- This topic has 167 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
Salisbury
2.50 Yazamaan 111, CRY PRESTO 110, Princeton 101.
3.20 FRETWORK 117.
3.50 PUYA 109, Stormy Monday 106, Meditation 105.
4.20 Wid 122, Vital Statistics 121, SUKI BEAR 117, Russian Rosie 117.
4.50 WUNDERWOOD 129, Collier Hill 123, Midas Way 121.
Redcar
3.40 Very Far 107, COLTON 104, Ryedale Ovation 102, Choreography 102.
last of 3 11/2, 2nd 5/6f, unpl 4/1, unpl 16/1, won 1/1, 3rd 5/1.
Stakes 6pts Loss 4pts
Running Total
Stakes 88pts Loss 12.85pts
(Edited by Artemis at 9:30 am on Sep. 1, 2006)
Haydock
3.35 TAGULA SUNRISE 121, DIZZY DREAMER 118, <br>Zomerlust 117
Kempton
2.10 Maslak 102, Monzante 101, FEVER 100.
4.50 Acrobatic 105, CHANGING WIND 105,Warsaw Pact 101.
unpl 4/1, NR, unpl 8/1, unpl
Stakes 3pts Loss 3pts
Running total
Stakes 91pts Loss 15.85pts
Well, that’s about it for the time being. I’m winding down for this flat season, which has been rather disappointing compared to recent years. I’ll still be doing the ratings and looking for value, but it gets much harder now that the (usually) profitable months of summer are behind us. We are entering the transitional period when the going fluctuates, there are large numbers of unexposed horses moving into handicaps, the jumps get going in earnest, and the AW meetings become more numerous. In short, finding winners gets harder. If I haven’t made any profit in the good months of high summer, I cannot expect to make it now.<br>If there are any decent looking bets pinpointed by the ratings, I will post them on the Daily Lays and Plays section. I’m still looking at the Market Correction Factor and will come back to it later in the year when I’ve researched it further.
(Edited by Artemis at 6:36 pm on Sep. 1, 2006)
Good stuff Artemis – I’ll look forward to it returning next summer – bigger and better!
Do you work any systems on the jumps?
Just the ratings, cormack, which can be compiled using the same criteria as for flat racing. Horses moving from flat to jumps, bumpers to hurdles, and hurdles to chases make the ratings less reliable. If you stick to the better class handicaps and graded races, the results are reasonable, although making a profit in this sphere on the back of ratings is difficult when fences and hurdles are put in the way. The AW is worth looking at after the turn of the year once the form has settled down, but this year with Kempton in the mix, I’m not sure what will happen. I’ve asked the RP to include speed ratings from turf in AW races and AW in turf races. They agree in principle, but the logistics of doing it makes it unlikely for a while.
I’m sure I will be back with more on the ratings before too long.
Having just read this through, I find it a thorougly interesting thread. It is a very similar system I think to the one I would apply, ie. taking into account the jockey, the ground, etc
But Artemis still finished down. Artemis may have been up last year using a similar system, but surely the point of ratings is to consistently throw up winners, and be in profit year after year?
It’s a shame I don’t really have the time to compile my own ratings, as i’d be very interested to do it for myself. Maybe around Christmas time. But thanks for the thread Artemis, as I said, very interesting.
jackane,
Thanks for your appreciative comments.
I have a fairly realistic approach to expecting long term profits using my ratings method. I tend to average about 25 selections a week over a calender year – can be over 40 in midsummer – at average odds of about 5/1, so my profit target of 5 to 10 percent on turnover is the best that can be expected.
During the period I posted selections, I made a loss, but in the long run I am still in front, although the margin this year is slightly negative.
Luckily, I have quite a bit of leisure time in which to compile the ratings.They don’t take as long as might be supposed once you get into it. It is quite an absorbing hobby, much more interesting than sodoku or crosswords, although I am quite partial to the latter. It could be costly in terms of papers and form books, not to mention your time(if you could be doing useful work elsewhere) if your ratings are not profitable.
If you wanted to get a living out of it, the figures would put just about everyone off (except someone who has just had a large windfall). If you wanted to make £30K net profit a year(not unreasonable), you would need to be turning over in excess of £20,000 a week or about £800 on each bet. A bank of at least £100,000 would be required, which you MUST be able to afford to lose.
If there any ‘Angels’ out there in cyberland with the spare dough to put at risk, give me a call – seriously.
I have been conducting trials using the concept of the market correction factor(MCF).
Over the next few weeks, I will be posting examples of this method in action. Most of the races reviewed will be based on the market prices obtained from Oddschecker at about 9.30am. This is for practical reasons. The optimum time to apply the MCF is about 10 minutes before the off, or as close to the off as possible whilst allowing time to do the final estimation of prices.
The MCF points are as shown in the earlier post and are equal to the price at the moment( in terms of percentage probability) divided by 4.
These points are added directly to the ratings and a ’tissue’ is formed from comparing the total points for each horse. Any horse that has a tissue price better than its present quoted price (i.e. looks a value bet) is a possible recommendation.
I think that this might be a better approach to the jumps than just using the ratings because I’ve noticed that the market may be a better guide in the absence of data I use to compile ratings.
It should be interesting, at least.
(Edited by Artemis at 7:37 pm on Oct. 24, 2006)
Cheltenham 3.55
Rating/MCF/ Total
HOT WELD(143/2/145) looks very good value at around 10/1 against the probable fav, Darby Wall (140/5/145)
Nottingham 4.20
PARNASSIAN (104/5/109) is clear top-rated and looks a very worthy favourite at around 4/1.
Both unplaced
Stakes 2pts Loss 2pts
(Edited by Artemis at 9:52 am on Oct. 26, 2006)
Stratford 3.30
YES MY LORD (135/9/144) is short at 7/4, but still seems to be reasonable value, being 6pts clear of MR Dow Jones(134/4/138).
LINGFIELD
3.50 EMILY BRONTE (123/3/126), Bouboulina (120/4/124), Highway to Glory (118/4/122), Pure Illusion (116/5/121).
EMILY BRONTE looks the bet at around 8/1.
4.20<br>Lake Toya (118/7/125), TI ADORA (121/2/123), High Heel Sneakers (119/4/123), Cresta Gold (119/3/122).
TI ADORA at 8/1.
4.50
ROYAL OATH(120/7/127), MR LAMBROS (120/3/123), Orchard Supreme (120/2/122), Easy Air (116/5/121), Malcheek 119/2/121).
ROYAL OATH(11/4) is 4pts ahead, but MR LAMBROS(8/1) is on a par, so I’d recommend both in this race.
A Couple of seconds, the others unplaced.
stakes 5pts Loss 5pts
Running Total<br>Stakes 7pts Loss 7pts
(Edited by Artemis at 9:35 am on Oct. 27, 2006)
Newmarket
3.15 TAU CETI
4.25 AT THE MONEY
These two were the value bets when I looked earlier this morning. Both were better prices then, but even after shortening up, they both still represent value according to the ratings+MCF comparisons.
unplaced and 3rd
Stakes 2pts Loss 2pts
Running Total
Stakes 9pts Loss 9pts
(Edited by Artemis at 10:08 am on Oct. 28, 2006)
Newmarket
2.05 EMPIRE DAY is well clear on ratings and I thought he would be much shorter than around 9/4.
2.35 EASY LOVER
3.45 Close between RAIN STOPS PLAY and PLUM PUDDING, so I’m taking both.
Wetherby
2.20 KINBURN
3.25 TAKE THE STAND
! winner at 4/1, a couple of places, the rest nowhere.
Stakes 6pts Loss 1pt
Running Total
Stakes 15pts Loss 10pts
(Edited by Artemis at 5:54 pm on Oct. 28, 2006)
Catterick 3.00
BOLD MARC looks like going off at around 5/2 and just about represents the value on my figures.
TRINCULO is well clear on ratings and 2/1 looks a very good price.
EXETER
2.40 CHILLING PLACE is the Pricewise selection, which is bound to shorten his price somewhat, but could still be a fair bet at around 5/1.
3.40 NOTANOTHERDONKEY at 10/3.
1 winner at 3/1, an unexpectedly generous price, and a few seconds, plus a hard luck story. In short, the usual. Level on the day.
(Edited by Artemis at 9:44 am on Nov. 1, 2006)
Huntingdon
2.20 SPINAROUND at  11/2
Kempton
5.20 DIANE’S CHOICE  at 9/1
Chepstow
3.55  WAGES at 7/2
Nottingham
4.15  TROUBLE MOUNTAIN at 8/1
<br>A couple of places and the other two thereabouts, but no cigar today.
Stakes 4pts Loss 4pts
Running Total
Stakes 23pts Loss 14pts
(Edited by Artemis at 9:50 am on Nov. 2, 2006)
Interesting Artemis,
If you want an excel spread sheet to work out your market correction figures drop me an e-mail and I’ll knock you one up.
Dave
Thanks Dave,
It’ all a bit experimental at the moment. I haven’t really settled on the MCF figures I’m using – I think they may be too big – but I’ll get in touch anyway because the spreadsheet can be changed if necessary.
Today, favourites seem to have the call, which isn’t really my preference, but here they are:
Haydock<br>2.10 MANNERS at 5/2<br>2.45 ABROGANTE at Evens
Wolverhampton<br>5.50 CONSONANT at around 8/1
Towcester<br>2.55 AFTER EIGHT at 7/2<br>1 winner at 11/8, a second and two nowhere.
Stakes 4pts Loss 1.63pts
Running Total
Stakes 27pts Loss 15.63 pts<br>
(Edited by Artemis at 7:03 pm on Nov. 2, 2006)
I’ve been reviewing the figures I use for the MCF(Market Correction Factor). 1 ratings point =4% probability seems to work very well when you are making your tissue:
a rating of 105 at 1/1 indicates a price of 9/4 for a horse rated 100
a rating of 105 at 5/2 indicates a price of 12/1 for a horse rated 100
However, this doesn’t seem to work when you take a horse’s current price and convert it back into a rating. It seems to bias your choice quite heavily towards the shorter priced horses. Perhaps the range of my ratings isn’t broad enough to fit the algorithm I am trying to apply.
It isn’t the poor results of the last few weeks that make me feel uneasy. The horses I would normally select are being overtaken by horses at much shorter prices. As I’ve had reasonable success without applying any MCF, I’m of the opinion that something is not right with the presnt calculation.
For the time being, I’m going back to using ratings sans MCF, although logically I still feel strongly that the market plays a significant role.
The selections for the next few weeks are purely ratings based. I’m also looking at a range of abilities rather than sticking to horses rated 100+, and concentrating on just one meeting a day.
MUSSELBURGH
1.00 HOW’S SHE CUTTING 95, Alugat 93
1.30 Risque Heights 88, Greyfriars Abbey 85
2.00 KYLE OF LOCHALSH 88, Virginia Rose 88, Sudden Impulse 87
2.30 Hohlethelonely 97, Hurricane Thomas 96, Salaasa 93
3.00 Piety 104, Tilt 102, MIRJAN 101, Luna Landing 100
3.30 LYNDALEE 104, Ptarmigan Ridge 102, Bond Boy 102
4.00 SILVERTOWN 95, Millagros 93, Thewhirlingdervish 92.
Selections in UPPER CASE.
Only one winner, How’s She Cutting at 4/1. The other selections were unplaced. Level on the day.
(Edited by Artemis at 6:46 pm on Nov. 3, 2006)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.