the race results (on the Vic TAB including the exotics, the pools and the price fluctuation like 15 minutes 10 minutes etc. as supplied by the TAB results). It is a huge database and it is in MSAccess format.
I do not know how much you know about databases and programming in general, so let me know what sort of a data you are looking for? I may be able to help you. We may come to an agreement!?

Hi GB,

Very interesting final filters. You have the KISS principle [keep it simple stupid] well under control.
I am currently using a small system that I worked out that is based on almost the same principles your filters describe. I believe too many filters beyond these simple but powerful ones, can lead to erroneous results as can those back fitted over many years because the horses running now generally had nothing to do with them and the further back you go the worse it gets.

I don't bet beyond dead though and I am even wary about that [dead and good footing or dead and slippery ?]. I also have a pre-post price [using PP from: http://www.tabform.thewest.com.au/s.../TFFrameset.jsp ] filter of no more than $9 or must be in the first 4 favorites. I use price but first 4 favorites would do the same job of excluding unrealistic class jumpers and a last start filter of no more than 10 days since last start. These three filters add a powerful handicapping effect. Finally I 'do the form' on any runner my system selects looking for any obvious [only] reasons not to bet the selection.

The main thing I try to remember is that I am looking for consistent results that no, won't score the winner of every race but will consistently achieve acceptable POT return figures from flat stake win bets. I am not interested in big wins but have a bit of fun with long shot interest bets on the side from my own handicapping efforts using the Sportsman and $5 win bets only. Sportsman ratings are tried and true and the new Winning Post ones look good too. My selections usually fall in the top 4.

Cheers.


[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2004-01-02 05:11 ]

GUMBOOT and CRASH.
Do you think you would improve your strike rate further by including on pace runners and field strength?.
Cheers.
darky.