Smartgambler
Pro-Punter

Go Back   OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums > Public Forums > Ratings2Win
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark all topics as read

To advertise on these
forums, e-mail us.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 20th July 2013, 09:07 AM
Michal Michal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,007
Default Difference between Systems and Ratings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brett V.02
Hi All,

I have tried everything in the last month to continue my system's winning start. But voodoo, animal sacrifice and re-enacting the big fella's Easter weekend has failed to resurrect the once heady heights of the systems beginning.

So it has made me think (as has Darky's continued challenging of all I have ever believed in when it comes to racing - past results are the promised land).

When is a system not a system when it is a system while not being one???....... Now I know this reads confused (which by the way I am) but what I mean by this is............. why is it that System players and Ratings gurus are always at each others throats.......

Aren't systems just a very basic form of ratings anyway?

I mean if you take a basic system, for example, a 4YO horse who has a 30%+ win S/R and placed it last start, aren't you rating the field.

So if a horse meets these criteria it is our 100 rater and is our bet.

More importantly, are people who are rating horses, just assigning a numerical value to factors they perceive as important, exactly the same as a systems player, except for the fact that they have many more factors and do not exclude selections based on criteria that return a 0 value.........unless you add filters......

So we are back to my confused self.............When is a system not a system when it is a system while not being one???

And if the 'Brains-trust' on here can not help me, it could be time to play the stock market..............

Cheers

Brett
Hi Brett,

I didn't want to hijack your thread, so I replicated your post above in order to put forward our thoughts on Systems and Ratings. I will first explain the differences and then address some of your actual questions/statements. I am aware that most, including yourself, have a firm grasp on what the differences are but in trying to make this helpful for others to come I'll take it down to the most lowest common denominator; someone with no knowledge at all.

Ratings are;
Numerical expression of performance, (well said Brett). These values MUST be applied consistently to all horses in order for the method to have merit. What ever the ideology used; be it Time converted to a rating, Class converted to a rating, Consensus of tipsters or any other user defined elements they are always applied the same way. The result is, in theory, that such rating allows its user to compare individual horses against each other even when these horses never raced against each other. Rating should be able to bring together and compare horses from different states, distances, class, weights and even countries for instance. For most part they work, but by their virtue some elements might be too different to compare! Example might be a rating that assigns points for beaten margin. It works until the distances of the races get too dissimilar. A length over 1000m is different to a length over 3200m; it is more critical over shorter distance. The skill is to create ratings that can better level out these differences such as the ones found in Axis.

Systems are;
Selective processes that EXCLUDE contenders. As such systems can't compare horses directly, they can only produce selections based on a method that eliminates (filters) majority of horses based on that users method leaving only the 'likely to win' contenders. So while a rating can compare horses against each other in a race, system eliminates undesirable horses. System can be based on a Rating, or any other form element available to the user. Obviously there are some similarities; ability to apply all filters consistently, without errors and emotion would be the main one.

Ratings and Systems coming together;
Despite the best intention of the system creator some factors are just about impossible to compensate for. Take for instance races with un-raced or lightly races horses, too many first up horses in a race and so on these situations create unfavorable conditions for the rating to perform at its best ; there are just too many unknowns. As a result these type of races should be eliminated. One can use a system for that; where by all horses from a race are eliminated using a RACE type filter. The rest of the system may then, for instance, select the top Rated horse in each race from all the races that are favorable. This quickly isolates the main chances and allows the punter to concentrate on horses that have potential to win rather then wasting his time plowing through the form for all of the horses only to come to the same conclusion hours later.

The above simple scenario can be greatly refined using Axis, where we have 13 ratings available. This works like using telephone towers to triangulate a position of a phone in spy movies. The more ratings agree (consensus) on a horse, the better its chances are, this is mainly because Axis provides ratings that provide different angles. Using a system to triangulate a horse like that quickly allows to isolate the best chances; why would you waste time on the others? Obviously these simple scenarios involve additional work by video replay or other form of study to finalise the contender list. Most professional punters work along these lines; create a short list and then finalise bets on additional work.

Other uses of system include the more widely accepted and contested idea that a system can just pinpoint horses without form study.

I'll try to explain this second use of systems in the next installment.
__________________
Michal - Ratings2Win Pty Ltd
R2W Axis - Axis is Australia's leading horse racing software and database;
with sophisticated form analysis tools and accurate horse performance ratings for TAB meetings.
http://www.ratings2win.com.au/
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 20th July 2013, 10:33 AM
Michal Michal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,007
Default

(continued from part 1) Other uses of systems include the more widely accepted and contested idea that a system can just pinpoint horses without form study.

This is true, however the form study is still involved; in this case it is retrospective. Using a system to isolate selections is step one, the next step is to find out how this performed in the past and eliminate further loosing contenders based on other filters. This retrospective filtering is the form study.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brett V.02
I have tried everything in the last month to continue my system's winning start. But ... (everything) has failed to resurrect the once heady heights of the systems beginning.

So it has made me think (as has Darky's continued challenging of all I have ever believed in when it comes to racing - past results are the promised land).
Do not abandon your belief in past performance, I think you will find that Darky is just winding people up. There is absolutely no possible chance of isolating winning contenders in races without reference to past; be that Form, Ratings or just the look of horses or any other way of determining what has a chance. Everything is based on previous experience.

The main point of past experience is; HOW MUCH PAST EXPERIENCE have you experienced?

This question ties in together with the retrospective form study needed for systems. Horse races are not a random occurrence, their outcomes can be predicted, the issue is that there are so many factors that it makes it impossible to account for them all. You can still however create methods that cut through the many factors, isolate a few and more importantly isolate a pattern that can repeat in these elements.

In order to properly isolate a pattern you need YEARS of data, not weeks, or months. Also in order for this to work you need a large sample size over this period. You also need a program, the workload involved in isolating a profitable edge using a newspaper and a pen and paper is enormous and takes hundreds of wasted hours. You are against others that have the tools to cut through the workload in minutes. Programs do however have their drawbacks; this comes in the form of back-fitting. This can get out of hand and result in a system with a 120 selections over 3 years, that's back fitting, is just as useless.

Mathematical variance suggests that unless you have thousands of selections in order to work out the mean/average performance then you cannot truly determine the performance of your method. Only when you have a sample size large enough can you have the confidence to use the method. In the case of a few selections per year it could take centuries to gather the evidence. Mathematical laws cannot be beaten and there is no dispensation for anyone, only way to prosper is to recognise them and work with them. The caveat is that combining 100 systems with 120 selections each does not work either.

Brett you need to answer these questions (for yourself). How much data did I analyse? How many selections did my sample show.

Look at our Free Favourite system method thread, so far we have tested 6 months live; with bets every day, at this stage there is no form curse over the last 7 weeks that we have placed the bets here live. It's not like we didn't have a bad run or 2 but in the end we know what the performance is and in the end the method returns to that performance. This is from a system that was devised in an hour or less whose selections are generated automatically from Axis to show what is possible. The tools, information you use and their application are the difference between success and failure.

Please read the other threads and posts on our Ratings2Win forum here, it is filled with information that will shed light on what you experienced and will give you pointers to improve your punting. We have covered mathematical variance and system development many times.
__________________
Michal - Ratings2Win Pty Ltd
R2W Axis - Axis is Australia's leading horse racing software and database;
with sophisticated form analysis tools and accurate horse performance ratings for TAB meetings.
http://www.ratings2win.com.au/

Last edited by Michal : 20th July 2013 at 10:39 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 20th July 2013, 11:11 AM
darkydog2002 darkydog2002 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 4,332
Default

Hey.
I,m not wnding people up in my comments on people thinking that a horse that raced 6 weeks or so is going to perform EXACTLY as it performed in its last race.There is no logic in this AT ALL.

There would be a million different factors that make up a horse race,.
Are you saying that its next race it will duplicate all those factors.

The data bases sold by the vendors will tell you that and silly people believe it.
I repeat.There is no logic anywhere to that effect.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 20th July 2013, 11:50 AM
Michal Michal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,007
Default

Hi Darky,

I meant no offense,

Quote:
Originally Posted by darkydog2002
Thanks but PAST data is no indication of Future results.
Cheers.
darky
Im sure that you can see that without a reference to anything the above statement can be taken to mean anything and can easily be misunderstood which is the case here.

I don't agree with you regarding database vendors, the connotation is that database vendors somehow take advantage of (silly) people. This is entirely untrue, database vendors sell information, it is up to each individual to which conclusion they come to and how they use that data. I also would like to add that from what you have seen of our performance and help to all that ask, you would agree that we strive to ensure that the conclusions people draw from our data are realistic and true; we take this very seriously! For us it's not an academic pursuit. We punt and live by the data we use and sell to people so we make sure that it's correct and that people use it to their best advantage.
__________________
Michal - Ratings2Win Pty Ltd
R2W Axis - Axis is Australia's leading horse racing software and database;
with sophisticated form analysis tools and accurate horse performance ratings for TAB meetings.
http://www.ratings2win.com.au/

Last edited by Michal : 20th July 2013 at 11:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 16th March 2014, 06:01 AM
Vortech
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Michal if we took every horse in the ratings 2 win that was rated 2.00 to 3.00 and only back them at 3.00 dollars plus would this scream profit?
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 16th March 2014, 08:11 AM
Michal Michal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vortech
Michal if we took every horse in the ratings 2 win that was rated 2.00 to 3.00 and only back them at 3.00 dollars plus would this scream profit?


No. While there are methods that use our Predicted Prices and make good profits it isn't done on the basis that exploits such market differences. The reason that it will not work is that this type of betting assumes consistent superiority over market. A blanket scenario like yours will not work; there are circumstances and good profits to be made where this does work but you have to pick them.
__________________
Michal - Ratings2Win Pty Ltd
R2W Axis - Axis is Australia's leading horse racing software and database;
with sophisticated form analysis tools and accurate horse performance ratings for TAB meetings.
http://www.ratings2win.com.au/

Last edited by Michal : 16th March 2014 at 08:14 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 8th June 2016, 10:28 PM
Lord Greystoke Lord Greystoke is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 1,237
Default

"Using a system to triangulate a horse like that quickly allows to isolate the best chances. Most professional punters work along these lines; create a short list and then finalise bets on additional work"

As simple as this sounds, its taken me some time to get this point but I am close to what I think might be workable strategy along these lines now using a couple of sets of ratings and a price filter. What I don't have is a database to check that it works over the longer run.

Thank you for the clarification Michal.

Cheers LG
__________________
The trick isn't finding profitable angles, it's finding ones you will bet through the ups and downs - UB
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 7th July 2016, 03:05 PM
Tipsy Tipsy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 42
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michal
(continued from part 1)

Programs do however have their drawbacks; this comes in the form of back-fitting. This can get out of hand and result in a system with a 120 selections over 3 years, that's back fitting, is just as useless.



I'm one of these people and I'm not sure how you can assume that a system with a small amount of selections MUST be backfitted. Nearly half of my filters are exactly the same in most of my systems, they all have an identical "range", which I believe goes some way to avoid backfitting. My systems have been tested over 15 years with what I believe is a niche that very, very few would waste their time with.

cheers
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump



All times are GMT +10. The time now is 07:56 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2008 OZmium Pty. Ltd. All rights reserved . ACN 091184655