curious

I think that should read that the horse drawn widest will be in gate #4, not gate #9?

OK. So it is another population stat not an individual horse assessment of fitness? I'll add it to the BP.

What the hell is the "21 day racing pattern". Is that another population stat I need to add to the BP to get it to stop losing money?

How do you know they are a good lead? And for that matter, how do you know there is a track bias? What exactly is that? Would it not be better to develop your own stats? And how can raw barrier stats be a useful indicator if they are not generated in relation to the chance of the individual horses in the first place? Otherwise, they surely just distort markets don't they if more punters rely on them?

Trying to update the BP Thommo. You say the above but with respect to the "course specialist" variable you earlier said: " I apply a max 50% upgrade in value units at times.... " So, what are the criteria that determine whether it is 20% or 50%? Thanks.

That caused me to cancel my CJC membership with immediate effect. Hard to believe that not a single CJC staff member let alone a stipe had bothered to drive round, let alone walk round the course on race morning before sending a bunch of unsuspecting horses and riders round on a race day.

Nope. Haven't worked that out. On the course specialist thing though, I see Winx has won 4 from 4 at Moonee Valley. Does that make her a course specialist eligible for the extra 20% next time she runs there? Mind you, I see she goes ok at Randwick as well, so is she also a course specialist there?

Tell us what a "course specialist" is then. Is it another one of your gross generalisations and population statistics?

You seem to have had 2 or 3 successful punts in the last few years. Keep it up and see if you can add the 50% at the right times so you can buy some air for the Princess.

Not bad sport now and then either ...

Yes, the ratio of OZ turnover to NZ turnover is almost always higher at venues like Reefton than Ellerslie or Trentham so I don't think there's any evidence that would lend weight to that proposition Horseboy. The reverse is more likely true.

Ok. Strange. Did you click on 'Save my details' at the bottom right after changing it?

In your account go to profile and you should be able to re-enter it there?

They aren't are they? It's overall net revenue that matters is it not?

There's no doubt that your post race wisdom is outstanding Thommo.

Yes, the variables you consider post race are always correlated with winners.

Were the stipes asleep at the wheel as well?

Yeahh, aside from finding your way around and figuring out the basic functions, not much wrong with the basic info and betting functions as far as I can see. What I don't see is $50m worth of innovation that is going to make the investment globally competitive, let alone ahead of the opposition. That was the idea wasn't it so it paid for itself and increased revenue? Some of the pricing and options offered are dreadful.

"Might be"? I think it's more than evident that she would run rings around them.

Maybe, but what's wrong with Westport?

The Master was a bit busy riding the Trentham Stakes winner. Send them the video and if they can't then figure out from that how to know how fast they are going and keep/get a horse balanced before asking it, they probably should consider an alternate career.

Can't find anything at all right now.

Reckon it's your internet speed Barry? Kids all downloading games and movies maybe?

Do you mean escalating bet amounts in that pattern till you win?

Yeahhh, that's a sure road to the poor house where you'll be able to have a beer with +30% Thomass porky. I think your staking plan is fine VC!. Interested if you have had a chance to review your assessment as Mardi suggested. Mardi, Barryb or others may have a better suggestion but I often do that with small samples after the first couple of weeks of a meeting to make sure that I'm still tracking where I was at the last meeting at that track. I just order/select/group my results data say into 15-19.99% chances, 20 - 22.99% etc. and then test whether results are giving me a winning strike rate somewhere in those ranges. Doesn't take long.