On one of my "observatory" selection processes, it keeps count of each race that passed through filters: bet_race_wait_for_results type of real time process, but set to test bets. ( not yet satisfied with strike rate/Loss streak and drawn-down)

No matter how I set the filters, no matter how I set the Min or Max Fav. to pass on to the next part of a selection process to determine if it is a bet_race, No matter if it's greys or horse races,

after 7954 races processed, (Greys included, I don't do Trotts on this particular method), there were 2703 Wins where the First Favorite won.

2703/7954
33.98 % for 1st

22.28 % for first fav to come 2nd
15.60 % for "" "" "" 3rd

---,
On same selection method, older than the one above which uses less refinements.
2463/8009
30.75% for 1st

20.85% for first fav to come 2nd
16.59% "" "" "" 3rd

----,

Suggestions and Opinions most welcomed.

Not trying to be funny here, but you found and posted a well known fact of racing, ie. favs win about 30% of all races.

In what respect do you invite suggestions?
We don't know your criteria/filters but obviously its selections come close to being favs, hence the result you got.

Can you be clearer?

Fair question BD, and not offended the slightest. All good.

It's not from a book I read what I have stated, it's "manufactured" from the ground up, everything I have learnt in Excel, the this forum and elsewhere, just stating my findings, 30%. ~ Favs.

The thing is, when one "manufactures" their own stats. or whatever, one can go way back right to the very source of their respective data and process.

Hence I added "trivia" in the title bar, yeah it's not a big deal, these fav stats percent are not the only stats. I've collected so far.

There is 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th percents on offer to compare, maybe.