OK, so, my latest sys has the following:

Test period - 2 years
Total Bets - 5859 (about 55 per week)
Total Winners - 1504 (25.7%)
Total Outlay - $5859 ($1 on each theoretical)
Total Collect - $6276
Average dividend - $4.20
POT = +7.1%

This is purely using Super TAB odds, so potential for improvement there with the corporates etc.

Of those 1504 winners, 73 of them were $10 or longer (slightly less than 5% of them). The longest priced winner was a 100/1 pop, the second highest priced winner was $33. There were two $33 winners, one $25 winner, seven winners about $20 or so, the rest were less than $17.

So, if you take out the highest TEN dividends, it still shows a 2% profit on turnover, on Super TAB odds.

However, there were also 90 winners priced shorter than $2.0, to show the flip side of the coin.

So, good people, what do we think of the viability and standup-edness of these stats?

Duritz, my opinion is, it looks good, though for calculations I would cross out the 2 highest priced winners and deduct 2 losers, then re work out your POT.

My experience has been that the figures are automatically improved using Maxi-divi (obviously) but I find that if the selection is quoted fav in the pre-post , betting at top fluc is better than maxi-divi.

Anyway good luck with it

That's great, thanks PP.

- PP using that method, deducting two highest winners and eliminating two losers, POT is 4.9%, again that's on STAB.

Duriz, one thing I forget to say is, many good judges consider that the acid test is to use 1 years past results (as most of us do) but then dry run with another 1 years ACTUAL results; b4 actually putting the money down. Personally I do suffer with impatience, and I contend that the future results now, will later be past, (famous words of somebody there hee hee)

Seriously though 5% POT (supertab) is ************ good , consider that it is generally considered that your returns will improve by at least 10% using maxi-divi and best fluc, so that would give you a return of around $6445 and a POT of 10% (based on your original figures)

If the results are GENUINE, then that is the best system ever seen by me in 25 years plus.

Based on the average win divvy, your profit comes from over 100 horses - SPECTACULAR.

The longshots have truly boosted the profit, but taking out five of them, you are still in profit.

2 years, 5,000 plus bets, TAB profits - I'm sceptical that this is not retrofitted.

Tell me it isn't, and tell me where I send my cheque

__________________
RaceCensus - powerful system testing software.
Now with over 412,000 Metropolitan, Provincial and Country races!
http://www.propun.com.au/horse_raci...ng_systems.html
*RaceCensus now updated to 31/12/2024
Video overview of RaceCensus here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W821YP_b0Pg

Nah it ain't retrofitted Chrome - but I don't want your cheque!

The results, broken down by year, were -

2004 (calendar year)

bets - 2705
wins - 688 (s/r 25.4%)
out - 2705
coll - 2849
pot - +5.3%
ave div - $4.10

2005

bets - 3154
wins - 816 (s/r 25.9%)
out - 3154
coll - 3427
pot - +8.6%
ave div - $4.20

The SR looks to be there.
Try reducing the number of bets by deleting any that are less than $3.20 pre-post market.
If one goes over the figures I think one will find that the horses listed at $3.10 pre-post & less would not have shown a profit , so may as well ditch them, this will of course lower ones SR but the POT will be greater.

Cheers.

__________________
Cheers.

Yeah good ideas - when I get time next day or two I'll re-run with that stipulation, post the results here.

Crash - you'd like it because it uses ratings, ie it's an automated handicapping program, using the ratings, you then take the top pick and if it passes a couple of "filter" rules, it's a bet. That's why there's heaps of bets at varying odds, every race is a possible bet. (check that, every race without any first starters in it)