- This topic has 60 replies, 26 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Stow Posted on 12:23 pm on Nov. 14, 2006<br>It’s well worth learning about Access databases
<br>.. true Stow .. I find excel far better though, so long as you know how to do Pivot Tables properly.
That’s the sort of collaboration I think works best, learning off others, rather than trying to simply pick winners.
Quote: from Alexander on 5:53 pm on Nov. 13, 2006[br] Do you recall that competition on this forum awhile back, we were in competition with Pricewise’s selections. I was wanting someone on the forum to beat him hands down as most of us are form student. I didn’t want to see his tips out performing us !<br>__________________
<br>Alexander
Did Pricewise outperform tRf selections?
Last year I emailed the Racing Post asking why Pricewise didn’t appear in their Naps table and whether he was profitable long term. This was when Pricewise was on a winning run started by Sergeant Cecil. The Post wrote back to say that he was significantly ahead of the game but couldn’t back it up with figures!!!
I like the idea of a analysing 1 or 2 races each week.
Quote: from cormack15 on 12:36 pm on Nov. 14, 2006[br]I really like Alexander’s idea of having a race put up on the forum each week for mass dissection.
I’ll look forward to that. Don’t know how much I’ll bring to the table. Maybe I’ll just make the tea!
It is extremely difficult for people to come to the table with different ideas and then one having to take precedence over another.
It is entirely possible that in any given race – half the field are slightly over priced and half the field slightly under-priced. As long as you are consistantly selecting the over-priced ones – in theory any of them will do over a long period of time.
If after hours and hours of study I come up with one of the over-priced horses, and similarly someone else does hours of study and comes up with one of the other over-priced runners – who is to say who is right and who is wrong?
Mug Punter,
Pricewise is significantly ahead of the game according to the table on Relayline’s website.
Since Jan 2000
No of bets 1586<br>Winners 420(strike rate 26%)<br>Profit at advised stakes and odds<br> 760.53(48% on stakes)
Profit at SP 272.86(17%)
In reality, the best prices obtainable are below the advised prices but greater than SP. The Pricewise selections usually shorten up from the early shows.
This is tipping of a very high standard indeed and bears comparison with any tipping line that I am aware of. It is no wonder that the betting market is influenced more by Pricewise than any other tipster.
Interesting stats – makes me wonder why punters pay tipping lines for selections when it seems that they can do just as well by following Pricewise.<br>
The thing about sharing selections is you have to implicitly trust the other person to back their selections with any confidence. That is something I don’t think I could do, or certainly not if I didn’t look at the race myself and at least see what angle they are coming from.
Good idea about putting a race up Corm – I felt like a fool trying to start a thread on a race that got about 8 responses!
dave jay, only 64K records in Excel. I would of thought that the functionality of Access is superior.<br>One of my databases has 10 years of Flat form in it, speed ratings etc There are tables in my database with more than a quarter of a million records.
Pooling our efforts doesn’t have to be a battle of wills, in which there is a victor who subjugates the others.
Each member would take a particular field of study.
E.g. Key Trends<br>    Speed Ratings<br>    Horse profiling<br>    Breeding<br>    Systems<br>    etc…………………
In this way the picture will hopefully become alot clearer.<br>Decisions can then be formed from a position of strength.
I think it may well be a non-runner.
Another walk over for Ego Boy.
(Edited by carlisle at 4:34 pm on Nov. 15, 2006)
Stow .. you are right of course. I have my stuff set up to use a work book for Flat and one for NH. On each book I have an input sheet, another sheet which carries out calculations and then an output sheet which is basically a pivot table.
My personal record keeping is a bit ropey and I have a few old workbooks that I might put into Access. But I prefer starting with a clean book every season.
As for data, I buy mine and use Prospector type methods to analyse. Once I have a system or method that I am happy with, I stop researching and just bet away, until it all comes grinding to a halt, or I get bored. I’m in a betting mode at the minute, having had a pretty poor flat season, for one reason or another.
Is the database you are talking about for research or do you use it to select bets from ?
- Total Posts 17716
Quote: from carlisle on 2:28 pm on Nov. 15, 2006[br]Pooling our efforts doesn’t have to be a battle of wills, in which there is a victor who subjugates the others.
Each member would take a particular field of study.
E.g. Key Trends<br>    Speed Ratings<br>    Horse profiling<br>    Breeding<br>    Systems<br>    etc…………………
In this way the picture will hopefully become alot clearer.<br>Decisions can then be formed from a position of strength.
I think it may well be a non-runner.
Another walk over for Ego Boy.
(Edited by carlisle at 4:34 pm on Nov. 15, 2006)<br>
Carlisle <br>I don’t know who said "The road to hell is paved with good intentions" but, according to the above list, I can see it being most prophetic for your little venture. <br>To have any consensus at all, you must at least begin with some agreement on the important criteria, and frankly the above list would, imo, be nowhere near the place to start. I sincerely doubt that anyone else on here would have the same priorities either.:o <br> I presume, that as you tend to focus on the market, the object is to initially identify value?<br> If that is the case, though it isn’t a route I would choose, then surely your first need is to identify aspects which impact upon sp’s or betting forecasts,(eg. recent form, ratings, trainer and jockey, suitably  of course, distance, going etc.) and proceed to identify strengths within those areas?<br>All this, of course, could only become possible after gaining enough interest from prospective participants, which in turn probably means you having open up more on what you have to offer, and even then, you are only at the beginning!<br>Sorry if all the above sounds a little negative, but if you really do intend to make a silk purse, it is best not to start with a sow’s ear!
Hi reet hard
thanks for your intelligent comments.  Although you are slightly misreading me.  My examples was in no way a list of priorities.  I was just trying to open things out a bit, and glimpse other study methods.  (& scare away the wool merchants)
E.g. Key Trends <br>    Speed Ratings <br>    Horse profiling <br>    Breeding <br>    Systems <br>    etc…………………
I totally agree with you that Going, Distance, Course…… and the search for value should form the backbone of any such project.
I can produce overall ratings that can be converted into prices. There should be 2 people doing this role in their own way, in order to give a sense of balance.  Plenty of room for worthwhile discussion there……
The other areas of study will greatly help the intepretation/decision making process.
I am not trying to hide anything, just ask away.
Talks about talks is going to be very important.
byefrom<br>carlisle
"Good means=Good ends"<br>
(Edited by carlisle at 6:17 pm on Nov. 16, 2006)
Each member would take a particular field of study.
E.g. Key Trends <br> Speed Ratings <br> Horse profiling <br> Breeding <br> Systems <br> etc…………………
mmmm too many cooks
Selection by commitee!
Fact is, what attracts most people to punting is that you make your own final decisions
Also, someone has to weigh up the factors ( and how many of those are there? 20? 100?)and furthermore often the seemingly smallest element (a trainer comment perhaps) can wipe out every other positive
Its the weighing up which is the crucial element and frankly thats often down to ones own prejudices or in a way, abstract thinking..
I think I’m with clivex on this.
I think horseracing selection is a private and personal thing and if you select by commitee it is always going to involve compromise.
I’m sure some of you over the years have bought a couple of newspapers and totalled the ratings that those papers carried and arrived at a selection. The winners all turn out to be obvious and very short and the long-priced one’s thrown up by one or other of the ratings are missed.
Colin
Just a quick comment.
There was an excellent consensus in the All Weather thread down below yesterday with Dancing Mystery resulting in a tasty 6/1 winner.
Specialism, (Emily Weber with sprint handicaps in the Post is an excellent example), is the way forward imo. Racing is such a vast academic field, a punter cannot hope to cover it all in reliable detail.
I’d like a facility whereby If I intended to have a large punt, then I could put it up and have the judges in that speciality tell me the objective drawbacks. That would be really useful. But I’m looking forward to the new initiative. 😉
Hi Maxilon 5
thanks for your constructive comments. I think we can both<br>see the upside of pooling resources.
It need only be a theoretical exercise, no pressure.
Individuals can pursue a common interest and a personal one too. However just as in life there are leaders and followers.
I think a few leaders should get together and form a winning team.
Members will have to justify their place in the enterprise.  As a whole it must be more than the sum of it’s parts.
Whistling in the wind.
byefrom<br>carlisle
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.