• 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

My "Inform Racing" System - Mk II

Southwell 1.15 Faustinovick, 11-4 ... 2nd
Southwell 3.50 Leylak, 3-1 ... 5th
Wolverhampton 5.10 Ventura Lightning, 7-1 ... 6th

Day 22: loss 3 pts
Running total: loss 9.42 pts
 
Wetherby 2.15 Snougar, 7-2 ... 2nd
Newcastle 4.40 Busy Street, 6-1 ... 3rd
Newcastle 6.40 Revolutionise, 17-2 ... 8th

Day 23: loss 3 pts
Running total: loss 12.42 pts
 
Southwell 2.05 Ornate, 4-1
Southwell 2.40 Drew Breeze, 7-2
Southwell 3.15 Red Stripes, 5-1
Doncaster 2.20 The Late Legend, 7-2
Doncaster 3.30 Beau Bay, 14-1
Kempton 6.15 Herculean, 9-1
 
Southwell 2.05 Ornate, 4-1 ... 4th
Southwell 2.40 Drew Breeze, 7-2 ... 7th
Southwell 3.15 Red Stripes, 5-1 ... 4th
Doncaster 2.20 The Late Legend, 7-2 ... 6th
Doncaster 3.30 Beau Bay, 14-1 ... 1st 8-1 ... 14 pts profit
Kempton 6.15 Herculean, 9-1 ... 11th

Day 24: profit 9 pts
Running total: loss 3.42 pts
 
THUR 25 FEB
Huntingdon 2.05 Hills Of Connemara, 8-1
Huntingdon 2.35 Lots Of Luck, 7-1
Chepstow 2.27 Supreme Escape, 4-1
Chepstow 3.27 Arian, 7-2
Southwell 7.30 False ID, 33-1
Southwell 8.30 Tyger Bay, 2-1
 
Huntingdon 2.05 Hills Of Connemara, 8-1 ... p/u
Huntingdon 2.35 Lots Of Luck, 7-1 ... 3rd
Chepstow 2.27 Supreme Escape, 4-1 ... 5th
Chepstow 3.27 Arian, 7-2 ... 3rd
Southwell 7.30 False ID, 33-1 ... n/r
Southwell 8.30 Tyger Bay, 2-1 ... 8th

Day 25: loss 5 pts
Running total: loss 8.42 pts
 
FRI 26 FEB
Lingfield 1.10 Mister Blue, 5-1
Lingfield 4.05 The Warrior, 3-1
Lingfield 4.35 Pop Dancer, 9-2
Exeter 2.35 Pink Legend, 9-2
Wolverhampton 6.15 Dodgy Bob, 16-1
Wolverhampton 6.45 Gonzaga, 7-2
 
Lingfield 1.10 Mister Blue, 5-1 ... 11th
Lingfield 4.05 The Warrior, 3-1 ... 3rd
Lingfield 4.35 Pop Dancer, 9-2 ... 5th
Exeter 2.35 Pink Legend, 9-2 ... 4th
Wolverhampton 6.15 Dodgy Bob, 16-1 ... 9th
Wolverhampton 6.45 Gonzaga, 7-2 ... 2nd

Day 26: loss 6 pts
Running total: loss 14.42 pts
 
SAT 27 FEB
Lingfield 11.45 Kendergarten Kop, 5-1
Lingfield 2.40 Johnny Drama, 7-1
Kempton 4.10 My Way, 9-2
Newcastle 4.25 Ascot De Bruyere, 7-2
Chelmsford City 6.00 Stevie McKeane, 7-2
 
Lingfield 11.45 Kendergarten Kop, 5-1 ... 5th
Lingfield 2.40 Johnny Drama, 7-1 ... 5th
Kempton 4.10 My Way, 9-2 ... 1st 4-1 ... 4.5 pts profit
Newcastle 4.25 Ascot De Bruyere, 7-2 ... p/u
Chelmsford City 6.00 Stevie McKeane, 7-2 ... 2nd

Day 267: profit 0.5 pts
Running total: loss 13.92 pts
 
Fontwell 2.10 Cherokee Bill, 13-2 ... 5th
Hereford 3.50 Overawed, 9-2 ... n/r

Day 28: loss 1 pt
Running total: loss 14.92 pts for FEB.

An awful performance this month. No idea why - perhaps lousy weather and going?
Anyway, I've tested as many elements of my system as I can think of on the System Builder, and discovered the following:

Most profitable SPs are between 3-1 and 7-1, so I'll now keep selections within that band.
I use Oddschecker (2 bookies not owned by the same group must offer the odds I quote), and obviously early odds aren't SPs. However, I notice that early prices/SPs rise/fall against each other in roughly equal measure, so "swings and roundabouts" should serve us in the long run, if I keep early prices from 3-1 to 7-1.

Hurdle races produce so little profit that I'll now discard them.
Heavy going produces a loss, so that will obviously be eliminated.
Class 5 races have produced a loss in every year from 2015 to 2020, so they're out too.

Let's see how we go for March!
 
Best of luck for March, MartinK MartinK. I don't know the intricacies of the system, but I'm forever wary of backfitting systems without good reasons, so just some observations that you're obviously free to ignore.

Cutting out heavy ground could make sense - I often remove the extremes of a criteria.

But is there a reason why Class 5s should be less profitable than others? If the extreme low grade (class 6) is profitable and the middle ground (class 3/4) is profitable, what logic is there to say class 5 isn't? Some winners might be around the corner there.

Same question about hurdles. I think it's reasonable for systems to distinguish between codes, but if it works on the flat and works in chases, why wouldn't it work for hurdles?

My final comment is an obvious and general observation: good systems and approaches have losing runs, and there's every chance you're changing it just as your existing February losing system would pick some winners/your new March system would hit a bad run.

As I say I don't know your system so there may be good reason to cut class 5s and hurdles, but hopefully some helpful things to think about.
 
newcomer said:
Best of luck for March, MartinK MartinK. I don't know the intricacies of the system, but I'm forever wary of backfitting systems without good reasons, so just some observations that you're obviously free to ignore.

Cutting out heavy ground could make sense - I often remove the extremes of a criteria.

But is there a reason why Class 5s should be less profitable than others? If the extreme low grade (class 6) is profitable and the middle ground (class 3/4) is profitable, what logic is there to say class 5 isn't? Some winners might be around the corner there.

Same question about hurdles. I think it's reasonable for systems to distinguish between codes, but if it works on the flat and works in chases, why wouldn't it work for hurdles?

My final comment is an obvious and general observation: good systems and approaches have losing runs, and there's every chance you're changing it just as your existing February losing system would pick some winners/your new March system would hit a bad run.

As I say I don't know your system so there may be good reason to cut class 5s and hurdles, but hopefully some helpful things to think about.
Click to expand...
Hi greyabbey newcomer

As my system is solely based on Inform Racing ratings, it's simple to use their System Builder to run "what-if" scenarios. I simply input my system "rules" (horse must be clear top-rated, must be this, mustn't be that, etc), set the years to/from (in my case 2015 - 2020) and click "apply rules".

A points-profit/loss figure appears, along with S/R, LLR, and other useful data. In the case of Class 5 races, they made a loss in every one of the 6 years, whereas C1, C2, C3, C4 and C6 all made good profits. I don't know why, and can't even guess.

Figures were : C1, C2, C3, C4 and C6 made 645.01 pts profit in the 6 years to BSP, whereas C5 made 327.27 pts loss. There were 5,675 C5 bets, so the loss is no small-sample fluke.

Also, I don't know why hurdles races were only slightly profitable -- maybe hurdles horses are generally less experienced than chasers or flat performers. Similarly I don't know why heavy going creates a loss -- perhaps it's because there are far fewer contests on heavy than anything else, so data is comparatively sparse. All I know is that, in the 6 years, there were 461 system contests on heavy, with a loss of 18.75 pts.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the reply MartinK MartinK and I genuinely wish you the best with it.
Even the biggest sample in the world can produce a coincidental result. Without a reason, I think it's worth digging into a bit more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top