• Hi Guest, The forum will be moving hosts on 26 July and as such will be closed from Midday until the move has completed.
    As we will be with new hosts it may take a while before DNS get updated so it could take while before you can get back on the forum.
    I think it will take at least 4 hours but could easily be 48!
    Ark Royal
  • There seems to be a problem with some alerts not being emailed to members. I have told the hosts and they are investigating.
  • Hi Guest Just in case you were not aware I wanted to highlight that you can now get a 20% discount on Inform Racing.
    Simply enter the coupon code ukbettingform when subscribing here.
    We have a lot of members who are existing users of Inform Racing so help is always available if needed.
    Best Wishes
    AR
  • Sorry for the ongoing issues that you may have been experiencing whilst using the forum lately

    It really is frustrating when the forum slows down or Server Error 500 pops up.

    Apparently the hosts acknowledge there is a problem.
    Thank you for using our services and sorry for the experienced delay!
    Unfortunately, these errors are due to a higher server load. Our senior department knows about the issue and they are working towards a permanent resolution of the issue, however, I'd advise you to consider using our new cPanel cloud solutions: https://www.tsohost.com/web-hosting


    I will have to investigate what the differences are with what We have know compared to the alternative service they want us to migrate to.
    Keep safe.
    AR
  • Hi Guest Just in case you were not aware I wanted to highlight that you can now get a free 7 day trial of Horseracebase here.
    We have a lot of members who are existing users of Horseracebase so help is always available if needed, as well as dedicated section of the fourm here.
    Best Wishes
    AR

Dynamic Methodology

Horsenberg

Yearling
Obviously you have looked at stats and I have never bothered but it’s funny the impression you get from watching and betting in-running , I always had Lingfield down as one of the tracks where you are most likely to have one finish wide and late to pip the front runners. That is assuming you are talking about the AW track.
TBH Outlander I haven't looked at the stat's as such. I haven't had time to because when you have to take all the variables and import the stats for all the different number of runners separately for every track it's an enormous task. I couldn't have remembered them all even if I had tried. Jockey tactics are something I have been unable to include so you are always going to see that kind of thing going on at Lingfield when savvy jockeys are up.
 

Horsenberg

Yearling
interesting, what technology have you built the software in?

have you back tested your weightings? if so over what sort of time frame/size of dataset?
I haven't built all the software. The ratings themselves are imported from proprietary software that I already subscribe to, into into an open source SQL database that I have configured on one of my Linux PC's for the purpose of adjusting the ratings and then recalculating the rankings. The stats for bias go back 5 years in order to make sure I have a decent sample size but they don't take into account moving the running rails or changes to drainage systems and the like. You can only do so much to try to maintain some kind of accuracy. The problem with back testing is that it can only be done on a day by day basis. I can't just press a button and get the whole five years results off in one run. That's one of the reasons as to why it's more of an experiment than a tried and tested method.
 
Very good, Chesham Chesham .

Also,

Betway Conditions Stakes (All-Weather Championships Fast-Track Qualifier) 5f​


  • (4yo+, 5f, Class 2, 5 runners)
  • Winner £10,468 2nd £4,912 3rd £2,454 4th £1,228 5th £612
  • Going: Standard / Slow
  • Surface: AllWeather

Weighed In:​


  • Winning time: 0m 58.95s
  • Off time: 13:32:49


Full Result​



PosDistHorseTrainerAgeWeightJockeySP
1st (2) 5 Venturous (IRE) T D Barron99-0 Connor Beasley 25/1
Chased leaders early, dropped to last but in touch after 1f, waiting for room 2f out, switched right from under 2f out and in the clear entering final 1f, quickened to challenge well inside final furlong and soon led, going away at line, readily
 

pawras

Mare
I haven't built all the software. The ratings themselves are imported from proprietary software that I already subscribe to, into into an open source SQL database that I have configured on one of my Linux PC's for the purpose of adjusting the ratings and then recalculating the rankings. The stats for bias go back 5 years in order to make sure I have a decent sample size but they don't take into account moving the running rails or changes to drainage systems and the like. You can only do so much to try to maintain some kind of accuracy. The problem with back testing is that it can only be done on a day by day basis. I can't just press a button and get the whole five years results off in one run. That's one of the reasons as to why it's more of an experiment than a tried and tested method.

If on the day of the race the weightings etc can change according to non runners etc etc in the decs but at close to off they are set and you do your calcs, I would have thought after the event the variables are then fixed and ergo the race can be shelved with all this info for adhoc back testing as and when required.
 

pete

Dam
Do we think Newcastle favours front-runners?
For Newcastle you generally want one that can be strong up the hill to the line. You need a horse that can stay on well at the distance it is running over. Long stride, a horse that takes a while to get into top gear is fine.

Lingfield you need one that has a good turn of foot, shorter stride, quickly accelerate from the final turn.

At Lingfield it helps to be towards the front as long as the early pace has not been too strong. If they have gone strong early, something will generally pick them off late as they get tired.

At Newcastle I personally love a closer up the hill, but if you have one that generally gets a mile, that is dropped in to 7f race, it's possible to wind the horse up early and go for the wire a few from home and hold to the line.

The pace does matter at Newcastle , but moreso in terms of today's race and opposition.
 

Outlander

Gelding
The pace does matter at Newcastle , but moreso in terms of today's race and opposition.
This is the nail on the head for me to be honest, I wouldn‘t care if say at one course over 7f for example 45% of races are won by prominent runners and only 25% won by hold up horses, if there was a race there with 5 mad front runners all battling for the lead you would want to on one out the back . I think overall pace analysis is race specific and even then rarely course specific, you see them win from the front and the back at all courses depending on the specific pace in individual races, I think there can be days when maybe because of conditions and maybe draw biases at the course itself can favour front runners, I think of some days in the summer at Lingfield Turf or even Windsor basically it has been who can lead on the rail wins. But they mess around so much with watering and rail movements now that a golden highway for front runners one day can be moved 5 metres in the next day into the swamp where runners were flailing at the previous meeting but giving punters the illusion it’s still the same rail they are running on.
The stats are probably favouring front runners at Newcastle because it’s a massive open space with a lot of small field races with slow paces where the front runner can dictate and quicken, but the very next race there could be a 15 runner handicap with a strong pace and that’s not going to give any advantage to the front runners no matter what the stats of previous races tell you.Just think there is limited worth in catch all stats about front runners at a course, but then I’ve never paid it any attention, maybe if I did I would pick more winners. I remember 25 years ago when I went to York races quite often I would actively look for horses who would be handy and have a chance of grabbing the far rail in the straight, now they treat the far rail like it’s a sinkhole and wouldn’t be seen dead anywhere near it. They have randomised most of the little biases that existed now and will do anything to confuse punters. Any little edge the punter could work out they will swamp it with water, move a rail etc to ‘correct‘ it before it starts costing the bookies.
 
Thanks to all above for the useful and interesting posts!
H Horsenberg , pawras pawras, Chesham Chesham, O Outlander, and pete pete.

I feel that the actual specifics of the race cannot be known entirely till the thing is over: this,regardless of all that went before, or, comes after.
Bit like a boxing fight or the like: it's a one-off, and all the gym-work, training, intended plans, can be knocked awry by one lucky punch. :D

I suppose I'm the type of gambler that looks for the lucky punch; mostly it feels like it ain't never going to come, but, ....

Without some kind of time-bend, there ain't never going to be a video of future events that matches exact actual occurrence.
Sure, there are guesses at the likely future, and, some are more accurate than others.

Speaking with guys who've scored a winning try in an important match, I find that several didn't even know or recall what actually took place.
"It just happened", they said.

Maybe that's why I'm a gambler and will never get anywhere.
Or, will I? :)

As an aside, I remember on the heinous btf forum ( before I got banned) I made a £100 bet that johnson would be PM:
I won the bet, I lost the bet, and finally, I won the bet.
That was the time of cameron, may, gove ( stabbed johnson in the back), and finally, eventually, johnson.

Anybody see the trend in that could easily fool me: all I went on was what an old Cotswold farmer told me at a car-boot sale in Witney ( PM's constituency).
Now, how scientific was that?
 

Horsenberg

Yearling
If on the day of the race the weightings etc can change according to non runners etc etc in the decs but at close to off they are set and you do your calcs, I would have thought after the event the variables are then fixed and ergo the race can be shelved with all this info for adhoc back testing as and when required.
That is possible but I'm not a professional coder and I don't do this for a living. It's taken yonks just to get this far. Trying to turn it into HRB isn't going to happen over night. Also, I didn't expect to come up with something that would bankrupt the bookies at my first attempt. The original Idea was to attempt to profile the kind of horse that was best suited to today's race conditions using the variables I have chosen and comparing them against the attributes of horses that have already been successful. Think of it in terms of Timeform's TRW rating system only trying to do it for more than just the one variable.

I have to be honest and admit that when I first sat down and decided upon which variables to use I didn't realise that including the number of runners would have this effect until I started using it. My first thought was to just take the NOR's variable out but then I changed my mind on the basis that if the dynamics of the race can change by the effects of removing runners then this could be an interesting angle if only because no one else is doing it.

It could be that there's a modest amount of success, it could be a total disaster, that's why I'm posting it in the 'Systems Testing' section. It scored around 46 points last week but there was that big win at Wolves I mentioned earlier in the thread so I'm just going to leave it ticking over doing what it's doing for now.
 

Horsenberg

Yearling
Just following on from my previous post as again there's not a lot of action today but TBH that is pleasing me. A quick scan through the past couple of weeks has revealed that all the winners so far were in the better quality race category, the lowest so far being class 4. The big win at Wolves was a class 3. It's too early to say I'm knocking out class 5's and 6's for obvious reasons but the fact that they don't get many bets I like as there aren't many horses in the lower grade races that have outstanding attributes ratings wise and the odd ones that do are normally backed off the boards anyway. Today being a Monday there isn't many better class races to go at anyway so I'm happy that it hasn't put up much to go at.

As for nuances, no computer based analytical program I know of can take the subtleties of a complex sport like horse racing into account and I'm not saying that for a moment that I've succeeded in doing something no one else can but a little perspective is needed as a lot of punters on here I notice use HRB, Flatstats etc etc and I don't hear them complaining about it. Computers can be great tools for finding angles and ways in to a bet but the final decision as to when to back them is always down to the user.
 
Last edited:

Chesham

Sire
Just following on from my previous post as again there's not a lot of action today but TBH that is pleasing me. A quick scan through the past couple of weeks has revealed that all the winners so far were in the better quality race category, the lowest so far being class 4. The big win at Wolves was a class 3. It's too early to say I'm knocking out class 5's and 6's for obvious reasons but the fact that they don't get many bets I like as there aren't many horses in the lower grade races that have outstanding attributes ratings wise and the odd ones that do are normally backed off the boards anyway. Today being a Monday there isn't many better class races to go at anyway so I'm happy that it hasn't put up much to go at.

As for nuances, no computer based analytical program I know of can take the subtleties of a complex sport like horse racing into account and I'm not saying that for a moment that I've succeeded in doing something no one else can but a little perspective is needed as a lot of punters on here I notice use HRB, Flatstats etc etc and I don't hear them complaining about it. Computers can be great tools for finding angles and ways in to a bet but the final decision as to when to back them is always down to the user.
Bill Benter managed it at the Hong Kong race track. He was failing until he fed in the Tote Betting and then made millions

More difficult here as we don’t have a Tote monopoly and small amounts are fed into tote pools in the U.K.

See this article about Benter The Gambler Who Cracked the Horse-Racing Code
 

Outlander

Gelding
When the rebates were removed - I believe they packed it in ? could be wrong its while since I looked at the publicity surrounding them
Yes no one alive is going to beat any tote rake, he was clever enough to get the loss down to a small enough percentage so that he could take advantage of overly generous rebates. He also somehow was allowed to put HK$millions and tickets into the tote system something the average punter couldn’t , then you can wait for all the dead millions in the triple trio rollovers and buy up most of the combinations, the HK tote simply took away his advantage so the cash cow stopped.
 

markfinn

Sire
Yes no one alive is going to beat any tote rake, he was clever enough to get the loss down to a small enough percentage so that he could take advantage of overly generous rebates. He also somehow was allowed to put HK$millions and tickets into the tote system something the average punter couldn’t , then you can wait for all the dead millions in the triple trio rollovers and buy up most of the combinations, the HK tote simply took away his advantage so the cash cow stopped.
Why were they getting rebates in the first place ? anyone know
 

Horsenberg

Yearling
H Horsenberg Mark Littlewood has a AI software package called MysportsAI. I know he has a Pace feature that can be used to model if needed along with other criteria

see
I'm gonna check this out thanks for posting. It's early days yet as I keep saying but if it proves the basic theory to be sound, fine tuning by improvement can only bring benefits I would have thought.
 

Outlander

Gelding
Why were they getting rebates in the first place ? anyone know
Rebates are common for high volume players in tote systems, I know for a fact that U.K. tote has in the very recent past and probably still does give rebates.
Betner virtually had is own personal ATM in his office the machines to bet into the HK tote in massive volumes, there is no way he could beat the tote rake but was just being handed over punters money like candy in rebates.
One guy think his name is Zeljko R….. brought the Tasmanian tote to the brink because they gave him so much rebates he was virtually taking every bit of profit they made. Clever people right place at the right time taking advantage of totalisers being run by people with much less intelligence than themselves, the rebates were too big , the volume from one customer was too big, they completely manipulated the system , basically their skill was being mathematically light years ahead of the basic idiots running the totes who just saw volume , volume, volume .
 
Top