ive been using ..a system of sorts very similar to yours .. except i only go as far as no 6 saddle cloth....

Number 6 & 7 were pretty close when I did the stats.

What else do you know about my system??

Privateer

I have read most of your previous post here about stats and have found them very interesting and have also looked into Mr Pareto's theory.

I am interested to hear if the stats have held their level of impotance over the time you have been using them. What I mean by that is, if you found that the horses place strike rate was the number 1 thing that pointed to them running a place 3 years ago, is it still the number thing today that points to them running a place at their next start?


Thanks

Wise One

In a word, yes. The stats hold their consistency. The only point of interest perhaps is that the stats that I use don't seem to go as well in fields where the horses are of poor quality. The better the quality of the field, the better the stats seem to perform. As a consequence, I introduced a race class factor based on total average prizemoney (won by each runner multiplied by the number of runners divided by the number of runners) into the method 18 months ago that has worked well. (The final average must be a certain amount for the race to qualify)

Privateer

Privateer

I very interesting stat. Do you mean that you add all the runners average prizemoney and then divide it by the number of runners,or have I misunderstood your above formula?

I am currently looking at the stats of a horses last 2 placing and where those placing were ie Saturday meeting versus midweek/provincial meetings and their placing ( 1st - 4th )

I have found some interesting results in the small sample that I have completed so far, but need to do more work on they to find how reliable they are


Wise one

Sorry, my error. You're right Wise One.

As a matter of interest on the subject of form, I only concern myself with a horses most recent start where it must have finished in the first 2. I have found that WHERE it ran to achieve that last start finish is pretty much irrelevant (as is the distance from the winner if it ran second).

Cheers

Privateer

Privateer

I agree with you in regards to margin from the winner being irrelevant, and that their previous placing more relevant.

So far I have been looking at all runners combined and working out the most important stats to narrow down the runners in each race, but I was wondering if there is a point where I should stop looking at all the runners and start looking at each race as an individual event?

An example is if you are left with 3 runners in a race with all 3 having the same stats, placed at their last start (1st - 4th), raced in the last 21 days, all having a win percent over 15 and a place percent over 65,to name a few, do you look at each race to find which stat is more relevant, like betting on the runner with the highest place % or win% or do you still look at all runners combined at make the selection criteria tougher so that you are left with fewer runners per race?

Wise one

Hello Wise One

In my view, the statistics should be viewed as "across the board" and not tweaked to accommodate races. Once you do that, I feel that the importance of the stats as a sole means of finding horses to support, becomes lost.

With the 3 horse in the one race scenario...I VERY rarely encounter that myself (in fact can't remember the last time I did!) I'd be tempted to bet on them all but that also depends on your staking method. Any more than 3 and I'd wipe the race.

You are spot one when you say that "make the selection criteria tougher" as that is what I would do if in your position. You may for example want to either really lift that win rate % or drop it completely. I don't use win rate % at all as I found that the place rate % (60%+) is a better guide to finding selections that may win or run a place.

This of course may not suit someone who bets win only. I bet 1 x 3 as I discovered very early on that your selection does not have to be first across the line in order to win money on the race.

Sorry that I can't be more specific but I can't give away too much here!!

Cheers

Privateer

Privateer

Thanks for your helpful advice and answering my questions. Yes I have read your previous posts about not having to be the first horse across the line to win money on the race and agree with you.

I also understand that you can’t be more specific as you don’t want to go revelling your selection criteria.

I will now have to sit down and not totally rethink my selection criteria but look at those that I can make tougher and possibly introduce a few news ones

Once again thanks for your help and advice

Wise One

You're welcome and I hope I've helped a little.

Cheers

Privateer

(wyattninteen@hotmail.com)