I would reckon if you carefully went back through the test data back to 2000 you would find periods where the results were equally sour for a period.

You just notice it more in real time and with real money whereas in data test mode you can have a few bad months followed by some strong months and you think " oh well - ho hum - nothing to worry about".


cheers

aussie

i find you very real Aussie longboat.

I wish you all success you deserve and hope you don't lose your way by being distracted by those who know not what they do.

I''ve just sent you an email Norm
Cheers

Hi Vortech,

One thing I found when running multiple systems at once, was that much greater percentage POT was made by not doubling up on selections , picked 2 or more times by the various systems.

We dont want to make the assumption that just because a Horse is picked twice that it has twice the chance of winning.

__________________
Cheers.

There 2 ways of looking at that final elimination method.
1. On the one had you could say that it seemed to work because your systems were inherently no good .
This is because the selection and systems are mutually exclusive- if they come up they should be backed no matter what. I mean – that’s how the system was generated - by its own individual performance. In real time by reducing that element of the outlay all you were doing was delaying the inevitable.

2. BUT on the other hand (in support )you could say that if your systems had picked the same selection(s) independently multiple times it was probably coming up on many other punters systems and thus would be over bet. By dropping it off you removed the so called “certainties” and thus increased your overall win price dividend because as we all know “certainties” sometimes don’t work out that way.


My conclusion as to which way was most reflective of the true situation would be determined by asking “where are the systems now.”
If they are in the trash can of broken dreams it would be “1” if they are somewhat alive it could be “2”
Cheers

Aussie

Thanks for your comments.
A very nice gentleman has run some of the systems going back past my test period. During this test period we had the following

Of the 25 systems: 14 were making a good strike and POT for my liking. The others to the testing bin

On your question of duplicates, when testing I tick remove duplicates and only normally back level stakes.

Simply marvellous Post and Summary and Conclusion AussieLongboat.

I get the impression that you are not quite as successful as you would wish.
But be knackered if I can work out why.
One thing I do know though.
I'll be reading all your posts.
I know you have winning approaches and guides in every single one of them.

May that GOD lift the veil on that final curtain for you AussieLongboat.

thanks moeee.
I will do a profile on that other page.
I was out of punting for 10 years whilst i was concentrating on my business.
only restarted again December 2010.
yes - i would like to be more successful and am working on it,

cheers
Aussie

Are there any further subscribers to the above theory?

I've had about a dozen systems going since 3 October (not a long time, I know) showing consistent strong results until 8 December when it all fell in hole. Also, can someone elaborate more on the changes to ratings that were mentioned by domenic? Several of my systems draw on uniTAB and Neural ratings, so if these have been changed, then that might provide and explanation...

This reference was made regarding the Betselector programme I believe?