Shaun, there was also a poster on here who only looked at Group Placed horses. Can't recall who the poster was but I'll look for it later.

This poster allocated points for a Win or Placing in a Group event. That is he / she Rated them. The better the race, the more points allocated for the Win / Place ..... ? So these horses had a Rating based soely on Group level performance. He / She gave examples of backing a horse that hadn't won for yonks but was the Top Rated horse in this particular race based on it's Rating. The logic was that even a good horse out of form for a while would come back and win sometime, somewhere. I think the one example was for a horse racing in Tassie which won at good odds. It was backed because it was the only "Rated" horse in the race.

This system didn't invlove backing these horses all the time, it Rated the horses based on how they'd performed at Group level.

I also recall the comments about Adelaide Oaks winner / placings earning less Ratings points that a Qld event. My memory's a bit vague, but essentially this poster did not assume every Group 1 event for example, should have the same amount of points allocated. He / She actually rated the Group events and allocated points accordingly.

Sounds like a cracking idea to me.