I find the QTAB ratings very useful. I don't look for 2nd or 3rd favourites but consider any runner rated equal to or above the favourite. There is often a clear selection (often second or third favourite but often further down the order). At Benella R6 today, for instance, I picked up a good winner with this method.

The favourite was Dance D'or, $3.20, rated by QTAB at 96. The only horse with an equal or a better rating was #7 Trust & Betrayal, rated 100, paying $9.10. (I grabbed it on Vic TAB for $9.30). I was backing that the rating was right and punters wrong.

If there are two qualifiers I look for the better prospect comparing ratings with price. Or use last starts or whatever to separate them. Yes, very frustrating.

Where there are three or more qualifiers there are value bets but I have no luck separating them. Also frustrating.


Another use for the QTAB ratings:

*Any horse showing $10 or better with a rating of 95+.
*Where there are two or more, take the horse with the lower TAB number.

I've tested this. A big sample of 516 races (till my eyes went bleary). A remarkable return of $691, $511.40 on places, or 33% POT on winners, 25% on places on races in second half of 2001. The win/loss sequence on wins is very erratic, but on places pretty steady, except several nasty runs of outs compensated by big $30+ winners.

Picked up one of these today too. Benella R2. #3 Dancer's Belle. There were several runners in that race rated 95+ and starting at over $10. It came down to #3 or #5 Tarazam. I went with the bias towards lower TAB numbers (my mini-filter) so #3 was the selection. Dividend $11 on QTAB.

In another post Bhagwan recommended rated 100 horses as placegetters. I tested it unfiltered. Lots of placegetters certainly - a solid strike rate - but a LOT overall. The rated 100 horses are probably the nearest thing to a sure pointer to a placegetter but you need to be selective on price. Lots of rated 100 horses are short-priced favourites not worth backing.

Hermes