OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums

OZmium Sports Betting and Horse Racing Forums (http://forums.ozmium.com.au/index.php)

- Horse Race Betting Systems (http://forums.ozmium.com.au/forumdisplay.php?f=10)

- - R & S Neurals (http://forums.ozmium.com.au/showthread.php?t=24402)

Quote:

Originally Posted by UselessBettor

I did a lot of analysis with the neural's on R+S.

I would suggest not bothering with them as they are not going to be profitable. There are niche cases where they work but they are hard to find.

Instead look at the ratings sheet which as EST, 12M, BL3, etc. These are much better if you combine them with some form analysis.

I use EST, 12M and BL3. I don't worry about LSR.

What you need to do is look at the ratings for the horse at the same distance, same track condition, same field size, (there are a few more but you can come up with what you like). This gives you a baseline of what you think is the base rating for this horse. it may be the same as EST or completely different. It should also give you a range of ratings that the horse is likely to produce. For example even though EST may be 30 you might find at this distance it usually produces a rating of 28-30 and on good tracks it produces a rating 29-34 and in similar field sizes it produces ratings of 26-29. This gives us a range of the horse producing a rating of 26 - 34. You can do this for all horses and now you have a range of ratings for each horse. You can then compare these and look across the last few races to determine if this horse is going to improve and run at the top of those ratings or whether it might struggle and run in the lower area of the ratings. This should give you a good idea of the chances to dutch to make a profit.

I hope that helps.

Thanks for an interesting post on the R&S ratings UB!

I know zilch about the R&S ratings other than they are compiled using Don Scott methods.
I hope they found some new good tweaks because, although profitable in earlier days, they went downhill and DS reportedly died broke.

Scanning the site I could not find any records of how the ratings have panned out in practice.
Just a passing comment where they say the results of their Computer Racecards are "astonishing".

Did your analysis show this?

Am I missing out on being astonished?

My recent efforts with my own ratings could also be called "astonishing", astonishingly feeble!

Quote:

Originally Posted by entropy

They are based on DS Ratings but its just the initial base rating. Most ratings don't work and most people who follow the ones on R+S will lose money too. You can't just pick up a rating and hope it works. As I said you need to find the ratings this horse produced in similar conditions, similar distances, similar field sizes, etc. That takes work. Most punters won't do that work but anyone who takes the time to do it can use any set of "reasonable" ratings and come up with a derived set of ratings that can then be dutched.

I use lots of sources of data and R+S is one of them. I wouldn't say their ratings are astonishing, but I wouldn't say that about any of the ratings I get. But when I apply my process to the ratings, and then dutch the profitable situations I can easily profit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by UselessBettor

Thanks UB, your feedback is appreciated and I will now take a closer look at their ratings.
A fair while back I looked at their Neurals but did not find them of any use so on that basis I dissed their ratings, looks like I should have dug a bit deeper.
I will have a look at their T&C's and if allowed will try to download the ratings for a look see.

Quote:

Originally Posted by UselessBettor

......

Instead look at the ratings sheet which as EST, 12M, BL3, etc. These are much better if you combine them with some form analysis.

I use EST, 12M and BL3. I don't worry about LSR.

......

I agree UB, those are the ratings I look at as well as the FR rating (Don Scott) in the worksheets to see if there is separation in the values. But horse profile is very important and of course the speed map is possibly the biggest piece of the puzzle - it is for me anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stix

Stix,

Do you prefer the R+S speedmap or the punters dot com speedmap ?

I don't have enough data on the punters dot com speed map to make any judgements.

Quote:

Originally Posted by UselessBettor

Stix,

Do you prefer the R+S speedmap or the punters dot com speedmap ?

I don't have enough data on the punters dot com speed map to make any judgements.

Hey UB, I use racenet speed maps, the break it into Early Speed, Position and Final Speed. I use these to make my own maps, adjusted for barrier, speed inside/outside etc

I have come to the conclusion that horses favoured in the neural market do very well in the real market. For example, today I had three selections in Bairnsdale R3 (the winner no.1 was a selection) and I made a profit of $54 on the race using $2 Betfair SP bets. I've looked at yesterday and Saturday and favoured horses in my neural market method would have snared almost all the winners, and there were a few good-priced winners. So far today I've bet on 14 races for 12 winners (normally between 3 and 5 selections per race). I'll give it a few more days and if profitable I'll list the selections here.

MG it depends how you set the neural selections up. If you use BP course distance $ then horse number one wins.
For you to win consistently this setting needs to be consistent.
In my experience this will not always be the case.

Kiwi, I agree. However I think the top part of the neural market tends to agree with the real market while the bottom half can be all over the place. This is what I'll be testing with my settings.

Don't trust back tested results ie. after ther race.

They tend to update when the results come in adn the order changes to mysteriously have the winner at the top (or near enough). only test on races that have not yet run.

UB spot on i have noticed that also ..

UB,I did the R&S neural settings I had above for Ipswich on wednesday. Thursday morning I checked them. The results were the same.
It appears the R&S neurals don't fluctuate next day after a meeting is completed.:)

kiwi, I can confirm as UB has said that the NR change post-race. Sometimes they do it the following day, sometimes they do it that night. I've found this out recently with some of my recording, thought it was all good because I was doing it same-night and they appeared to only change the following day but then found some more anomalies.

Would need to record pre-race and then take out scratchings afterwards if you want to record neurals.

its a very trusting man who looks at informnation after a race to assess if it was worthy of using.

All my data is recorded pre-race. I never want to trust data after the race.

Its not just R+S that does this. For instance some of the figures at punters form guide does the exact same thing. It updates after the race and is useless for post race analysis.

But for those who are willing to record the information pre race, look through it and find those gems there is a lot of money to be made.