I think it may have been over 1000 from memory, but my memory aint that great. I'm sure someone on the forum could produce some up to date figures for us?

Just my opinion of course, but unless some very special conditions were attached to that claim, it is just impossible to be true, given the vast number of people who look ONLY at statistics, they would have found this angle and exploited it accordingly, thus ruining the odds.
52% strike rate at $2.60????? just by following No. 1 when fav?? No way.
Good luck to anyone who runs it through a database, I wouldn't bother.
If proven wrong, I will stand corrected and ready to eat humble pie!

The person who supplied the stats to the magazine was in response to the columnist previously stating that quite a few systems are based on the TAB No.1. The person in this latest issue has informed the columnist "I did a little analysis on the breakdown of the order of favouritism from my results. It may or may not be of assistance but when the favourite is No.1 it is worth a look." He then gave a breakdown of the stats when No.1 is fave which has produced a strike rate of 52% for an average divvy of $2.60. When No.1 is the second-fave, it produced a strike rate of 18.8% for an average divvy of $4.21. He also provides stats when No.1 is third-fave, fourth, fifth and other, but these are big losers. He then continues: "In my overall picture No.1 accounts for 26% of all favourites and 8% of all winners".

I suppose the interesting point is when he says "a little analysis" - how many races is a "little analysis"? Unfortunately he does not provide any further clues to this nor does he say if they are TAB divvies. He has not identified himself as he asked the magazine that he remain anonymous.

Don't think you'll be proven wrong Iomaca. I ran this through my database for all of 2005, just for the Saturday metro meetings and while the strike-rate was Ok @ 33.7% from over 500 selections, the loss amounted to 15.8% LOT with an average price of $2.50.

Another potential Holy Grail up in smoke

The problem is with the wording of the article, or more the case of how its been interpreted – the stats ONLY relate to the correspondents results and not results overall.

Another fave goes down the gurgler, didn't even run a place at $ 2.10

La Mer, probably one days racing, he found something out of the ordinary and thought he'd get his 15 minutes of fame.

I haven't got any actual stats to back this up, but after a few years now watching odds every day, something which has caught my eye is that if the top weight is the fav then you are better off backing the 2nd fav, better odds and they salute it seems to me, more than the fav does.

Kenchar!
How did you find out my secret?
Even in my own rating I bet only the second selection, pays a lot better at a slightly less strikerate.
I still can't master the art of following two or more TABs like you do, keep missing the jump.
Cheers

2 tabs is easy, try 2 tabs and 2 bookie sites one to the other in the last minute before the jump, my right forefinger has got muscles on it.
Just curious have you got any actual stats on the scenario I outlined.

Cheers