Racing and Sports now moderates the Talkback forum to ensure posting guidelines are adhered to.
The views expressed on Talkback are those of the writer and not necessarily those of Racing and Sports. You must be a registered user to write postings or send messages to other users. Click here to register.
Message: Has anyone out there ever done a survey of the strike rate of the Sportsman's top rated Zipform selections? And if so are they willing to share their results with others? I'm experimenting using impact factors applied to top rated selections from reputable ratings services. Results have been very good so far but I'd like to hear from someone who may have done an in depth statistical study of the accuracy of ratings services that are easily obtained by the general public, in particular Zipform.
Message: I tested 456 races last year from Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, and Adelaide metro tracks with the following results:
Top raters (including equals) won 24.78% Within 1 point (incl equals) won 14.69% Within 2 points (incl equals) won 12.94% Within 3 points (incl equals) won 19.30% Within 4 points (incl equals) won 11.62%
Total of these was 83.33%, but I noticed that there were many equal rated, sometimes up to 10 or more horses rated within 4 points of the top rater.
Unless you can devise some additional qualifying condition(s) to reduce the number of equal raters, you will find it very difficult to formulate a reliable staking plan.
good research, but those horses which fall within 4 pts of the top horse are usually obvious choices, so really one is left with the same bunch of prospects they would have had with a quick look at the formguide.
separating the 3-5 prospects in most races will always be the main task and is often difficult.
best thing to do is only bet where one or more of your own top 2-3 rated horses r value.
Most people think punting is not about picking winners, whereas the main game is betting the value horses.
Message: Thanks for those stats. I take your point about applying other criteria to the top raters to identify the good bets. That is exactly what I'm into. If the stats you provided hold up over the long term it means that the Zipform top selection has a similar strike rate to Wizard 100/100 pointers and not far behind Superform top selections. Interesting when you compare the cost of each service and the number of meetings covered.
Message: Thanks for alerting me to that. I remember the original article when it appeared in PPM but I never followed it up. Actually what I'm searching for is a reasonably priced and easily accessed accurate rating service to which I can apply profile criteria that I have developed. Most rating services seem to priced for the professionals with large turnovers who can afford to pay through the nose for them. The stats I have seen so far is that Zipform top selections are on a par with Wizard 100/100 selections in terms of strike rate. Interesting when you consider the cost of buying those ratings and others over the internet.
Message: Hi I dont want to waste your time but yesterdays zip form highest raters for doomben and sandown went very good as i followed it for the first time with a system. The system was a failure but sportsman s zip form produced many winners .I only followed it for the first time yesterday so i dont have many stats yet. Regards
Message: I applied the el greco system yesterday using the zipform and found it didnt improve the selections . i might have been doing something wrong but i should have just stuck to the highest raters of zipform.
This site is maintained by Racing and Sports (®) Pty Ltd (ABN 093 360 108) ("R&S").
Copyright in all R&S materials is owned by Racing and Sports Pty Ltd (R&S).
Racing and Sports is a Registered Trademark.
R&S takes all care in the preparation of information appearing on the site, but accepts no responsibility nor warrants the accuracy of the information displayed.
This information is provided for entertainment purposes only. All information including race fields and TAB numbers should be checked with an official source.