i've subscribed to a ratings service and have to say i'm confused as to how to apply the ratings so that I can make the same money as they advertise. i'm also very sceptical about their results and testimonials because none of it can be confirmed.

Depends on where THEY placed their bets as to the Profit they quote.

Get in touch and ask them where they recommend (My guess would be Top Fluctuation Bookmaker)

Cheers
darky

Mmm...I have used manual & computer generated ratings for over 25 years. The way I use them will not suit everybody but basically this is what I do. I look at the top 4 in the ratings. I pay no attention to the rated price. If I think the race is suitable, the actual market will dictate if I bet or not. A good example was Race 5 at Belmont today, my top 4 were;
The Blues........$7.00 SP
Razed in Flames....$2.60
Burj Khalifa....$21.00
The Cavaleri...$8.50
A total of just over 69%. More than enough to bet, and a nice profit with The Blues winning. I wish each race was that easy !!!
It takes a long time and a lot of patience to use ratings.

A lot of punters make the mistake of looking at the top rated runner only. This, in my opinion is a road to the poor house. You should endeavour to spread your bets according to the available market.

Do your records indicate that backing overlays only is no better than backing the underlays? I tend to think that this is true. Im working on some WA ratings myself and have found I can isolate the winner regularly in my top 4, with the return of these far outperforming the remainder. I tend to think your methodology has merit. Still a work in progress

Raven, I believe you are correct. I stopped trying to bet overlays about 10 years ago. The market is far more accurate these days than my assessed prices will ever be. I simply use my ratings to isolate the best chances in the race and then look at the market. I have found that my ratings work the best on distances up to 1400m. Anything over that distance there can be a lack of pace.

I think price still needs to be taken into account but not in the way most people think.

Using ratings you identify the top contenders. You don't even need ratings to do this but it gives you a different perspective then just the top X in the market.

Having identified your strike rate for your top contenders (could be 2,3,4,5,etc) that you feel is consistent enough you then need to work on identifying which races to attack.

Its no good having a 80% strike rate for the top 4 selections and then bet into market where you dutch the selections to 95%. In the long term you will likely lose. You want to identify the races where you still see value in those selections. For example getting a 70% dutched book over your selections will probably be a long term winning strategy providing you can record and confirm that your strike rate is not substantially lower in these sorts of races as it probably won't be 80% anymore and may drop to 75%. As long as it holds above the 70% then you are showing some long term edge in your method.

Race 8 was a good example. My top 4 were:

Uncle George...........rating 125... $20 top fluc
Iseethingsyoudon't...r 124...........$4
Accrual...................r 123..........$6.50
Full Steam Ahead......r 122...........$6

So my top pick was $20. Was he really a better chance than say Accrual or Full Steam Ahead? If I had priced this race, given the close spread of ratings, I doubt I would have priced the winner at less than $4, so in that respect he was "unders", but he won! Taken as a group I could have outlayed $62 for a return of $100, which as you say Dom, is what's pertinent.