Systematic's Ratings System/Strategy

[Systematic]

Hi everybody. Been using an idea I had for rating horses in small fields. It is fairly new, only thought of it earlier this year, its a cross between a system and a strategy. Basically I noticed how some horses with certain form lines in small fields kept winning. They had some sort of form in relation to two form pointers. First they were in the first 4 at least once in their last 3 races. Secondly they have shown some ability in at least one of their last three races. Horses meeting these two points are then rated using a method that has nothing to do with form figures, weights, speed figures or any of the usual stuff. All qualifiers get a basic 100 points and then get extra points for achivements in any of their last three races. Next I deduct points according to thier last three races and one point if they are odds on in todays race. This leaves me with the ratings for the horses. I then make a choice from the top two rated horses in the race. Not yet found a consistent way to pick a clear top rated and second top rated when there are joint top rated horses, but I am working on it. Will put the system ratings on here from today and see if anyone can come up with a suggestion or two for splitting those joint top rated horses. Not sure if any of the meetings will be abandoned due to the downpour, but here are the ratings for today. Sunday 26th November Newbury 14:05 Denman 103, Snakebite 100 Leicester 15:00 Novacella 100, Little Venus 99, Lojo 96 Fontwell 13:15 Pablo Du Charmil 100, Penzance 99, Royal Shakespeare 88 Fontwell 13:45 Gods Token 102, Kawagino 100, Dusky Lord 99, Hawadeth 99, Ichi Beau 99, Fait Le Jojo 88 Systematic

[alkarkar]

Re: Systematic's Ratings System/Strategy Good luck Systematic.:ok What do you meen by "they have shown some ability in ..." , how do you calculate ability?

[Trilobite]

Re: Systematic's Ratings System/Strategy I run the cards through my software, computing various algorithms i have implemented. One of the things i have set is the easiest to work out, and from your selections above i get pretty much the same order as you. Maybe just a coincidence though ? Its quite simple, you add the1st, 2nd, and 3rd figures from the horse profile @ horses.sportinglife.com and calculate the win/place % from the runs. And just list them in order.

[Systematic]

Re: Systematic's Ratings System/Strategy

Good luck Systematic.:ok What do you meen by "they have shown some ability in ..." , how do you calculate ability?

Thanks alkarkar. 'Ability' from my viewpoint is pretty much subjective in as much as it can change day to day or even race to race. Mostly I look at horses' performances in their last two or three races, checking to see if it turned in a good run against better horses or beat better class horses. To me this shows some degree of ability to win races. Othertimes I look for horses that have not won for some time but have earned a place and are up in the weights, which shows some achievement even if only a little. I find this rise often points out an improving horse that has shown some modicum of ability. These are my interpretations of ability and you might not agree with them, tell me yours and maybe we can come up with a much better approach.

[Systematic]

Re: Systematic's Ratings System/Strategy

I run the cards through my software, computing various algorithms i have implemented. One of the things i have set is the easiest to work out, and from your selections above i get pretty much the same order as you. Maybe just a coincidence though ? Its quite simple, you add the1st, 2nd, and 3rd figures from the horse profile @ horses.sportinglife.com and calculate the win/place % from the runs. And just list them in order.

Thanks for the imput Trilobite, but my ratings are no where near that complicatedIm a bit of math thicky really. I do all the calculations in head with the help of me grade 3 CSE in maths. Its just adding and subtracting of one or two digit numbers from the basic award of 100 points to each horse. Interesting that you get almost the same ratings from your calculations. Maybe we could compare the two approaches?

[Trilobite]

Re: Systematic's Ratings System/Strategy Its simple. I just ran the 1st @ http://horses.sportinglife.com/Racecards through my software as an example, and it has these as the top % ( Newbury 12:30 ) Mountain Approach - 75% Bonchester Bridge - 67% Blackbriery Thyne (IRE) - 60% Lady Wilde (IRE) - 33% Lady Bling Bling - 20% Chilly Milly - 12% Click the horse name to get its profile up, from the "vital stats" part add the 1st,2nd,3rd position figures together, divide that by the figure for Runs, and Times that by 100. That gives you the overall win/place % (i round it up) I haven't really tested this over any period, as i think its just going to pick the favs (lowest price) out using just this as a way of picking any.

[Systematic]

Re: Systematic's Ratings System/Strategy Monday 27^th November Folkestone 3:00…Gray’s Eulogy 99, Touch Of Fate 95, Jimmy Tennis 94, Magic Of Sydney 91, Optomistic Alfie 88

Yesterday…4 Bets, 2 Winners, Won 2-11 & Won 1-1 Stakes 4 Returns 3.18 Loss 0.82 Running Toatl -0.82

[Systematic]

Re: Systematic's Ratings System/Strategy Tuesday 28th November Lingfield 1:20 Hurricane Spirit 98, Onenightinlisbon 94, Teasing 84 Lingfield 2:50 Salient 100, Solid Rock 97 Hereford 2:10 Lawey Des Ormeaux 99, Ballyboyle 98, Fair Question 93 Hereford 3:10 Theocritus 98, Before The Mast 97, Nenuphar Collonges 96, Called To The Bar 96, Vigaruex Yesterday 1 Bets, 0 Winners Stakes 1 Returns 0 Loss 1 All Bets...Won 1-1, L, Won 2-11, L, L 5 Bets, 2 Winners Running Total -1.82