Sandown 22/12/04

RACE 4

1. $2.2
8. $3.75
2. $7.0

RACE 5

1. $3.5
9. $3.9
2. $5.0
5. $8.5
13. $10.0

RACE 6

1. $1.6
4. $6.5

RACE 7

9. $2.6
5. $2.9
7. $5.5

RACE 8

9. $3.2
12. $4.2
1. $5.5
2. $6.0

Best Bets are:

Race 4 No.1 Music Star
Race 6 No.1 Our Court
Race 7 No.9 Cedar Tee (each way)

Doing pretty well so far.

Thanks Sportznut. The value's there, but the "good things" keep going down - today is a horrible day for favourites Sydney and Melbourne.

Ive had a terrible day on the punt, need All Elegance to dig me out of a big hole, created when i had alot on Rapid Chess in the 7th.

4 value winners from the five races rated:

Race 4 No.8 Twisted Times (assessed $3.6, $5.5 available)
Race 5. No.1 Power and Faith (assessed $3.5, $5.5 available)
Race 6 No.4 Lisas Bewitched (assessed $6.5, $7.5 available)
Race 8 No. 2 Dane's Jester (assessed $6.0, $13 available and much better on the tote)

Tough day for best bets with none of them getting up.

Filante those results are good, but I need to know when do you consider your selection a value bet? Your market is I assume framed to 100%, and with that being the case do they merely have to be longer than those odds to be value, or is there some other parameter? As you know with mine I simply use the old Don Scott method of 80% as an arbitrary figure, how do you decide?

Value = anything above my price. I'll back any such horse to win. The higher the value the more I put on. The higher my bank goes the higher my multiplication factor. For example, if my multipication factor was at 100 I would bet as follows:

Twisted Times: 100/3.6x5.5 = 152@5.5

Power & Faith: 100/3.5x5.5 = 157@5.5

Lisas Bewitched 100/6.5x7.5 = 115@7.5

Dane's Jester 100/6x13 = 217@13

Winners at Flemington last Saturday at that multiplication factor were:

Processor: 100/2.1x3.1 = 148@3.1

Demerger: 100/5.5x7 = 127@7

Bruges: 100/4x6 = 150@6

Broadband: 100/2.8x3.8 = 136@3.8

Catscan: 100/5x6.5 = 130@6.5


As far as framing the market goes, I first eliminate the horses I don't think can win. If this leaves me with between 1 and 5 chances I rate the race to between 75% and 100% depending on the reliability of the form. Today's ratings ranged between 78% for race 6 (only 2 selections) to 96% for race 5 (5 selections).

Cheers,

F

Interesting. That's a form of dutch book I suppose I would be right in saying?

Interested to know - how do you decide which horses cannot win? When I ask that I mean for you to go beyond the pale - do not state the obvious about well worn paths of form analysis, do you have any new insights to add about horses which you feel cannot win? I ask this because the best value races (as I am sure you already know) are those in which you find a fancied runner, preferably the fave, who you can confidently and with solid evidence declare has no hope. Those are always the best betting races because if you're right you're "buying their dollars for 75 cents", to quote Pittsburgh Phil. However, not enough faves have no hope, so for the rest of the time we usually have to grind away being smart and disciplined enough to make a percentage. Would you agree? Your thoughts on this are very interesting and let me say I am very glad I found this forum.

Duritz.

I'd just like to ask all the people that do ratings, how do you decide on what is the qualifying run?

I'm just starting to get interested in doing ratings again but I'm looking at keeping everything VERY SIMPLE. Looking at some of the results over the last few days, I think it's possibly a good idea to simply use the horse's latest run, or perhaps it's best rating run out of it's last two starts or something. But what about horses resuming after a spell. What do you do with them?

Sports
For what it is worth, why go to all the trouble of doing your own ratings when a site such as Ozeform has a rating figure for every run a horse has had in it's entire career.
I have been using this facility exclusively for about 2 years and my method is to keep it very simple.
Regards which rating to use, you have to use your discretion and select a rating figure most pertinent to today's event.
To give an example, I tipped Valashka on the forum today but in actual fact the rating figure indicated it might finish exactly where it did.
I arrived at the figure for Valashka in the following way:
The horse had 2 runs since res. from a spell so I considered it was ready to produce it's best.
I went back in it's history and discovered that on march 4th. 2004, Valashka was beaten 1.1L in event equal to the one being contested today.
The base rating for that run was 57.
To arrive at a rating figure I simply deduct the weight allotted today from 100 and add the base rating figure of 57. Any apprentice claim is added to that figure.(the claim has got to be added because the Ozeform rating figure reflects the actualweight carried)
Valashka's rating was 99.
If you look at the last rating figure for Power and Faith which was a rating most relevent to todays race and apply the same procedure, Power and Faith's rating was 103.
Fuchsia lady's base rating was it's latest one and her rating figure was 102.
Now we come to Rocketeer who seemed to surprise getting into 2nd place.
I did not initially rate Rocketeer but on looking back at it's record, it had had 3 runs since resuming from a letup.
Before the letup, Rocketeer had returned base ratings around 55 on 4 occasions.
Using this figure for today's race plus the claim for M Payne, Rocketeer's rating was 104.
So, we had Rocketeer, 104, Power and Faith 103, Fuchsia lady 102, Valashka 99.
A base rating for Iona Avenue for this distance would have been around 55 for a final rating of 101.
This method might seem too simplistic for a lot of the Gurus but it will be around the mark enough times to compete with any selection method.
Another big advantage I find with Ozeform is to suss out those horses that always perform well at their 1st run back.
One example of many is Command and Conquer which won 1st up over 1600m. at lucrative odds of around 20/1.
Command and Conquer had won 1st up in it's last preparation over 1500m.
For mine, this is not an advertisement for Ozeform but without it, I would probably not bother.
PS. It has taken me so long to type this, the page has probably timed out.

( Yeah. It has.)