TWOBETS- “When backfitting systems it is impossible (almost then) to isolate aparticular input factor. You may think you are adding only "first up laststart" runners for example. But in fact within that group you have amillion other factors that may or may not be having an input on the result.Thus when you add or subtract any single input it actually affects the otherinput factors.....There, clear as a bell".

Wesmip1 - "The fewer but more complex filters, which are not easilyidentifiable by most punters, in a system, the more chance of it repeating.

AngryPixie– “There's dozens and dozens, even hundreds of potential variables you could measure, most of which aren't independant so in using them you're in fact doubling up on your measurements.”

Barny– “You’re paying a fairly hefty premium in terms of SP for the most popular filters /combination of filters – look where no-one else is looking”>>

I included myself because ..... I can (it's my post !!!)

When I first joined this forum their were quite a few long timers, a few years on most are still here but a few seem to have disappeared. I wonder why and where they might be now.

eg. Crash
Baghwan
Wesmip

I know their are more because I enjoyed the banter.

ps. Sorry, I meant to start a new thread, not hijack this one. Only 5 mts to play with.

Evenin' Barny,
Haven't had a rant for a while cause this forum makes me want to pull my hair out. Not that I've got any left.

This from Wesmip is the gist of my success and I wanted to add something that I perceive as fundamental but many on here obviously don't agree with.
All this talk about very specific yet obvious facts ( like placed last start, ridden by top jockey, or whatever.... these have all been factored in to the price and have thus been rendered useless to the average punter. The price will always be against you.

To my mind you have to look for the magic Wesmip filters for a nice edge in this game. I've only got one which is why I come across like a tight rrrs, and have nothing to share, but that's where I'm at.

__________________
"Not winning on a horse that came first is one thing.....Losing on a horse that didn't come first is something else entirely!!!"

Five for the Pool Room, methinks.

But Barmy, tsk tsk,

__________________
"Now let me get this straight - Whatever I do don't bet this horse?"

Barny Read up on William Benter.

Identified around 140 variables that could affect a race result. 24% POT at around a net value of $50 Million.

when wesmip talked about filters he would often identify 2 sets of ratings, the use of a wide barrier and Days last start. The ratings were very unique but in the background many other variables gave him this total.

If someone were to say use the top rater from Don Scott racing and sports and the unitab top rater and sky ratings you probably are doubling your points or allocation on one particular variable.

I suspect you need some serious life experiences in the examination of the punting caper to appreciate how pertinent the insights of TWOBETS, wesmip1 and AngryPixie are .....

My post was indicating that its not the specific amount of variables that is the key but more around which are not independent of each other.

Its not a matter of not appreciating there comments it comes down to doing your own testing and understanding how the results / ratings are produced.

I'm sure I'll be making adjustments for the next 10 years or so but at least I'll know whats in the background.

Very true Vortech,

Good rating sites like inracing ,r+s are always refining their handicapping procedures as new inovations are discovered though they also recognize the value of the basics.
Cheers
darky

So Vortech, if I've got your message clearly, your saying we need to identify variables that are clearly DEPENDANT, a bit like Rules, and Sub-Sets of Rules etc, all intemimgled with each other ?? That flies in the face of "going against the crowd".