January 12, 2005 at 04:25 #4064
I’m alway’s interested in the opinion’s of other TRF member’s(even Ian Davies):biggrin:and i am fed up of reading all the cheltenham related thread’s
But it is form and form analysis that interest me most,as we know there are many different way’s to analyse form,personally all my form analysis is based around Speed and Speedfigures
also to get the debate going collateral form ain’t worth a carrot IMO
What form analysis tool do you find is the most successful ?
(Edited by empty wallet at 4:48 am on Jan. 12, 2005)January 12, 2005 at 06:02 #94625
If what you say is true,that the world and his wife are using timefigures,why while using timefigures, do i seem able to find winner’s at decent prices <br>Is that not down to the world and his wife using the same set of timefigures, say topspeed for exampleJanuary 12, 2005 at 07:26 #94626dave jayMember
- Total Posts 3386
I’d agree with the varied approach, value’s moving target. I use different approaches at different time of the year and for different race types.
I think it’s also important to know why you are varying your methods and not just skip from one to the other in a random, guessy way.<br>:biggrin:January 12, 2005 at 07:48 #94628
Hi Dave jay,how are you
Can you clarify, what those different method’s areJanuary 12, 2005 at 09:59 #94634cormack15Keymaster
- Total Posts 8798
I agree that isolating a particular factor which has relevance to a horses chance (e.g. speed figures, trainerform,etc, etc) can provide an edge but also that the edge can sometimes disappear for a variety of reasons (e.g. in the case of speed figures they are much more widely analysed and used these days).
I have,over the years, used a variety of systematic approaches which have concentrated on individual aspects which were not being factored into the price.
Some of these were fairly standard tools such as speed figures and some not so, the relevance of the number of days since a horses last run which was a useful ally before the significance of the so called ‘bounce’ factor was more generally recognised. In all these cases the edge disappeared over time suggesting that the factor was now being allowed for in the price by the bookmakers or, as I now believe was the case the majority of the time, they were no more than statistical anomalies which, as statistical anomalies almost invariably do, reverted to norm (which is why backfitting fiends often come unstuck).
These days I rely on a balanced approach where I am spending a long time analysing each race in fair detail using a host of factors to establish a clear outline of the relative percentage chance each horse has (in other words I make up my own tissue). It is not easy to find an edge however and my betting, apart from trading, is highly selective as a result.
E/W – I’d ask whether, although you are finding big priced winners using speed figures, are you making a long term profit and, if so, what level of profit (in percentage terms against turnover)?January 12, 2005 at 10:00 #94635
I agree 100% with the darkknight’s last post.
Adopt a multi-dimensional approach to analysis and seek to price each horse up as accurately as possible independently of what everyone else is doing.
At present, I find that consideration of sectional timing leads to the biggest discrepancies between my own prices and the public’s.January 12, 2005 at 10:04 #94636
Maybe i’ve been misunderstood,when i say speedfigures are the basis of my analysis,weight,distance,draw,trainer form etc,etc are taken into account
Personally,i would like to go into more detail,but this being a public forum i am reluctant to do so
Maybe,Daylight can create a member’s only area,which i would be more than willing to pass on info to other interested forumitesJanuary 12, 2005 at 10:06 #94637
It is interesting that you regard "ratings" and "collateral form" separately, EW.
From this, I take it that you regard ratings as involving factors other than a simple "Horse A beat Horse B last time but Horse B is weighted to turn the tables" approach. You would be quite right to do so.
Ratings—sophisticated ones, or so I hope—provide the foundations of my analysis, but there is much more to consider besides.January 12, 2005 at 10:18 #94638
as i have stated on a couple of thread’s’the rating’s given to horse’s which have given weight in hcp’s over the jump’s in particularl,which are then used and compared to rating’s given to a horse which has never run in a hcp,trouble’s me :biggrin:
as you can see in my first post,colateral form is not worth a carrot
(Edited by empty wallet at 10:20 am on Jan. 12, 2005)January 12, 2005 at 10:27 #94639
Some trend’s are of use to the punterJanuary 12, 2005 at 11:00 #94640
Again I agree 100% with TDK.
While trends are not entirely useless (well not quite), it is horses who win, or lose, races, not trends.
Trends attempt to apply generalisations where specifics (ability of horse, suitability of horse to conditions, draw, trainer-form etc etc) are available and far, far, more appropriate.
Trends are, at best, a short-cut when you have little time. But they tend to be those short-cuts where you end up lost, with a flat tyre and a knackered suspension.
(Edited by Prufrock at 12:01 pm on Jan. 12, 2005)January 12, 2005 at 11:16 #94641
here’s a course trend
southwell 0-23 4+hcp 0-11
<br>horse went of fav yesterday,finished well beatenJanuary 12, 2005 at 11:25 #94642dave jayMember
- Total Posts 3386
TDK, when is trend a trend and not a statistic?
For example the draw bias at Chester.January 12, 2005 at 11:34 #94643ACR1Member
- Total Posts 64
I think you are being a bit hard on trends analysis. A lot of the time the problem with this type of analysis is the conclusions it’s users make rather than the approach itself.
The only reliable way to use this type of analysis is to know the true percentages and winning expectations (or profit/loss figures) for each trend you are investigating.
For instance, say 8yo’s and older have never won a particular h’cap hurdle in the period you are looking at. That tells you absolutely nothing unless you know how many 8yo’s+ ran and how many could have been expected to win (or their P+L figures). When you this, then you can start to come to some conclusions.
Anyway, I’m a firm believer that every type of successful punter is an "analyser of trends" whetether they’d call it that themselves or not.January 12, 2005 at 11:39 #94644thewobblerMember
- Total Posts 1
I obviously don’t do as much research into my punting as many of you people.
But I have found with NH, especially with regards to chasing, a very simple method that often pays dividends with good priced e/w bets.
1) Does the horse tend to normally complete races?<br>2) Has the horse proven he can win at the distance?<br>3) Is the horse in good form i.e. either winning or being relatively close to the winner in recent outings?
If in need of another delimiter:<br>4) Has the horse shown well over the course before?
Or, in other words, I don’t need to look much further than the RP’s postdata.
Is this really too simplistic an approach?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.