Systems

[jackster109]

Sorry to babble on about systems, I have a few more questions about system research and when people decide to impliment them.

Im using 8 years worth of data from Adrian Masseys website.

I found a system that has thrown up a 65pt profit but has only had 105 selections over the years but has had 54 wins. Is a system that throws up only 10 - 20 selections a year worth doing? I notice that Keiths system throw up on average a 2-3 a day. On average how many selections should I be looking for a day or year?

Another thing is what is the worst losing run that I should be content with I've looked at systems with a worst run of 14 and still shown profit.

Also if you have a system which researched the selection going off SP Faveourite or Second Fave how would you go about making your selections. Do you use the Racing Post (or any other racecard Betting FC) or wait until the first show of betting?

Is there any alternative to RSB where I can do further research or any programmes on the market that would make it easy to find my qualifiers?

I think I have covered most of my questions here but if there is any further advice to system research that people think may be useful to me I would be very grateful.


Cheers

Jackster :thumbs

[Win2Win]

On average how many selections should I be looking for a day or year?
Depends on if your selection process is automated or not. If not, low number of qualifiers....you tend to forget to check on a daily basis.


Another thing is what is the worst losing run that I should be content with
Down to personal choice. If you cover all SR from 15% to 60%, with a decent number of systems, then losing runs are not an issue.

You don't research with SP, as it is not something you know till after the race. Use F/c prices.

RSB, Raceform, and a few others.

[jackster109]

Cheers Keith

[jackster109]

another question guys

say I have a system/method eg. odds-on beaten fave (hc-hurdles + hc-chases only)

now should I keep a seperate bank for the hurdles and chases or just use one?

would it be the same if it was the system/method worked on hurdles only, would it be 2 seperate banks (hc and non-hc) or just 1 bank?

cheers

jackster:thumbs

[mathare]

say I have a system/method eg. odds-on beaten fave (hc-hurdles + hc-chases only)

now should I keep a seperate bank for the hurdles and chases or just use one?

would it be the same if it was the system/method worked on hurdles only, would it be 2 seperate banks (hc and non-hc) or just 1 bank?
I would work on 1 bank for 1 system. If you have a system for odds-on BFs in handicap hurdles and chases that sounds to me like one system, unless the stats are wildly different for hurldles and chases. You may wish to monitor hurdles and chases separately (or back-test the system on hurdles and chases separately) and see if there is any appreciable difference. If there is then maybe you have two separate systems but initially it sounds like one system so one bank.

Similarly, unless the system performs very differently for h'cap and non-h'cap hurdles (your other example) it's one bank. Otherwise you could have a bank for every different variable/combination of variables. Would you separate out left- and right-handed tracks? Colts, geldings, mares and fillies - that's 4 banks there isn't it?

Set the system rules to include what they need to include and then set one bank up for that one system. If you change a rule it's a change of system so a change of bank.

[jackster109]

mathare thanks

i've learn't more of this forum in a few days than i ever did in school:wink