1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. There seems to be a problem with some alerts not being emailed to members. I have told the hosts and they are investigating.
    Dismiss Notice
Welcome to the UK Betting Forum. Please consider registering, it is free!

Early days

Discussion in 'Ratings & Utilities' started by davejb, Jul 1, 2017.

  1. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Mordin seems to me to be in the sort of trap I imagine a lot of these guys get into, you have a pretty successful book and a run of decent luck, but you don't quite get to that peak we all imagine is out there where magically the winners just start to roll in because we suddenly know exactly how to pick them. There is, however, money to be made by putting together some of your more recent ideas.... next thing you know you're considered an expert horse backer and in reality you're probably not doing much (if any) better than half the people on an internet bulletin board.... I don't blame him for writing each one, and I read them and see if he's produced any ideas I might like to look into, but that's as far as it goes. I can honestly say that I have read quite a lot of racing books over the decades, a fair proportion of them being 'How to Win' style efforts, and I never get anything from them worth having except, on occasion, an idea that will lead me to investigate something - usually, in fact probably 99.5% of the time, it ends up as a dead end. The horse/trainer/jockey bios and histories of racing, on the other hand, are at least more entertaining.
    Dave
    ps Of course it's seldom a good sign that the focus of each book is on something totally different each time - if you had a really good basic idea then books 2,3 and 4 would, you would think, be increasingly polished versions of book 1.
     
  2. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Yesterday's results: Didn't take long to process - only 6 top rated each over flat and jumps.
    On the flat 4 handicaps produced 2 winners at odds of 4.1 and 3.7, using the filter that became 3 selections with 2 winners.
    Non handicaps had 2 runners, both came third, neither was forecast favourite so there were no filtered selections.

    Over jumps, 3 handicaps, no winners, 2 of them were passed by the 50% filter so 0/3 for all handicaps, 0/2 for filtered
    3 non handicaps produced a winner at odds of 7.2, using the filter this reduced to 2 bets with no winners.

    So unfiltered results 12 out in total return 15.0
    filtered 7 out 7.8 return

    A fairly rare occurrence still, the filters reducing the return.
    Dave
     
    mlmrob likes this.
  3. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Daily cards and ratings ....
     

    Attached Files:

    TheBluesBrother and mlmrob like this.
  4. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow's files.
    I took the 'top 2 ratings' list out of the full card files, you can see the top two (marked * and + ) in the racecard sections anyway, and the full ratings list is of course as per the description on the tin. Also in the card file I've removed the Larkspur ratings stuff, I don't think it was doing anything, I've tidied things up a little but nothing major. Still working on improving the 'selections' - for instance I'm watching the class flag in conjunction with the top rated runner - oddly enough it seems that a flag value of 1 (placed at or above this class) is more of a guide than a 2 (won at this class or higher).... I can't really make a sensible case out for this, other than possibly showing improvers (in which case the 1 on it's own isn't the full story).

    Non handicaps continue to have a high strike rate, but lately the odds have been dire.... something like the last 7 out of 10 have gone in, but at odds of 1/4, 2/5 etc.
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

  5. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrows cards etc as usual

    Yesterday there were 27 top rated in total on the flat, 16 in handicaps produced only 2 winners at 5.46 and 3.73, or the same 2 out of 11 if you used the market filter.
    Non handicaps gave 1 win in 11 (ouch) at odds of 1.79, using the market filter that became 1 winner from 2.

    NH handicaps gave 1 winner at 2.6 from 4 runners, 1 in 3 using the filter
    Non handicaps gave 1 win in 2 runners at 1.28, both runners were f/c fav so also 2/2 using the filter

    No real change, checking various flags and things like lto form figures and the like doesn't seem to do much for improving things - the filters do a good job (including in handicaps) of reducing the number of possible selections without harming the win rate - normally the win rate is improved by a good degree. The market filter reduces non handicaps to a small number most days, today for example there were only 5 runners across the 4 meetings (the 6th one didn't qualify for a maiden race....presumably it won recently) of those 5 runners 3 of them won (1/4, 11/10, 5/4).
    The market filter is 50% on handicaps - narrowing this to say 25-30% doesn't seem to improve things, which often leaves quite a large proportion of top rated runners in the list - maybe cutting the list to 2/3 or so of the original size... still far too many for my taste. So far I haven't found any better way to cull this number automatically, for example:

    For the last 212 top rated runners in handicaps 40 winners were produced (19%), applying the 50% market filter reduces both to 27 winners from 136 runners (20%).
    If you apply a filter based on the last two runs, taking the raw placing values, and look for all the above qualifiers that have improving figures (eg 3rd 2lto going 2nd on lto, that sort of thing) you get 90 qualifiers and 18 winners (20%).

    Take the top rated/50% market runners and insist they have a class win (class flag = 2) and you get 8 wins from 41 (19%) .... I won't bore further on this, I've run a bunch of tests to see if class flag values or the lto/2lto figures, alone or in conjunction with the market filter and/or each other, makes any difference and the fact is that whilst applying extra filters will reduce the number of selections it will not vary the win rate very much at all. Whilst reducing the number of qualifiers is, on its own, worthwhile I'd prefer to up the win rate and returns in the process!

    One thing that does seem to help (forgive me for stating the obvious) is to check the race that got rated - if only half of the runners have a rating and the top rating is 25* then you probably aren't being pointed towards a betting opportunity soundly based on form. Reasonably well exposed horses where the majority have been rated (preferably several times), with the top rated having a few flags set to 1 or 2 to show it isn't doing everything for the first time, will probably tend to win more often than the type described above*.

    I'll keep looking of course, I don't expect everything to pop up automatically, but I do want to at least identify the best places to apply study time.

    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

  6. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Yesterday's results :
    no NH racing, 29 top rated runners on the flat.
    14 handicaps produced 2 winners at odds of 4.0 and 4.34, applying the filter this turns into the same 2 winners from 7 selections.
    Non handicaps 15 runners, 5 winners at 2.49* 5.1 2.22* 3.18 and 1.39* applying the filter this becomes 3 winners (the ones marked *) out of 5.

    The Non handicaps filter knocked the best pair of winners out of course, but prior to the filter the return was 14.38 from 15 out, afterwards it became 6.1 return from 5 out - I'll take a 20% profit rather than a 4% loss any day thanks.
    The handicap filter, obviously, turned a loss of 5.66 (about 40%) into a profit of 1.34 (19%).

    I've actually put small bets on 10 so far this week, winning a small amount from 6 winners overall, just so you know - there comes a point where you have to test ideas with cash or the exercise becomes pointless.... it's also the point where you find that you do or don't get the odds you expected, or there's a deduction you forgot to account for, and your marginally winning tactic turns out to actually be a loser - so I'm using very very small stakes to ensure that this all works!

    In light of that, what I'm betting on are the non handicap selections on the flat, I am also considering non handicaps on the jumps as they seem to do okay too, and as well as being picked by the 'selections' list I'm checking the form output (the racecard file, eg 07sep.xlsx) to see how things look, only if it looks a sensible choice will I bet. Today there are three selections on the list for the flat, and I'm not betting on any of them as all three are in races where far too many other runners are unexposed - there simply is no way to know what the opposition is going to be like, therefore any bet would be essentially down to backing f/c favourites... the ratings don't exist for most runners. The only time I'd consider backing one like these is if the top rated runner had a fairly spectacular rating - in which case I might decide that in the vast majority of cases it'd be miles ahead of the typical opposition anyway (essentially deciding that the horse met or exceeded the par for that class and type of race).

    As an example - the top rated of the three is Ginbar (2.30 Haydock) - out of 8 runners 4 are unraced, of the remaining 4 only Ginbar has a prior placing. Ginbar is rated 62, which is okayish but not stellar, and that was earned on his first of 3 outings at Chester (a very different sort of track to Haydock) with runs of 34 at Nottingham then 47 at Pontefract to follow. That just doesn't look all that enticing to me, and the other two in the selections list look no more appetising. So, no bets then. (Watch all three win by miles....)

    There is one qualifier at Sedgefield in the opener, who certainly looks to have a decent chance, unfortunately the expected odds (1/3 currently) are so short as to make the bet - in my view - not worth taking, there are enough vagaries in racing to make odds like these too short even if it was a 2 horse race against a donkey.

    So, wallet firmly closed for the day.
    Dave
     
  7. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Well I wasn't that far off - Ginbar won 11/8, Clairette won 10/11, only Blanchefleur stopped me explaining myself again by running 2nd at 13/8.....
    Okay, fair enough, but I still didn't think these were acceptable risks - and I turned out right at Sedgfield where Runasimi went off at 4/9F, clouted a couple and then fell.... for most of us it's difficult to accurately assess risk, but over the jumps especially it seems to me that really short odds (Runasimi was 1/3 when I looked earlier) don't reflect the chances of a horse getting around the track never mind beating the other runners.

    2 NH handicap winners on the list so far, at 3/1 and 11/2, flat handicaps are all bouncing off the woodwork rather than going in the net so far....
    Dave
     
  8. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow's cards and ratings...
     

    Attached Files:

  9. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Another no bet day, as there are only 2 non handicap top rated runners passing the filter, and again they are both in races where there are too many unrated - in the Ascot race (1440 Merlin Magic) only 4 of the 9 has a rating, and at Down Royal (1715 Beach Wedding) it's 8 out of 13, I know that doing this yesterday meant missing 2/3 winners but until I see them going in regularly regardless I will ignore this sort of selection. Nothing on the jumps side either. For anyone wondering my opinion is that I want at least 80% of runners to be rated before I'll consider the race viable. (I might just program a marker into the selections to show which ones meet this criterion).

    Not touching the handicaps, the ratings just aren't doing well with them at all lately.

    Yesterday - Flat 11 handicaps, no winners (-11 then). Applying the filter just changed this to -7 as it filtered 4 of the losers out. Virtually all of the selections came 2nd or 3rd - close but no coconut. Non handicaps 4 wins from 12 (6,02, 2.45, 2.0, and 5.05), using the filter this became 3 selections with 2 winners, the 2.45 and 2.0, missing the nice 6.02 and 5.05 odds winners.... but missing 6 more losers of course.
    Jumps Handicaps 2 wins out of 8, both passed by the filter (which turned this into 2 from 7 by knocking a loser out) odds 4.34 and 7.42,
    non Handicap 5 runners, no winners - the filter improved this by giving a single selection to reduce the loss to 1 pt (this one fell, as I mentioned in an earlier post, whilst explaining why I wasn't going to back it).

    Dave
     
  10. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow's stuff.
    Runners in the selections text file now have a ! before their name if there are less than 80% rated runners in the race - for example Astrum in the 1430 at Stratford is one of only 2 runners to be rated out of the 7 taking part. I personally do not think it's a good idea to back a top rated runner unless you also have a decent idea what all the others in the race are like - I can live with the odd race where maybe there's one over from France or something and there's no rating for them, but I'm not willing to ignore anything that is new to the track... there'll be some good horses appearing in the near future, especially 2yos.

    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

  11. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Well, I enjoyed watching Harry Angel win, but my teeny bet on Winter went amiss - I really ought to have learned by now that whichever O'Brien horse you fancy it's always the other one that wins.... oh well. I must be even blinder than I thought, apparently I was the only person who didn't know A O'B had described Winter as probably needing the run....

    Yesterday - flat handicaps continue to struggle, only 2 of 26 winning at 5.84 and 6.6, filtered that became the same 2 winning out of 18. I must confess that this continues to look pretty lacklustre, but watching the racing on TV I couldn't help but say to the wife how the handicaps were all lotteries... I reckon I'd have to pick 5 or 6 in each race to be fairly sure of getting a winner regularly I reckon.
    Non handicaps 4 winners out of 16, 3.39 3.15, 6.4 and 2.39 using the filter that turned into 1 winner at 2.39 out of 2 selections.
    NH handicaps 3, winners 0, filtered turns that into 0 from 2
    NH non handicaps 5 runners, 2 winners at 4.4 and 4.2, there were no selections using the filters.

    I already know that today the non handicaps threw up 4 selections, 3 of them were marked ! to show (essentially) no bet due to insufficient data, the one left in was Winter - beaten a head as evens favourite. I know one of the ! runners won at a measly 4/7, the other 2 lost. 2/4 won in NH handicaps for a change.

    Tomorrow's files are attached, unusually there are a good few non handicap selections tomorrow. Oh, I included the Curragh in the full card file again, as it's a big festival I thought I'd break with my normal tradition of not including Irish cards.

    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

  12. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow's files:
    Yesterday - 19 handicaps, no wins...blimey... I think it was 11 of them passed the filter, still no wins of course. Non handicaps had 4 wins from 23, 1.69 1.35, 3.16 and 4.35 after the filter 3 selections 1 win at 1.69. Using the ! bit there was one bet, on Winter, beaten a head as no doubt everyone already is aware.
    Jumps 4 handicaps gave 2 winners at 2.93 and 3.65, all 4 passed the filter so same 2 from 4, The ! marker cut it to 3 selections and 1 winner at 9/4.
    Non handicaps gave 1 winner in 3 at 3.22, there was 1 filtered selection (marked !) who lost.

    Don't give up the day job eh...
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    Donny likes this.
  13. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow's files attached.
    The hard times continue for the ratings, I think it's the changing going that's causing problems - the ratings aren't picking long odds against shots, a good percentage are favourites, and they simply aren't going in often enough! As usual I'm extracting data to analyse in my own little way, but what will probably happen is either the ratings will swing pendulum like into an upturn or I'll gradually sink into my desktop and finally become one with the wood whilst chanting rubbish about going allowances.

    As there are an awful lot of variables in racing it can be rather difficult to hit on anything to latch onto - you decide the going is really important for example, but exactly how much is it going to alter the performance of the runner? Ad infinitum.... this was never going to be an easy job to do, don't be surprised if this goes on for quite a while yet.

    Yesterday is fairly easy to describe, there wasn't a huge amount of racing after all - 6 handicaps had a top rated runner, none of them won, the filter cut this to 5 runners and only managed a 2nd and a 3rd. A total of 9 Non handicaps gave 1 winner, the filter cut this to 1 winner from 4 - Order of St George duly won at the massive price of 2/5.... oh well.
    Over the jumps there were 6 handicap runners, 1 winner at 4.43, filtered to the same winner from 4 runners. Non handicaps scored none from 8, 0/3 filtered.

    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    TheBluesBrother and dicko14 like this.
  14. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,436
    Likes Received:
    3,094
    You are dead right there Dave.

    In the past week calculating the going allowances is taking me double the time it normally does, in the past week I would say that the majority of meetings would have been impossible to automate.

    You come across things that you have never seen before, all of a sudden, Leopardstown now has an inner and outer course?

    Yesterday the 3:30 Maisons-Laffitte was classed as grade 1 race (Jumps) yet they used starting stalls and ran on the flat.

    I could go on, but I will need to write a book on the different subjects...

    Mike.
     
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2017
    davejb likes this.
  15. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    As you say, there have been some fairly strange looking lumps (a fairly accurate description, considering their usefulness) of information for the past week or more - it's become a regular chore to check the distance of the races actually run (as best you can do that) for comparison to the results info, and having watched a fair amount of racing over the past week or so I've found myself wondering about how some courses are classifying the going.... you pretty much have to accept what the jockeys report it as, they're probably the best judges on the day, but I've seen absolute mud baths described as soft whilst another track has been called heavy and you can still hardly see a divot being kicked up halfway through the meeting.

    Throw in the somewhat cavalier attitude to deciding where to actually run relative to the general outline suggested by the course map and it simply adds to the conundrum!
    Still, all this rain must be good for the peace and quiet on the riverbank....

    Right, yesterday - another tough day, but not an absolute slaughter... on the flat there were 9 handicap selections, which the filter cut down to 3 - the same winner came up for both, at odds of 2.77, so a small loss provided you follow the filter info. Non handicaps there was a 2.2 winner from 3 runners, all passed the filter, so another small loss.
    Jumps - 9 handicap runners, cut to 4 by the filter, 1 winner at 3.25.... hmmm, another small loss then, and finally 4 non handicaps reduced to 3, zero wins from either, taking the day to 25 out, 8.22 back betting blindly on all top rated, 13 out the same 8.22 back using the filters. If you also applied the ! notation for the "80+% of runners rated" you actually ended up with 7 selections in total, and had winners at 2.77 and 3.25 losing 0.98 in total.

    There are days when the 2 filter types cut winners out, but they seem to cut far more losers, which is why I persist in using them. The filters are based on forecast market position and the percentage of runners that have a valid rating, the market filters simply stop you backing the odd longshot (which really doesn't win at all often) in exchange for cutting the number of possible selections down by between around 33 and 50%, and the rated% runners which will often as much as halve those that pass the market filter and is simply telling you it is too risky to bet in a race were 20+% of the runners are of unknown ability.

    Dave
     
    TheBluesBrother likes this.
  16. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow is attached, shazzam....
    I wonder if anyone at the Racing Post has noticed that their results page for today's racing claims not to have any results to show you?
    Seems a bit of an obvious thing to check, but I've been getting my results info off Timeform for the past 4 hours as a result....
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    Donny likes this.
  17. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,436
    Likes Received:
    3,094
    In the past week I have 3 error reports logged with them, Mark Nelson told me yesterday that this problem is being looked into.

    Dear Sir/Madam,

    Thank you for contacting the Racing Post.

    Please accept our sincere apologies for the issues that have been affecting our website over the past forty-eight hours or so. Unfortunately, for reasons still being investigated, a routine task caused corruption to one of our databases. Our IT team largely managed to rebuild the affected database late last night and resolve many of the related problems earlier this morning.

    However, whilst we would be hopeful that you will have seen significant improvement since your initial contact, we are aware that some aspects of the site are still not working as they should, including some horse profile pages. Please be assured that we are working to permanently resolve these on-going issues as swiftly as we can.

    We are sorry for the inconvenience caused and your patience and understanding is appreciated while we work to resolve the remaining issues.

    Kind regards,
    Will Pepper
    Racing Post Customer Services


    Mike.
     
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2017
    davejb likes this.
  18. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Well, nothing is infallible, especially in I.T. but you'd have thought they might post a small note on the site about it rather than a bland 'we have no results for that date' sort of message.
    Never mind, I just hope it didn't inconvenience you too much when trying to access and store your ratings on the site. ( found that aspect of hand cranking the ratings the most tedious, probably at least in part due to my ADSL not very lightning fast broadband connection).

    Yesterday's results show a little touch of an improvement, I'm going to hope really hard that the pendulum is about to swing my way....
    On the flat 14 handicaps gave 3 winners, and 11 were passed by the filter with the same 3 winners still left in, 2 of them at odds of 4.84 and 1 at 6. Using the ! mark to filter using the 80% cutoff trimmed this to 2 winners (4.84 and 6.0) from 7.
    Non handicaps 12 runners 1 win at 6.0, filtered to 1 winner out of 5 initially, 0 out of 1 using the ! to filter also
    Jumps Handicaps 4 runners, 1 win at 6.82, all 4 in top 50% so no change, ! filter knocked the winner out (boo) and left 2 runners
    3 non handicaps, 1 win at 4.71, didn't pass filter.

    So, all ratings gave 31 runners and a return of 33.21, first profit for a while, albeit tiny.
    Using the market filters we have 20 runners producing 28.50 which is better
    Using the ! to filter out the unsure ratings we get 10 runners and 2 winners returning 10.84.... not really the effect we want there, and as this has happened a couple of times I think I'll ignore this filter idea other than to keep a check on it each day.

    Dave
     
  19. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow's stuff...
    Normally I haven't got the previous day's results processed and analysed as early as I did today, which means I have more to waffle on about than just to say 'tomorrow's stuff'.... the post seems a bit empty now I've done the daily debrief already!
    Okay, I'll fill in with a racing story - I'd been promising to take my wife racing for decades (literally) but it's about a 4 hour drive to our nearest course, which is Perth, and to be honest I hadn't been to a racecourse since the mid 1970's when I visited Doncaster for the 199th Leger, York (100-1 O'Brien winner turned over 2 hot 2yo's that day) and several visits to my nearest track - Haydock. So I was rather spoiled, and didn't fancy standing around in the cold and wet of an NH meeting, more to the point I figured my wife would swear off it for life if I 'treated' her to that.

    So a few months back I bit the bullet, booked a Hotel in Perth for the night, we drove there, watched the racing, then had a nice meal in a gigantic Italian restaurant called Pablos... it looked a fair size from outside once we got in the place was heaving and it went on for ever - must have been properties on both sides of a block knocked together. Anyhow, we had a nice meal as I said, and a jockey who retired that day at Perth came in, as he passed by I recognised him and wished him a happy retirement.

    Today Brian Harding rode the 5-1 winner of the race for retired jockeys at Doncaster..... now with that backstory how on Earth could I have missed backing him?
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    Andyx likes this.
  20. Andyx

    Andyx Newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi Dave,
    thanks for your interestin researches.
    Im newbie in horse betting but, as I see (for 2 month monitoring) it looks like a big lottery. Especially UK and Ireland markets.
    What do u think about USA races? It looks like more predictable.

    Also would you comment a todays situation at Carlisle/2017-09-13/04:10 where's a favorite ANN WITHOUT AN E moved from odds 3.00 to 5.50 just for last 5 minutes before the race and was going like a donkey during all of the distance. (BTW this horse was selected by timeform.com and attheraces.com as theprimary favorite) Looks like a dirty business there...

    Thank again
    Andy
     
  21. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Okay,
    I'm no expert - please don't think I know even half as much as many of the contributors on here - so all you get is my 'man in the pub' opinions!
    US racing - it really depends on how you want to bet, and whether you can be as interested in something you'll never (probably) go to in real life, and whether you can get the information you want.... and a bunch of other stuff too! From the outside, so apologies if some of my assumptions are plain wrong, I'd see the advantages of going US to be the relatively easier comparisons between tracks and racing styles, and the in depth information on pace etc that US punters take for granted. The latter I also see as a disadvantage, because it seems to me that everyone is handicapping the horses pretty much the same way using the same information feeds and I don't think that makes it very easy for you as a punter to get an edge over the majority. As I understand it the US approach is pretty much to go with the speed figures, while over here I think you have more ways to tackle the puzzle. I've watched a number of US races of course via the internet, and whilst I can find a great deal of interest when watching something like Secretariat's triple crown runs (or more recently Arrogate's efforts) the majority of the races I don't find all that interesting - a bit like watching a card of class 6 handicaps at Kempton.

    Ann Without an E - looking at the market info on the Racing Post this one drifted from 7/4 at the shortest to 7/2 before finding limited support to close at 100/30 for the off. BF Odds I can't say off the top of my head, but that would equate to a drift of 2.75 to 4.5 then in to 4.3 for the off, give or take, which at least resembles your version. Looking at the form, it's a fillies novice style event, her latest form figures and ratings are fairly dire (last 3 runs at the back of small fields, and very low ratings) and half the opposition were unraced. I would imagine what happened was she was forecast favourite on the strength of having had 3 runs and nothing in the race looking at all decent, she presumably didn't fire the imagination much when she appeared in the parade ring, and drifted from being a weak favourite to begin with. Eventually people decided she was backable to a small extent at 7/2, but I doubt very much money went on her to arrest the slide. She subsequently ran a race entirely in keeping with her previous form I'd suggest, on heavy ground she scored her lowest rating - my ratings for her last 4 efforts run 37, 22, 20, 11 which suggests that she's somewhat off the boil. I doubt there was any skulduggery going on, I'm only surprised that she was considered favourite material really.

    Dave
     
    Andyx likes this.
  22. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Ho hum,
    tomorrow's cards etc attached as usual.
    Yesterday's runners: 1 win in 15 in handicaps at 6.6, fikltered to 1 win in 8 at 6.6
    Non handicaps 3 wins from 12 at 13.5, 2.2, 2.07 - filtered to 0/3 so for a change the unfiltered results were FAR better.
    Jumps handicaps 0 / 5 unfiltered, 0/2 filtered
    non-handicaps 1 win from 4 at 12.5, 0/2 filtered so like the flat, better without the filter.

    I know that today's selections is a bit of a mixed bag, only 1 win from 5 in non handicaps (at 9/4) but the handicaps weren't too bad with three good priced winners at 6/1, 9/2 and 7/1 out of 10 runners.... proper analysis tomorrow. At a glance it looks like the main meeting at Doncaster went poorly, but the others threw a few winners up between them.
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

  23. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Yesterday the filtering worked as intended...
    flat: Handicaps 12 runners, 3 winners - when filtered this came down to 10 runners with the same 3 winners at 9.6, 7.8, 6.0 so the filter increased the win% by cutting out 2 losers.
    Non handicaps 11 runners with a single 1 winner. filtering took this to 1 winner at 3.5 from 5.... not a profit, but knocking 6 losers out was a good move.
    Jumps 6 handicap runners with 1 win, filtering again knocked 2 losers out to give 1 win from 4 at odds of 4.02
    non handicaps 0 wins from 3, filters knocked all three out for 0 from 0.

    Non filtered returns overall 30.92 back from 32 out, filtered returned 30.92 from 19 out.
    Dave
     
    TheBluesBrother likes this.
  24. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow's runners -
    personally I really liked Stradivarius at Goodwood, but my head says Defoe for the St Leger whilst my ratings are saying Crystal Ocean. I think there'll be enough pace there on slightly testing going to mean that you really want to be sure your horse will definitely stay - so we'll see what happens! I definitely am not keen on Capri's chance, so that's pretty much the equivalent of a nap from Pricewise....
    Let's hope for a really good day's racing at Doncaster tomorrow.
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

  25. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrows cards...

    Yesterday: Apologies if this goes a bit fast, I'm playing around with a LOT of data currently and it's eating my time up...
    13 handicaps produced 1 winner at 4.54, the filter knocked this down to 1 win from 7 which is better but still a couple of pts light.
    Non handicaps 6 won from 18, at 1.33, 1.77, 3.15, 3.6, 4.2, 5.44 the filter cut this to 4 wins from 7 runners, knocking out the 5.44 and 3.15 winners but also removing 11 pts outlay so a good move.
    Jumps handicaps 1 winner from 1 runner, sadly not passing the filter, but then the odds were 18.0 so a long way down the market forecast!
    non handicaps 2 wins from 4 at odds of 1.51 and 5.0, filter took all 4 runners out so 0 from 0 for the filtered result.

    I know the non-handicap selections today did ok, 4/6 on the flat and 1/1 over the jumps, the handicappers did absolutely nothing....admittedly the handicapper is meant to make life difficult for people like me, but it is getting a bit tedious that the handicap performance is so much below that of the non handicappers.

    So much for Capri's chances then (I told you my being against him was as good as a nap from Pricewise, so does that count?) I wouldn't knock him, he won well enough - I think I'd be asking the pacemaker what on earth he was playing at mind, he looked like he was trying to win the 3 O'clock. I was pleased to see Stradivarius run well, despite his lowly ratings - I was a bit surprised to see how his price was slashed though, while Defoe seemed quite unwanted before the off. Oh well, a good few interesting meetings still to come.

    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

  26. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow's cards..
    Yesterday: Flat - hcaps 1 win from 19, filtered to 0 out of 12. The winner was at odds of 8.4, the miserable run in handicaps continues
    non handicaps 5 wins from 15, filtered to 4 from 6 - winners at 2.98, 6.13, 1.91, 2.83 (this one was filtered out) and 2.78 so the non handicap returns continue to be okay really, especially using the filter - pre filter we get 15 out and 16.63 back, which in reality probably amounts to break even or only slightly ahead once you take the percentage cut into account, after filtering we get 6 out and 13.8 back which is 100% profit with a bit to spare (130% less the cut etc, just to prove I can do the maths really).
    Jumps handicaps 1 win out of 5 at 4.68, so a small loss, 0 out of 0 filtered as there were none that passed the filter.
    1 winner from 4 in non handicaps pre filtering turned into 1 out of 1 using the filter, with a short priced 1.84 favourite going in.

    I haven't totted things up for a while - I spent a lot of time today going back over results data for the past 5 months (slow going) as I'm going to start running an experimental database as and when I get the time for it, where I can play 'what if' a bit without messing up the daily stuff. I suspect that the non handicap races, using the filter, are showing a decent profit over the past few weeks even though there have been a few tough days off and on. There was only one such selection for today, Christopher Wood, who came 2nd by a couple of lengths or so at 1/2F. A couple of the handicappers won at short odds at Ffos Las as well. Tomorrow's selections are attached, there are no non-handicap selections on flat or NH so not a day for betting in my view.

    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    TheBluesBrother likes this.
  27. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    20 minutes before we head out to the library (it's more an excuse to leave the house, something that has become necessary since retiring last month) so I might as well rattle yesterday's results off as there were so few races...
    No NH results at all of course, and for the flat there were 9 handicap runners producing 2 winners - the filter removed 2 losers so this becomes 2 wins from 7 - winners at 2.66 and 2.33 so the handicaps again give us a bit of a loss.
    Non handicaps produced 0 wins from 3 (4 races, 1 non runner) and as I mentioned yesterday the filter cut this to a single runner who, sadly, came 2nd.
    So without filters it's 5 back from 12 out, with filters it's 5 back from 8.

    I've just about got my second database sorted, what I'm particularly looking for is an improved approach to handicap rating - I find it hard to accept that the handicap win rate can be so dire, to be honest it'd probably be more profitable to just back the ones with pretty colours so far, and there really ought to be some indication that doing the ratings serves a purpose beyond keeping me occupied....

    Dave
     
  28. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow's cards, all meetings are in there now, including the Irish racing at Galway.
     

    Attached Files:

    markfinn likes this.
  29. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Yesterday:
    Flat 13 handicaps 1 win, filtered to 1 win from 11, poor win rate slightly helped by the odds of 32.44! (BFSP) ('normal' SP was 20/1)
    3 non handicaps with no wins, no filtered selections
    Jumps 6 handicaps, reduced to 4 by filter, 2 wins in either case at 4.64 and 6.8
    non handicaps zero from 9, reduced to zero from one by filter.
    Dave
     
  30. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow....
    all the UK cards again.
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Sep 19, 2017 at 9:41 PM
    ArkRoyal likes this.
  31. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow again.... where do the days go?
     

    Attached Files:

  32. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    And again....
    Not many passing the filter for tomorrow, even with the cancelled Ayr meeting left in (as I did the cards before seeing that bit of info).

    Yesterday there were (flat) 3 handicap winners from 14 at 4.83, 5.0, and 3.19 - after filtering this became the same 3 winners from 8 runners, so that worked pretty well.
    Non handicaps 2 wins out of 14 - rather lower than the norm - at 6.21 and 3.77, after filtering 1 winner at 3.77 out of 3.
    NH 0 from 5 in handicaps, 0 from 3 filtered (reduced loss then), non handicaps 1 win from 1 at 3.15, no filtered runners so 0 from 0 there.
    Non filtered you get 33 runners, so 33 out, and 26.15 back, after filters you have 14 runners so 14 out and 16.79 back.
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Sep 21, 2017 at 8:44 PM
  33. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrows cards:
    Yesterday: Flat handicaps 3 wins from1 7, st 4.72 4.36 15.28. Filtered 1 win at 4.36 from 9
    Non hcaps 1 win from 7 at 1.5, 1 win from 3 (same) after filter
    jumps handicaps 1 win from 4 at 5.5, same winner from 3 after filter
    non hcaps 0 out of 4, filtered to 0 out of 0
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Sep 22, 2017 at 9:29 PM
    Donny likes this.
  34. davejb

    davejb Filly

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    263
    Tomorrow - quiet day so the selections list has hardly anything on it...
    Yesterday - Flat handicaps 2 wins from 8, filtered to 2 from 7 - hey, it knocked a loser out, it helps the profit... at 11.48 and 3.62
    non handicaps 3 wins from 12 filtered to 1 win from 3, 2.64 2.34 and 2.4 - the one at 2.4 was the filtered winner.
    Jumps 4 handicaps with 1 win at 1.85, filtered zero wins from 1
    non handicap 2 wins from 9 at 2.o7 and 6.0, filtered to zero selections.

    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    pete likes this.

Share This Page