David Punshon
Yearling
Just wondering has anybody successfully incorporated LTO Odds To Runner Ratio in to their ratings
I find that the way i use HRB, the odds to runner stat is not one that fits in on a regular basis for some reason.I haven't done this but I have the feeling that you would get more bang for your buck if you concentrated on the trainer angle
Profit yes, but the strike rate will depend on how long you are prepared to wait for the next win. No one knows when or how long the next wining or losing streak will last. AE and CHI i believe are a guide for this situation.You always have to remember that its about profit and not s/r.
The other day I pondered what would I get if I combined the best three Owners with the best three Trainers with the best three Jockeys for the last couple of flat years.
Although not within the HRB Database , mlmrob introduced to the Class Sheets the Odds to Runners Ratio for the Winner of LTO race, useful if the horse in question may not have the lowest Ratio but has come form a race where the winner did have a low Odds/Runners RatioAs ArkRoyal and David Punshon have shown odds to runner ratio improves strike rate. My question is has the improvement come about because the odds to runner ratio even though not intended is now acting as a back fitted stat.
Even though at some point the odds to runner ratio has to be brought in, otherwise how else can it be tested for different angles. But should other angles be applied at the same time.
I think the rule of thumb would be the more stats included the more back fitted the system would be. However how do we find the dividing line between reliable and back fitted not reliable, how do we find the dividing line.
If anyone has a answer please be gentle with the answer as this could be a very complicated thing to understand.
Arkle
the odds to runner ratio even though not intended is now acting as a back fitted stat.