Mathematical Systems?

[darkman]

A Month or two ago Nick Mordin in his racing column referred to computer programs based on numbers.Is he referring to systems using speed figures or ratings?,or something else?.Can anybody enlighten me?.

[mathare]

A Month or two ago Nick Mordin in his racing column referred to computer programs based on numbers.Is he referring to systems using speed figures or ratings?,or something else?.Can anybody enlighten me?.I think the numbers he is talking about are 1s and 0s

[Win2Win]

Blimey......I can't count that high .....

[sparkyminer]

A Month or two ago Nick Mordin in his racing column referred to computer programs based on numbers.Is he referring to systems using speed figures or ratings?,or something else?.Can anybody enlighten me?.

8
11
4
15
26
12
9
7
4
1
:D

[bigcumba]

Can anybody enlighten me?.

I think this website might help there

http://www.maharishi.org/

[darkman]

Sparky,just in case you are talking about saturdays race,your using skip code,26-4=20,15+12=27.Straight answer yes or no?.

[mathare]

Sparky,just in case you are talking about saturdays race,your using skip code,26-4=20,15+12=27.Straight answer yes or no?.Err, half past three?

[Win2Win]

30-40 Advantage Mat :doh

[sparkyminer]

Sparky,just in case you are talking about saturdays race,your using skip code,26-4=20,15+12=27.Straight answer yes or no?.

Obviously.
I can see you and I getting on fine mate.:wink:D

[MattR]

Shouldn't this be moved to the surreal section of the forum? :D

[bigcumba]

Shouldn't this be moved to the surreal section of the forum? :D

fish I tell you!

[counterfeit]

I started reading this thread wondering what it was about. I think I then banged my head, got knocked out and woke up in Wonderland having tea with the Mad Hatter. He explained everything to me and now I am in a position to say with all honesty - wtf???

[darkman]

at last, i nearly gave up.How long have you been doing this,?did you get wednesdays *** bit?.I'm trying to do sats Newcastle Plate,i've got 15 years of previous papers, but cant locate last years,still,shouldn't be too much of a problem hopefully!.I take it you got Osbournes horse on Tuesday?.

[bigcumba]

Sparky finds a new best friend :laugh

[bigcumba]

It's a Puuuuppppeeeetttttt

[John]

Well played Sparks. :laugh

How I love this forum. :D

[Win2Win]

Do we shout HOUSE when we've coloured in all the pretty boxes? :)

[MattR]

Sparky,

3+8=11.right?.4.40 hexham. 4-5,23? I think so.3-4-5. 5.15 newbury. paper says horse won.must be right? Where am I?I've lost my mind.9-2-3.stop the bleeding.help.broadsword to danny boy.8.galoshes.4

[mathare]

I think 4 across is caribou

[bigcumba]

I think 4 across is caribou

haven't we had enough rain dear?

[Win2Win]

:thumbs

http://www.spencersonline.com/images/spencers/products/processed/00021667.zoom.a.jpg

[MattR]

Do you have a picture like that of every animal? :laugh

[bigmazey]

This thread. Oh Deer!

[darkman]

Well Sparky are they correct?,personally i think not,I remember somewhere on this site some reference to people with qualifications in quantum physics if thats you all this stuff should be a cakewalk.Obviously some other people know which explains some of the collapse in price of some of the horses.ok where do we go from here,send me your e-mail and i'll send you the Pitman winner,i think it will be better if we use that from here on in.

[John]

Sparky says...

1
4
15
26
12
9
7
4
1

But shouldn't it be...

6
14
34
18
32
14
10
8
2
4

18 + 14 = 32, yes? And 14 - 8 = 6. So 32 - 6 = 26. 26 / 2 = 13... so Triskadekophobia is our main selection. Currently 15/2 on most bookmakers, you can get 10.5 on Betfair if you're quick.

[sparkyminer]

Mea maxima culpa.
:ermmm

[Water Skater]

Excellant thread darkman

I may have missed it . . .
But, are you posting the qualifiers at all ?

[Win2Win]

He has, can't you see them, obvious :ermmm :laugh :helper

[Water Skater]

ahhh I see it now

looks good keep it up :D

[Water Skater]

todays qualifier
Utt 4.55
Kety Star

[darkman]

Okay skat,lets try you,what do you know about skip code?.

[bigcumba]

what do you know about skip code?.

he finished 9th in the Breeders cup Juvenile last year.

[Water Skater]

3yr old colt
won twice as a 2yr old :happyboun

[Water Skater]

they are a data structure which uses a probabilistic algorithm. They use simple algorithms which are very fast and have three important properties: maximum level, current overall level, and probability. :wiggle:

[Water Skater]

came 2nd :geek

[bigcumba]

they are a data structure which uses a probabilistic algorithm. They use simple algorithms which are very fast and have three important properties: maximum level, current overall level, and probability. :wiggle:

Don't encourage him, he'll think you're serious and you'll have a new friend for life :yikes:

[Win2Win]

Sussed it :thumbs

http://www.efunda.com/math/num_integration/images/GChebyshev.gif

[buddhabee]

Are you after silax's job?

[Win2Win]

From Silax's last post, he's only up to this level :)

http://www.universalpreschool.com/images/preschool_math.jpg

[MattR]

I think you'll find this is actually the answer

[sparkyminer]

I think you'll find this is actually the answer

5.
It's a 3-4-5 triangle.

[darkman]

Simple question;does any of your computers when faced with a barrage of numbers,can they when asked to,identify all ways of arriving at a specific number?.

[TheOldhamWhisper]

Simple question;does any of your computers when faced with a barrage of numbers,can they when asked to,identify all ways of arriving at a specific number?.

The simple answer is that if a human could use mathematics to find the answer, a computer could do it (and probably a lot quicker).

[Win2Win]

Much quicker, you try doing binary beeps for SETI manually :)

Phone Hommmmmmmmmmmme.................

[John]

Oh my goodness Keith. Integration. Never again.

[Water Skater]

darkman
The bit thats still eluding me
Is it profitable :doh

[darkman]

God i'll have to do this the hard way.The question i want answered from you computer guys is this.Obviously computers can do things quicker but do they exist and where can i get one from?.I now realise this site is more of a advertising site for your systems that you publicise,[win to win etc].Nothing wrong with that,but me coming on here and talking about my own system may have given you the impression that i was trying to advertise my system,Incorrect if that's the case.My system doesn't do well in ordinary races any more!!! but better in big races.I can only do a fraction of what i want to do.Basically i end up with clusters on a page [ ok skip the jokes bombs etc],for instance Ces at Newmarket afew years ago, started off kept ploughing thru,everything all over the place then 8 hours later one cluster pulled right away from the rest, and then one horse emerged clear of the rest,most unusual,but only one Heroes Fatal,it won at 14-1.It took 10 hours plus the research before.Nowadays its more difficult and more to the point,exhausting,[like typing this!] to work it out and if theres a computer out there that can do it easier and quicker,EVERYONE will benefit.

[Win2Win]

New Paragraph.

This site is here to help folk? It is not an advert, unless you'd like to pay me the monthly running costs which are well over £1000.

It would help if people knew what the hell you are talking about.

[bigcumba]

computers can do things quicker but do they exist and where can i get one from?..

and you're typing this on a banana?

[Win2Win]

:thumbs

http://toastytech.com/guis/bananapicture.jpg

[TheOldhamWhisper]

If you gave us details of what you were trying to find, it would help.

If all you need to do is crunch numbers, the machine you are working on will do fine - you just need to know which software to use (or pay someone to design something bespoke).

Up to now, the only thing you have provided is a series of numbers based on the fact that you don't have time to type the horses' names.

[sparkyminer]

and you're typing this on a banana?

Are they Apple's main rivals?:)

[MattR]

:laugh


I think it would be Apple. I think he's more likely to be in a mac.

[Mavrick]

What is this thread about again? I heard Mordins name mentioned somewhere and then it went a little off track.

[Win2Win]

Einstein started reading it..................then shot himself............

[darkman]

Ok basically you have a series of systems totalling about 100,given the time you can add on more ad infinitum.If you had a 20 runner race for instance you can get the winner 6 which gives you a 70% chance of the picking the winner.you do this about something like 60 times and you end up with a cluster in about 2 places . then you do your system equations that give you winners in 4 selections totalling somewhere in the region of 25.The next day as racing results become known at that track, a more precise idea of the going becomes clearer and you get winner in 4 again plus about 10 key systems that give you winner in 3 or 2.Match them all together and about 4 bets, some times only 2 appear where you have a cluster.The more research you do beforehand [i have no computer skills] the more likely of success.Bigger fields are better because as in 32 runner hunt cup winner in 4 equates to a what 87% probability.Got to go,oh Spanish Don 100-1 3RD choice.

[TheOldhamWhisper]

....If you had a 20 runner race for instance you can get the winner 6 which gives you a 70% chance of the picking the winner...

Let's begin with this sentence, it is gibberish! - what does it mean? - try giving some examples and I might be able to at least understand the basis of what you are trying to say.

[bigcumba]

It's the Darkman Da Vinci Code!

[sparkyminer]

I think what you mean is called 'Iteration'. Computers can do it but if you had the programming skills to make that work, you'd make more from the programming than you would from the horses.:)

[MattR]

Ok, I've read that four times and it's no clearer :doh


Are you saying there are around 100 systems and you run them all on the same race and the horses it throws out as winners most are the ones that are to be bet on?

[plater]

Sounds more like clusters regarding the draw to me, but what do I know:rolleyes:

[darkman]

MattR yes from your reply you are basically correct.As in a court of law one or two pieces of circumstantial evidence doesnt guarantee a conviction, if more and more circumstantial evidence appears,guiilt becomes obvious and the jury convicts on probability alone.If acomputer amasses all data [and my method means that you can keep on adding sytems that give you winner in 3 or 4 etc] the chance of success becomes greater.Some systems common to a particular race fail and are discarded,but some with a 87% success lasted for 6 consequtive years,to be replaced by another thats lasted 4 years, and all i had to do was to change avery small piece of it.Hello Sparky!.Iteration i'm going to look that up,but not sure what you mean as in i would make more money if i could write the program.Are you saying that it would to difficult for aprogramer to do or to expensive? By the way my first choice in the plate got short headed.More research needed!.

[paul183195]

yes, i must admit in my humble opion it reminds of when you get hold of some staticizzzzzzzzzzzzzzz....zzzzzzzzzzzzz....zzzzzzzzzzzzz

[TheOldhamWhisper]

OK, I'm beginning to get the picture but I think the main danger here is over-analysis.

Part of many system variables (and often a key part) is the type of race. If you have 100 systems that use the particular type of race, all well and good but you could probably 'fine tune' by eliminating conflicting systems in the first place. E.G. If one system says '4yo and above' and another says '3yo only', you already know that both cannot be correct and you need to choose whether or not to keep one or the other or eliminate both from the equation.

The problem with doing this is that the 'human factor' then comes into play and the systems becomes a method (based on a choice rather than pure statistics).

I honestly believe that your time would be better spent analysing the systems you have in place and monitoring their progress to decide which individual systems produce good solid profits rather than trying to find/produce the 'perfect' system (which can usually be found just beyond the horizon at the base of a rainbow).

[sparkyminer]

After your last post, I can see now it's not iteration. I think the nearest thing to what you're trying to achieve is RSB. And the full version ain't cheap but you can trial it for nowt.

[Win2Win]

My software runs 100's of systems, some horse may be picked by 60 of them, this does not mean it has a better chance than one system alone that has a 70% SR, and picks a different horse in the race, as statistically the 1 not the 60 will win.

[darkman]

Yes Whisper your point is well taken,and Sparky,i saw your earlier posts when i googled "Iteration". You guys are way ahead of me in computers and math skills.I think i merely stumbled upon something not normally observed by most,as the key to my systems comes from the unusual data that i use.Maybe its a rainman thing,ive in the past tried to show people even the basics of it, they go all foggy[its not that hard].The reason ive been obscure is to protect my systems,for once revealed any programmer could go of with it and leave me out of the loop.I promise to keep you all informed as youve been quite helpful.I will open up athread on the Bunbury and July Cups.Ive seen the fields and their abit of a pig,but lets all give it a go shall we?.The reason we should pool our info is because of what follows.Onthe friday of Royal Ascot i noticed Obe Gold running ,this triggered bells as this horse won the same day as Spanish Don, When trained by Mick Channon.As i fancied his Majestic Roi,i looked to see what else he had, and having acouple of ticks on his Nijoom Dubai backed it for small money.It won,Majestic lost and i didnt do his Championchip Point.A week later i had a conversation with a bookie punter, he revealed that a guy he knew in the know had told him that he had heard a good word for the horse but didnt back it.So there you have two people each with a piece of info that individually amounts to a hunch, but if put together makes a compelling bet.A third person may have come along and volunteered the info that Zabell Tower running that day used to be trained by Channon and a leap of faith involving merely a hunch of course would have produced another winner[14-1].So the benefits of pooling sharing].

[mathare]

I remember somewhere on this site some reference to people with qualifications in quantum physicsOooh, that's me that is. MPhys(Hons) Physics with Theoretical Physics. I studied relativistic quantum mechanics in my fourth year. I do a good sideline in particle physics too.

[buddhabee]

I will open up athread on the Bunbury and July Cups.

God help us. :splapme

[Win2Win]

So Mat, if you could just calculate the quantum mass of each horse, that would be just fine 'n' dandy :)

[mathare]

So Mat, if you could just calculate the quantum mass of each horse, that would be just fine 'n' dandy :)I could do that easily enough but you'd need to allow for the quantum interactions then between the horses, each horse and the jockey, the horses and the track etc. At the end of it you'd end up with probability distributions with huge error bars on. You may as well just post a load of random numbers as tips :wink

[MarcusMel]

Was there an element of Bayesian Probability involved in the idea? Getting data that alters your view of probability of sucess was mentioned eariler and that reminds me of Bayes!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayes'_theorem

[darkman]

Budhabee,please contribute to the debate, or dont read the posts,simple.Bayesian?.Isuppose its something like that,but remember one thing,racing involves human involvement, and like the stockmarket,a market place, with BOTH places playing follow the leader to certain degree.Also a certain amount of self-fullfilling prophecies?.Quantum physics Mathare my system should be a walk in the park for someone like you.We know theres not a lot of difference between horses, for these days they run in their own class generally.But we know that a horse in a small field getting a soft lead up front on a round course,can slow before the bend, making those behind shuffle up,then quicken off the bend [or about the2 furlong post] and win.A level ground final furlong,even better.The horse can do it again even.Then he runs in a big field on a straight course like Newmarket say,and because of his at first glance good form figures,the bookies are obliged to put him in low.We all know, especially if a few contenders take him on up front, his probability of winning belies his starting price.So the physical make -up of a horses form is critical.Basically you should find horses who win, in spite of the pace or the track not suiting him.3O odd years ago they were commonplace,but now very rare.Comments please,horses names even.Look although i'll probably fall flat on my face Bunbury/july cup wise i'll still give it ago[clocked 36 hours so far] Pointers any one?[isnt Dandy Man a better horse than people give it credit?.]

[TheOldhamWhisper]

...So there you have two people each with a piece of info that individually amounts to a hunch, but if put together makes a compelling bet.A third person may have come along and volunteered the info that Zabell Tower running that day used to be trained by Channon and a leap of faith involving merely a hunch of course would have produced another winner[14-1].So the benefits of pooling sharing].

Now I have a real problem with this because if you take it to its logical conclusion, you simply pick the most tipped horse of the day (using, say, the Racing Post nap table).

The problem with that? For a start, the selection will be overbet and (Do I really have to say this?:yikes:) will represent no value whatsoever.

[Win2Win]

Darkman.....do you know what this is < p >

[MattR]

Did you ask Carol for that Keith?

[buddhabee]

Budhabee,please contribute to the debate, or dont read the posts,simple

Cheers darkman, I'll bear that in mind.

[darkman]

Whisper,come on now,obviously your going to avoid the "usual suspects,and that p,no please explain.Why no replies on pace of races etc.?.What about Henry The Navigator,8-1 for the Guineas and no Royal Ascot two Year old winning colt has won in both since before the seventies,and only one filly since 1971.

[mathare]

and that p,no please explain.That p indicates a new paragraph. It makes your text a lot easier to read and your the fact you don't use them probably goes a long way to explaining why you get so few responses to your questions and why no-one really joins in your discussions. If they are anything like me they open post, see a big block of text and think "I can't be :butthead:ed reading that." If you added more spacing and new lines into your posts you'd get a better response as people will be able to more easily pick out points they want to discuss.

Proper punctuation, spelling and capital letters help also but let's not get you running before you can walk, eh? :)

[Win2Win]

Proper punctuation, spelling and capital letters help also but let's not get you running before you can walk, eh? :)

:hoho:

[TheOldhamWhisper]

...Why no replies on pace of races etc.?...

I thought that was rhetorical.

The thread (if I remember correctly) is about a large number of (cumbersome and time consuming) systems identifying the same horse in a specific type of race and thus making it a better prospect. Unfortunately, your logic and reasoning is flawed at the most fundamental level - which is what people are trying to explain to you.

If 60 systems out of 100 (for example) picked a certain horse, what is the percentage chance of it winning? The fact is, there is insufficient data given here to ascertain it. If all the systems give it a 10&#37; chance of winning, what then? What about a range of %age ROIs?

Can you see what I am getting at? You are trying for the holy grail and it just isn't there.

You really would be far better off running a few steady earners based on solid trends.

[darkman]

Yep take your point, paragraphs. Trouble is one's brain formulates the words 100 times quicker than I can type so one loses the plot so to speak I'm probably in too much of a rush to precis or read it back,apologies. The Bunbury, absolute disaster,ticks on it but it broke some long trends so will have to ditch that section.

A better system is to pick them yourself. Thank God for horses like European Dream and Doc Of The Bay. Good horses in their own right and I remembered John Terry winning like Pegasus when he won as a two year old (unfortunately didn't back that one). They all have the same M.O. Very similar even to Sakhee's Secret and Tarteel also. I will post the occasional good thing as and when they appear. This will make for much better reading because Donna Viola, when I raved about her winning a 3k handicap at Yarmouth, went on eventually to win the 250k Yellow Ribbon at Santa Anita. Check her out, many more winners too.

[TheOldhamWhisper]

...The Bunbury, absolute disaster,ticks on it but it broke some long trends so will have to ditch that section.
....

I have NEVER ditched a system based on one result. OK, so a few trends were broken - or maybe this is just the start of a change in trends. As you say, there were ticks in some boxes - so it didn't break EVERY trend. Also, the weather must be taken into account. There are plenty of 'freak' results on ground that starts the day on the good side and ends up Heavy, Swamp in places. :giggle


A better system is to pick them yourself.

Before everyone jumps on you: picking them yourself is a method and not a system (but I don't think you were using the term 'system' in the strrictest sense of the word :) ).

[Win2Win]

A 'method' is a systematic way of coming to a conclusion, a 'system' is a number of methods put together to come to a conclusion :)

[bigcumba]

I've come to the conclusion that this is all bollox... but was it a method or a system that helped me decide? :doh

[Win2Win]

Anyone want next Wednesday's lottery number.....???? ............ask me next Thursday :)

[darkman]

Whisper,once again you make some good valid points.I have identified about 5 short term trends that give you the winner in six, and i will look for a match when i do the Tote International, bearing in mind the long term still.You are quite correct as regards the defernition of system and method.I saw some earlier posts where people tried to define value,and they seemed to be tying themselves up in knots, as can happen.
Bigcumber i had a very quick look at your ratings.Have you checked to see if they're more successful on certain tracks/distance/going/field sizes? As for lottery numbers thats another story,i Crib you not.The weathers better in Greece so i'll be back for Ascot.Any tips?.