LeMale

15.40 Punchestown 
Pigeon House 16/1 b365 

730 Chelms Tazara 12/1 ew bet365

5.50 Chelmsford - Candle Of Dubai = E.way 10/1 W.Hills

Three By Two
16.50 Punchestown
33/1 Paddy Power
Each way

A low key start. I suspect the leader won't be there for long !

Strewth! This was all right!

Yep that's why i said Monday to give you time to scrutinise. Apology accepted Clarkey, we have to make allowances for age.

You are right, apologies to @Zilzalian, to be fair I haven't taken my meds yet !

I don’t want to play devils advocate but I think he means he’d supply the data on the Monday, ahead of the meeting.
I’ll certainly take a butchers even if I feel like I might have been damned by faint praise by being described as having a “different mind”! 

Has Royal Ascot added an extra day or does @Zilzalian need to take his / her / their medication

Tell you what @harry_rag How about i supply you with all the raw speed data for 2yo on the Monday of Royal Ascot and see how a different mind might interpret it? I think there are 3 2yo group races races.

You should be on tour with that sense o humour. National Express tour to the Outer f'in Hebrides...

To be fair sexual politics is a minefield. Any notion of a mild rebuke for sexism was somewhat blown out of the water by his sudden identification as being non-binary!

I'm surprised the moderator's allowed that, very sexist
I bet you still like Yorkie bars !

Yeah but binary event option bets are for girls surely? 🤣😁😂💋

I think it’s easier to try and calculate fair odds for binary events (over/under, player to score or not) than horse races or anything with a big field. The ratings angle seems more appropriate for them. You also need less data to be confident about the validity when there’s just two possible outcomes at relatively short odds.

I've tried to calculate the fair odds from my systems but invariably it throws up a lot of the outsiders as value bets
For the 2000 guineas probably every horse apart from the favourite would be a value bet

I think the best thing about systems is throwing up a quick short list if you don't have the time or inclination to spend ages looking at the form for a days racing.......... use your system to get 3 or 4 'posibles' in a field and then look at those horses in more depth
Similar with 'Trends' ......... a quick way to eliminate a lot of runners in big fields
As long there's some logic behind the system or the trends then it's fair enough........ you have to accept that if you're quickly eliminating runners without due study then you're going to miss some winners !
 
 

I hope that I am transparent in my systems, I always state my profit or loss in the various threads I post on.
By your definition I am not smart because I will take the outcome of my system and bet on it regardless. So called negatives can in fact be positives if they are over compensated for in the betting.
You are right though, most systems fail. I always test mine on a years worth of data to see if it still makes a profit. I will then calculate the p-value to ensure that the results are not driven by chance. Even then I will bet small amounts until I have a sufficient bank for that system.

Biggest problem with system creators is that they become so entrenched in "their baby" that they blind themselves to all other considerations, they shout hallelujah when they get a winner (confirmation bias) but are silent/ignore if a loser. The smart people are those that no matter how much work they have put in to their system they are still able to reason around it taking many other variables into account to form a reasoned judgement. For me my Speed ratings are a starting point and i then see how many negatives i can find in the top rated and then make an informed decision which goes something like this  A. go with the Speed figure. B. don't have a bet. or C. change my mind and bet another horse. On top of this i would consider what stakes each option is worth so If we take A. for example i would ask myself how strong is this number in relation to the others in the field and that would create further options like A. max stake B. Half/part stake. C. win or EW. or D. not a great option in my opinion (although i have on occasion) back more than one in the race. The big thing with me is if my horse doesn't come up to my expectations i don't just shrug it off i really want to know why even if there is no obvious reason and maybe simply got my assessment wrong. Tonight i top rated a french horse in the 730 at Chelmsford it got beat into second at 20/1 beaten by the favourite. Even though the Fav was on a good roll my conclusion was that Tazara was drawn in the widest stall was bumped at the start and it used up a lot of energy getting around the field to lead and i would hazard a guess that it would have been a very close call given a better draw.

Not the legendary Van Der Wheil method !
I think it was based on adding the last 3 finishing positions together and taking the first 5 in the betting, I I looked at it once but the results weren't much better than random selection.
As for each way betting, I only bet each way in handicaps of 16 runners + or where extra places are available. If you do the maths on a theoretical 16 runner race where all the horses are at odds of 15/1 you would breakeven backing all the horses to win but a return of 1.5 points if you bet each way.

I suppose a system is something where "computer says yes/no" and you bet regardless of how good or bad the bet strikes you. A "method" might be where you consider the system rating alongside other variables and make an informed choice. The use of speed ratings seems to fall more into the latter category. Compare the output to the prices on offer and make an informed choice on how many selections to back and how to combine them. 
From a goalscorer perspective I have a simple system that only involves two variables. 3 x 25 =  75 = bet, no other considerations involved (where 3 is the fixed odds price). 3 x 24 = 72 = a possible bet if I have time to look at the players stats. The former is very much a pure system bet whereas I record the latter as a "studied" bet which you could definitely say uses a consistent method. The studied bets have the better ROI this year though it was the other way round last year.
I've had many systems or methods that have worked well for a while over the years but fallen away over time. That will be for a variety of reasons; sometimes there was no real edge as the approach was based on too small a data sample, sometimes the bookies or other punters cotton on and the prices adjust, sometimes the market gets dropped because the firm was taking a hammering. Sometimes the value is still there like low hanging fruit but the b*****d farmer bans you from the orchard! 

A long time ago (decades, probably) there was a vogue amongst gamblers for being dismissive of 'systems' and then saying that what they did was to use 'methods' for selection. In the end I suppose you pay your money and make your choice, but the difference between the teeth of that fine comb of definition escaped me then, and still does. Each gambler has their own likes and dislikes - and their taboos. My personal taboo is never to back each way - it only takes a moment to calculate that the 1/5 offered on a 33/1 shot that finishes 2nd or 3rd is not 6.6/1, but 3.3/1 - and you are still trying to find a 33/1 shot to place.
One of the 'methods' that was popular for a while at least used current form as a basis - look for horses that put up improved speed figures in a better race LTO - 'better' was defined by value of race e.g improved figure in 30k race  LTO, now running in 20k race. It was a starting point, and was useful. It had some success then, and is probably a good yardstick still. At the time it was known as the Van Der Wheil method - apparently named after a gambler.

Well done all winners this month and unlucky losers and those in the money. Thanks as always to @MCLARKE for all his hard work. 

Well done all winners this month and unlucky losers and those in the money. Thanks as always to @MCLARKE for all his hard work.