Stay in the saddle, Star.

Best use for them I have found is,
As a final filter for 2-3 top chances,
Rather than as an outright selection system.

Just need to determine the top 2-3 nags first!

Having said that..
Decided to apply the Ns(only) today to shortlist top chances in Flem quaddie,
To get a feel for whether they could still be useful as an initial filter.

Managed to pull in 3 outa 4 legs using...
(a) combination of CP,CF,JA,TA,JT settings
(b) top N selections <$10

Cheers LG

__________________
The trick isn't finding profitable angles, it's finding ones you will bet through the ups and downs - UB

Be careful with the J/A J/T in the neurals L.G.

I used them for a good long time the problem,
I found was that as the neurals came out at,
Least 24 hours before the races the actual jockey,
That was listed beside the horse in the neurals,
Wasn't actually the jockey that rode the horse on the day.

Thus making the actual rating useless, up to you?.
The other 3 are excellent filters C/P C/F T/A.

Good luck with it.

Cheers.

Thanks for the heads up, garyf.

So if we get any jockey changes <24rs before jump,
JA and JT settings are worth nowt?

I will 're-do' the flem quaddie without these 2,
And see what transpires.

Cheers LG


PS Is it possible that the Ns are adjusted once the jockey change announced?

__________________
The trick isn't finding profitable angles, it's finding ones you will bet through the ups and downs - UB

Well done LG. But what minute past the hour did you do it. if you were held up for a few hours, with the exact same filters could you be sure that you would have the same top chances.

That's my quandry.

Star

To my knowledge they never change for the jockeys.

I used them for nearly 8 years up till around 2010.

Never once did i see any column change once they were up.
The only thing that did change was the order of there ranking.
As individual horses became scratchings during the day.

Haven't looked today i set all the neurals to=0 as Star,
Said when he did it he still had ratings showing.

I tested 20 races after hitting ("set preference scale= 0".)
And everything came out as =0 as it should.

Unless they have altered recently everything appears as it should.

Maybe i am doing something different to others?.

Cheers.

It's an interesting quandry Star,
Not sure if you will crack it however!

Cheers LG

__________________
The trick isn't finding profitable angles, it's finding ones you will bet through the ups and downs - UB

Hi Star.


I must admit you have me completely bamboozled in trying,
To help you out here.

What you are saying if say in the C/P column A HORSES,
Rating or number continually alters.

Let's look at SAY FLEMINGTON R=5

Go to set preference scale put the C/P in as 5.
Then mark everything else to=0

NOS=3- -40.0
NOS=10-18.3.
then 5 horses on 11.7.
Every other setting should be showing=0.

What you say is the above figures keep changing during the day,
So nos 3 in the C/P might alter to 35.0 nos 10 may become 20.5 etc.

Forget the order i just want to know if the above example,
I have given is correct.

Cheers.

May not be a shocker. Could be what you should be expecting. What's your average starting price?

__________________
Pixie

"It's worth remembering that profit isn't profit until it's spent off the racecourse." -- Crash

In reply to " garyf ". You might be a few steps ahead of me on this. What I did was to put O in each category.

The results showed the order of the new neural order. I did not bother to look at the individual column. They may well have been nought in each, I will pick a few races for tomorrow or Monday soon and record the time and results.

What I was concerned with is note the Numerals rating number, but the combined total which should give me an order for all the combined settings.

But, I had O in all yet they still recorded a Neural preference order. In the few races I looked at their was a different combined neural order. I would have expected a void sign or error but did not.

So, if we set O as our default and it still comes up with a Neural prefernce order, when in my opinion it should not give an implied order at all, then maybe they have some hidden defaults in there even though in the individual columns it is not shown.

I do not know, and I may be writing utter crap, but I will watch it more closely now.

Star

I understand Angry that with my SR of about 20% I have seen an Article that says with my SR, I may experience a run of outs of 25 to 28 Average run of outs. It also states a Worst run of 75.

But my worst until today was 13, now it is 19. My Average winner is about 7 to1, with a few highs of 16 and 15 in their. I also now think that with a run of outs of twenty afour quick winners brings things back into order.