Just a little idea I had, any further ideas or improvements from anybody might be worth considering.
1-Top pick in tipsters poll(I use Herald Sun for Melb)
2-Must have been tipped to win by 3 or more tipsters.
3-Win or placed last start within 21 days
4-Must have 50% win record at todays track.

For Sydney races I used pre post favourite instead of tipster poll as I didn't have access to a suitable tipster poll.
Any thoughts , possitive or negative are welcomed.
Eddy.

The odds you get for any selections will be very skinny. and consequently youll need a very high strike rate. The 50% track winners rule might eleminate most potential selections.

Taking rules 3 & 4 only shows a 12% loss on turnover and average dividend of $5.16.

One can imagine the loss if tipped in the newspapers and highly favoured in the tipsters poll.

My advice: look at what ISN'T in the tipsters poll but is well backed. You'll get much better value and know you are following the smart money rather than the crowd.

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 399,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 31/03/2024
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

Eddy I'm not knocking his approach per sea' (spelling?) BUT consider that you have no control who is actually employed to make those selections, could change tomorrow OR next week?..... see what I mean? the basic method of selection is suspect!!!

PS. I think the Pre-post idea is better as it is more likely to be from a more "premanent source"

I agree with your sentiments [and Chrome's point] re. using Newspaper tipsters as a system base Party. I think however most newspaper tipsters do a reasonable job considering the amount of races they have to cover.

Hi Crash.

How about going the other way, and consider a horse that has been tipped to win by only one tipster and is not mentioned at all by any other tipster?

You are probably going to obtain long odds about a horse on which the tipster may have inside info. (I used to use the Australian newspaper poll for this on Saturdays.)

Consensus doesnt always mean success..in fact I get worried when my selections come up in other peoples selection methods as well. I much prefer it when I have a "one out" selection. Time after time, on this forum, we see horses that most people agree upon as a horse that will salute, and yet it doesnt happen...

Recently, I have been monitoring the Qtab ratings alongside the techforn ratings. One will often have a selection win that the other didnt, while the co-inciding selections have a rather ordinary strike rate thus far. It is getting to the point whereby, I may well end up using this as a filter..i.e. if both ratings services come up with the same selection, (after I have run my methods through them), I may end up eliminating the horse from consideration....

How is that for contary thinking?

As an aside, to date, every selection of yours in your "No Brainer "method that has also come up in my selection methods, has failed to win. (despite your very high strike rate of winners). It's early days of course..but an example whereby co-inciders, or consensus horses dont necessarily have a stronger chance of winning over a "one out" horse

Quote from 924: 'As an aside, to date, every selection of yours in your "No Brainer "method that has also come up in my selection methods, has failed to win.'

Well it seems your selection method [which one is that?] is picking my losers but not my winners. So the go would be to combine the 2 systems and only back the runners in my system that your system doesn't come up with as well. Easy street here we come.

"Well it seems your selection method [which one is that?] is picking my losers but not my winners. So the go would be to combine the 2 systems and only back the runners in my system that your system doesn't come up with as well. "

There may well be merit in that Crash..that's exactly the sort of thing Im talking about.... Taking such an approach is probably no more or less logical than backing all the ones that do coincide...

At this point I have too few Saturday selections of yours to get an accuarate line on things..however, if you are willing to provide me with your previous Sat selections (and public holidays if you have them) going back to early Feb 2005, I am more than happy to go through them ...could be interesting..
w9241@yahoo.com