OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums

#31

9th December 2011, 06:34 PM

lomaca

Member

Join Date: Jan 1970

Posts: 1,096

Quote:

Originally Posted by lomaca

All the above but any TAB number:

Qual: 646 won 123, placed 270
win loss -87.1 Place loss -86.7

Still far from being a winner, I used NSW dividends, can't be that much of a difference can it?

Sorry that was for >= 11 runners no upper limit but the rest of the rules as stated.

With runners between >= 11 and <= 14

Qual: 370 won 74 , placed 168
win loss -72.3 Place loss -47.4

slightly better S/R

#32

9th December 2011, 08:13 PM

aussielongboat aussielongboat is offline

Member

Join Date: Nov 2010

Posts: 259

Quote:

Originally Posted by lomaca

I don't know what's happening but I can't even get near enough to the results you guys were getting.

Let's make the rules crystal clear;

First I selected all the races where there were more than 11 runners
after scratching.

Then selected Don Sct top rated. meaning I selected the lowest "DIV" thinking that it's the "top rated"

If this horse was also tab number 1 then I looked if it finished first at its last start and if it did then I looked if it had at least 11 carrier starts.

Complied with all of this, then I looked at the results to see if it won or placed.

For this year I only had 81 qualifiers for 16 winners and 37 for the place (1-2-3).

Win loss -29.9 place loss -18.4

The only way I could get the qualifying numbers close to what you guys got, if I selected ALL the horses with Tab number 1, regardless where it was in the ranking, all other rules complied with of course.

It is disturbing in serious way, I don't mind being wrong but if we can't get these results within a ballpark of each other then what and who's research-results can we trust?

Cheers

yeah your results are similar to mine

that's why i was surprised when the other post was talking about these glorious returns.

it seemed too simple and too good to be true.

and hey
guess what..
you know the rest

#33

13th December 2011, 09:03 AM

Dale

Member

Join Date: Jan 1970

Location: Bundy

Posts: 292

lomaca

May or may not be important but I noticed in one of your posts you said more than 11 starters.

My original rules call for 11 starters or more and 11 career starts or more.

Not more than 11.

#34

14th December 2011, 03:09 AM

Bhagwan

Member

Join Date: Jan 1970

Posts: 2,428

With more updates added to data
I got...

22% SR
24% POT

Av price $5.64

RULES
Don Scott 1
LS 1
Career Starts => 11
Runners 11-14

There were 173 selections for the System
There were 38 Winners for the System for a strike rate of 21.97%
There were $214.57 returned for WIN (after 5% commission) which means a Profit or loss of $41.57 or a percentage profit/loss of 24.03%

The Rules used were : lastStart = 1 and donScottRank = 1 and careerRaces >= 11 and runners >= 11 and runners <=14

If using TAB prices , one would have to work out what the average price was for that sample then compare that to the average Betfair price sample.

The Betfair price will always have the higher average price even after coms.

It is very challenging trying to find systems that show a profit using TAB divs.
Betfair prices can make a huge difference to results.

There will be many examples of horses showing say $6.00 the win on TAB & $13.00 on Betfair.

If one jags just a couple of these , it makes a huge difference to the average price for that sample.

__________________
Cheers.

#35

14th December 2011, 03:42 AM

Bhagwan

Member

Join Date: Jan 1970

Posts: 2,428

I feel the main reason why there is a big difference in results ,is that there is a big difference in the rules being applied.

Therefore different result.

For instance
TAB No.1
Why was this applied?
That was not in the rules

11+ careers starts.
Appears to have been totally left out.

LS 1 (Won Last Start)
This also appears to have been totally left out.

So in total , there where only 4 simple rules and half where left out.
Then say it don't work.

This is a good example why folk out there should not worry about sharing systems , because they are nearly always changed.
I do that myself , all the time , rightly or wrongly, even with this one.

__________________
Cheers.

#36

29th December 2011, 08:18 AM

James

Member

Join Date: Oct 2011

Posts: 21

Website

Quote:

Originally Posted by UselessBettor

These are backing results using betfair prices. Results are from my website and cover from Aug till yesterday:

Unitab ratings return :

There were 3407 selections for the System
There were 788 Winners for the System for a strike rate of 23.13%
There were $3106.41 returned for WIN (after 5% commission) which means a Profit or loss of $-300.59 or a percentage profit/loss of -8.82%

Neural ratings(default setting):

There were 2825 selections for the System
There were 645 Winners for the System for a strike rate of 22.83%
There were $2506.21 returned for WIN (after 5% commission) which means a Profit or loss of $-318.79 or a percentage profit/loss of -11.28%

Don Scott Rating(default setting):

There were 3103 selections for the System
There were 740 Winners for the System for a strike rate of 23.85%
There were $3054.68 returned for WIN (after 5% commission) which means a Profit or loss of $-48.32 or a percentage profit/loss of -1.56%

Top Place Strike Rate (> 0%):

There were 3303 selections for the System
There were 764 Winners for the System for a strike rate of 23.13%
There were $3156.35 returned for WIN (after 5% commission) which means a Profit or loss of $-146.65 or a percentage profit/loss of -4.44%

Top Win Strike Rate (> 0%) :

There were 2361 selections for the System
There were 522 Winners for the System for a strike rate of 22.11%
There were $2500.01 returned for WIN (after 5% commission) which means a Profit or loss of $139.01 or a percentage profit/loss of 5.89%

Top API Rank (included place strike rate >0% to remove poor races):

There were 2098 selections for the System
There were 478 Winners for the System for a strike rate of 22.78%
There were $1836.11 returned for WIN (after 5% commission) which means a Profit or loss of $-261.89 or a percentage profit/loss of -12.48%

So based on the results of my website (which are betfair results) you would be worthwhile looking at horses with the top win % and/or top top don scott rater. Even the top Place strike rate is not a bad return for no other filters.

Gday Uselessbettor

On your website how would I find the results of the top 4 rated Neurals-Don SCott and Unitab Strike rates?
For example using the top 4 rated neurals - how many winners?
Thanks
James

#37

29th December 2011, 09:54 AM

UselessBettor UselessBettor is offline

Member

Join Date: Sep 2011

Posts: 1,474

James,

depends on what you want. You could do them individually which would give you the most accurate result. So do it for Neural Rank =1 then neural Rank =2, etc. then do it for the others.

You could also get an approx by doing Neural Rank = 1 to get the number of races (which would be the number of selections as very few would be dual top selections). Then just do the Neural Rank between 1 and 4 and it will give you the total number of winners. Divide one by the other and you will have a good approx of the strike rate.

I hope that makes sense.

#38

30th December 2011, 03:41 PM

James

Member

Join Date: Oct 2011

Posts: 21

Quote:

Originally Posted by UselessBettor

Thanks UselessBettor

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

	To advertise on these forums, e-mail us.