My "Inform Racing" System - Mk II
- Thread starter MartinK
- Start date
Frontrunner
Stallion
MartinK
Gelding
Catterick 2.00 Another Emotion, 11-2 ... u/r
Leicester 2.40 Tidal Watch, 15-2 ... u/r
Newcastle 4.00 Notation, 5-1 ... 8th
Newcastle 4.30 Madeeh, 9-2 ... 1st 7-2 ... 4.5 pts profit
Newcastle 5.30 The Trader, 11-2 ... 5th
Newcastle 6.00 Silver Dust, 5-1 ... 2nd
Day 2: loss 0.5 pts
Running total: profit 10 pts
Leicester 2.40 Tidal Watch, 15-2 ... u/r
Newcastle 4.00 Notation, 5-1 ... 8th
Newcastle 4.30 Madeeh, 9-2 ... 1st 7-2 ... 4.5 pts profit
Newcastle 5.30 The Trader, 11-2 ... 5th
Newcastle 6.00 Silver Dust, 5-1 ... 2nd
Day 2: loss 0.5 pts
Running total: profit 10 pts
newcomer and all interested:The questions you asked seem to be eternal. I don't believe we ever find out the reasons "why" to the same extent as we discover "what" works and what doesn't.
This is particularly true in systems.
In my case, I'm only an old chap off the side of the road, but, I've studied and paid to study racing systems for decades. Well over a thousand of the goddam things!
Since Christmas, I'm not afraid to admit that I've lost hundreds of pounds on live experimentation with hare-brained schemes I've thought up from various data.
And what did I find?
Well, if I'd stuck rigidly to a simple method involving Inform Racing's top -rated - similar to Martin K's trial - I'd be a few quid up by now.
Don't ask me why, 'cos I don't know!
I thought I knew better.It could be a genetic weakness in myself; for instance, I'm so contrary, that I refused to get a new hip for ten years or more, preferring to hobble about in agony, rather than get the thing done with just a couple of days in hospital.
I thought I knew better than the specialists. Tried all manner of crazy diets and exercises: used to go to the gym twice a week and dancing three times a week. I was useless and it was painful.
How stupid I was! The simple X-ray was the correct indicator all along. I went to private clinics go leor to get all sorts of differing opinions. All a waste of time and money.
The old NHS X-ray was correct - as was the surgeon.
In conclusion, all I can offer is do whatever works.
I mean, I don't even know why just one favourite in three wins in the long-run.
This recurring fact seems to be universal in both horse and dog racing. I could never find out why, but the fact remains, decade after decade.
Maybe there ain't no perfect answers in life?
Good luck to all!
greyabbey
Colt
Thanks
S
Sandhog! One very friendly disagreement from me: we use data to look at what worked to try and see if repeating it will work again. If we don't have an explanation as to why something worked, it's either coincidence (1) or some other reason we haven't accounted for (2). The first reason will eventually dwindle away through chance, and the second one will only work again if we've included it in ignorance. Without understanding the reason, merely that something worked is little to no predictor of it working again.
I cannot argue with your hypothesis,
newcomer.
Can you explain to me why only one favourite out of three wins? Why does the ratio hold good over and over?
Btw, I understand the rudiments of chance and probability and the heads or tails of coin tossing. Do you have a time limit (minimum/maximum) for "eventually"?
Like you said, this is a very interesting subject, imo. I've been looking for the answers for ages.
And, sorry,@ MartinK, for messing up your thread.
Some folks on these forums get the right hump if anybody dares to write anything but "well done!".
Please say if you would prefer no chit-chat on your thread. I know we could always start another thread.
newcomer.Can you explain to me why only one favourite out of three wins? Why does the ratio hold good over and over?
Btw, I understand the rudiments of chance and probability and the heads or tails of coin tossing. Do you have a time limit (minimum/maximum) for "eventually"?
Like you said, this is a very interesting subject, imo. I've been looking for the answers for ages.
And, sorry,@ MartinK, for messing up your thread.
Some folks on these forums get the right hump if anybody dares to write anything but "well done!".
Please say if you would prefer no chit-chat on your thread. I know we could always start another thread.
greyabbey
Colt
Thanks
MartinK. Nicely done at Wincanton today.
S Sandhog, I don't have much of an answer on favourites, other than people revolve around reasonable prospects. It's more than a 1/3 in NH racing though.
I think the coin toss is a reasonable example to use. If somebody had 10 years worth of data showing that heads landed 55/45, and they then gave me reasonable odds against on tails, I'd take that bet everytime. The data is obviously coincidental, and I've very good reason to doubt it will continue in the long run.
Chris from HRB did a service to members in the new year, showing a dozen or so systems he'd put together, based on analysis of his racing data. All of them had (IIRC) four criteria, >20% strike rate and a reasonable profit both to SP and BSP over a long period. He made them primarily so members could pick out interesting ideas to improve their own, and very explicitly wasn't claiming for their future effectiveness. But they're interesting because some made sense (eg, trainers do better on certain surfaces or in certain regions), but some were probably just coincidence (eg horses running specifically in the afternoon on the flat carrying a 6lb penalty do very well - 22% - compared to the evening - minus 5%).
My stupidly long-winded way of saying... no time limit. If there's not a reason for something, it's either coincidence or we've no control over it being right. Which isn't a strong system.
MartinK. Nicely done at Wincanton today.S Sandhog, I don't have much of an answer on favourites, other than people revolve around reasonable prospects. It's more than a 1/3 in NH racing though.
I think the coin toss is a reasonable example to use. If somebody had 10 years worth of data showing that heads landed 55/45, and they then gave me reasonable odds against on tails, I'd take that bet everytime. The data is obviously coincidental, and I've very good reason to doubt it will continue in the long run.
Chris from HRB did a service to members in the new year, showing a dozen or so systems he'd put together, based on analysis of his racing data. All of them had (IIRC) four criteria, >20% strike rate and a reasonable profit both to SP and BSP over a long period. He made them primarily so members could pick out interesting ideas to improve their own, and very explicitly wasn't claiming for their future effectiveness. But they're interesting because some made sense (eg, trainers do better on certain surfaces or in certain regions), but some were probably just coincidence (eg horses running specifically in the afternoon on the flat carrying a 6lb penalty do very well - 22% - compared to the evening - minus 5%).
My stupidly long-winded way of saying... no time limit. If there's not a reason for something, it's either coincidence or we've no control over it being right. Which isn't a strong system.
pete
Sire
I have no stats to back this up, but ... my guess would be that the average SP of the favorite in a race would be around 3/1 and therefore they will win around 30% of races. (taking into account a little for the overround.
If you look at horses that start 10/1, they will win just less than 10% of the time.
Even money shots should win just under 50% of races.
The average price of the favorite will determine the strike rate, so if the average SP of the favorite across all races is around 3/1, then they can be expected to win around 1/3rd of all races ... ?
Very good again,
MartinK !
And, many thanks to
newcomer and
pete.
pete, it seems, from what you say, that price (SP) explains a lot, if not everything. I have trouble accepting this myself. Perhaps I don't understand it.
I would go along with the view that price is a defensive mechanism used by bookmakers to limit their liabilities. Dunno whether it really reflects actual chance and probability.
Fascinating subject, isn't it?
In relation to this and MartinK's system, my guess and prediction is that the bigger priced selections will be key to profit, in the final analysis.
We'll see, but, who decides the cut-off point?
I'm running out of time, so tend to look for quick results. Not a good idea, btw.
There are no short cuts to success, unless we use the work of others plus get lucky.
MartinK !And, many thanks to
newcomer and
pete.
pete, it seems, from what you say, that price (SP) explains a lot, if not everything. I have trouble accepting this myself. Perhaps I don't understand it.I would go along with the view that price is a defensive mechanism used by bookmakers to limit their liabilities. Dunno whether it really reflects actual chance and probability.
Fascinating subject, isn't it?
In relation to this and MartinK's system, my guess and prediction is that the bigger priced selections will be key to profit, in the final analysis.
We'll see, but, who decides the cut-off point?
I'm running out of time, so tend to look for quick results. Not a good idea, btw.
There are no short cuts to success, unless we use the work of others plus get lucky.
pete
Sire
Sorry, I should have course said 2/1 = 33%.
These stats do actually hold up when you run them through something like HRB.
Even money shots win at a 50% clip
2/1 Shots win at a 33% clip
3/1 Shots win at a 25% clip
The fact that a horse is favorite or not does not matter.
The price of a horse will more or less equal its chance of winning.
The average odds of a favorite will therefore equal its chance of winning ...
(Somewhere between 2/1 and 5/2 appears to be the average price of a favorite, therefore win percentage of favorites is around 30%)
MartinK
Gelding
Ludlow 1.00 Flashing Glance, 11-2 ... u/r
Southwell 2.15 Gulliver, 13-2 ... 8th
Southwell 4.30 A Touch Of Luck, 11-4 ... 5th
Taunton 3.05 Dentley De Mee, 3-1 ... 2nd
Taunton 4.42 Luckofthedraw, 3-1 ... 4th
Chelmsford City 7.20 Arij, 7-2 ... 2nd
Day 4: loss 6 pts
March total: profit 9.5 pts
Southwell 2.15 Gulliver, 13-2 ... 8th
Southwell 4.30 A Touch Of Luck, 11-4 ... 5th
Taunton 3.05 Dentley De Mee, 3-1 ... 2nd
Taunton 4.42 Luckofthedraw, 3-1 ... 4th
Chelmsford City 7.20 Arij, 7-2 ... 2nd
Day 4: loss 6 pts
March total: profit 9.5 pts
