Yep ok, will definitely factor the trainer into too.

Will try Bhag's suggestion, since even tho it target's favs it means small odds which is what I'm ultimately after.

the negativity & worse expressed around here (yes i have been guilty of it on occasion, my bad) is i believe due to the inevitable frustration the punt can bring out in otherwise calm & level headed people & usually follows a particularly bad day on the punt or blue with the missus (what milk money?) & and an ale or 2 too many (or not enough!), still no excuse tho...

pengo, my 2 cents worth - to make a go of this laying caper whatever method you happen to use, i believe a max price ceiling must be adopted, laying over about $12-$16 is just asking for trouble imho, so confine your search for that weak link to nags at the short end of the market

if you must lay at longish odds then follow the suggestion in a recent thread by bhagwan (i think it was) of setting a max loss amount per lay

Where can I find trainer stats broken down by s/r at a tracks? I was using racenet to get the same for jockey's but they don't offer the same for trainers.

Could only find this http://www.racenet.com.au/HotTrainers.asp and it appears a lower strike rate is better? I think the s/r column is how many outs before a winner? There is the jockey/trainer combo on that site, too but still doesn't break it down for track or have all trainers ;(.

Just to prove your point Angry, check out this race.. the horse that came 2nd (unofficial) had no jockey lol.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwfAoFv5cpw

Since I can't find stats for trainers, going off track stats for jockeys and 1st or 2nd fav on betfair as suggested by Bhags.

Ararat R1:
The early fav on betfair is B RAWILLER's ride, and he has more than a 10% overall strike rate and over 15% for the track, so his horse is out. 2nd early fav is Iblits ridden by B MELHAM who has less than a 10% overall strike rate, but a 20% strike rate at the track so his ride is not a selection. Will have to wait closer to jump before making a final selection (if possible) so the odds shorten.

So as it stands no selection for race 1.

Hmm 3000 for a back for Mr Quiet (Rawiller's ride).. someone thinks its gonna win. Update: guess not, someone who took that lay is a happy man!

Pengo

Apologies.

Sales & marketing is what i know best. I would like nothing more then to have threads in here like i can find in the archives from 2005. I simply dont think thats where we're heading in regards to someone experienced coming along tomorrow and having enough quality threads to keep them interested allowing me/us to learn from them. Picking a horse & starting a thread based on a weak link is like taking the outside barrier horse as long as its not 1,2,3 fav is no different to picking a horse with the worst jockey on board. << It would never end in regards to whats next on exactly the same end thought.
This is the first time ive seen you make such an effort to reply with 'thanks for the suggestion i will use it' etc etc. Having a go as some refers to it is what i said i am 100% behind. Its all those posts that people offered to steer you on course, but you only removed your hands from your ears to type the next horse you were going to take, made it very discouraging from this end in the past. I spent a whole day with you not so long ago with Betfair. At no stage did you stop and listen to any of the posts. Your next post after mine you were trying to go 2 steps further down the track with no acknowledgement of what i was saying.
Beagle i dont care for your thoughts. Firstly take your skirt off & say the name of whom you refer to. Secondly take note of the time i & others have spent trying to help Pengo with zero thanks or aknowledgement from his end, in return only to see his next post up in 30 seconds resulting in another basic punting error that the last person just told him about. Dont get involved in matters that have more background in them then a few of the latest threads you see. I am straight up and down, and blunt if it means dodging the subject will only result in being back in the same place later on. < Some see that as rude i see it as immediate progression

No point in going further, lets leave it there Pengo. Just take in what some are saying & atleast show your taking it in. when replying instead of full steam ahead.

Ill leave you with this, good luck

http://www.virtualformguide.com/trainerpercent.shtml

you will also find better then average jockey stats there too covering odds of horses ridden each run etc etc. It may help Pengo

Pengo i just found this one aswell http://www.aapracing.com.au/strike-...ol/today's/4928
you will fiond a link down the bottom for 'other tracks' i assume it will update daily ready for your next days bets.

__________________
Its the ones you leave, not the ones you take, that give you the margin

Thanks King. I thought I thanked you when you helped me with Betfair and acknowledged the suggestions but chose not to use them, instead to figure it out for myself, as I was optimistic. Nonetheless, thank you advice is appreciated even if I choose to disregard it.

The reason why I think jockey's strike rate holds more weight than going based off wins from a barrier, is that well a barrier is an inanimate object that doesn't have a brain. Whereas a jockey can affect the result of a horse by making it overrun the race/fighting with the horse and so sabotaging its chances at winning.

Thanks for the links. Awesome, the AAP is cool.


Well going off my original idea for a lay system of just laying the horse with the jockey with the worst s/r under 10%, didn't win.. so a succesful lay there for Ararat R1 (11 SECRET SENSATION). No selection using Bhag's yet, but now that I got access to trainer stats thanks to King, we should be able to make a better selection using Bhag's suggestion.

Perhaps thats what i was meaning to say......

Enough said on it all. Good luck

__________________
Its the ones you leave, not the ones you take, that give you the margin

For what it's worth, it's not about being negative, it's about frustration - and that's why threads get a little heated.

Scenario 1 - new poster tries all avenues at once, we've all been there before I think.

Scenario 2 - existing poster has done it all before and can clearly see some basic mistakes.

Result - heated argument and frustration from both parties.

It's when you try and help someone and they disregard your help it gets quite frustrating.

It's also frustrating when you are trying things and you think people are being negative all the time.


So we simply have some quotations...

"You just can't help some people"

"Perhaps the people that you think are know alls, actually know something you don't"

The best ideas come from research, nobody buys land without researching with the council to see what happened in the past and what is probable for the future. Business moguls don't takeover companies they know nothing about.

What I'm suggesting is that one cannot post threads about various angles and not expect some negativity when others have already researched it and know the outcome is bad.

I genuinely feel that quite a few posters have helped Pengo along the way, if that's seen as negative, then it's time to stop helping.

__________________
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

Ararat R2:
7 FLAWED (D YENDALL track s/r: 4.3 JAMIE EDWARDS & BR (track s/r:2)
1st fav on betfair atm. Some big bets going on to back it for a win.
9 MOS EISLEY (S MURPHY(A) track s/r:6 DARREN WEIR track s/r:6)
2nd fav on betfair atm.

I tend to favor mos eisley for the lay as the trainer has had more runners at the track than flawed's trainer and flawed's form looks the better of the two. Kinda ironic I have a horse called flawed in my selections, lol.

Oh hangon i misunderstood the s/r data, its not a percentage value but how many outs before hitting a winner, i think? So if thats the case, higher number the better.

Update: Mos Eisley won.