Hi John

Thanks you very much, on both counts.

Lots more great info to come this week and beyond. Hopefully we’ll be back racing before too long.

Thanks again,
Matt

Hi Matt

Ha, ha, you are absolutely right regarding scepticism of the ROI – I do like stats based data but I struggle with the real maths at times so I balance that against my own judgement and know that that “all that glistens is not gold”.

To the point: I did look at the years data. It was lower in the first year but profitable and improved through to 2019. However I would say that the range is too limited to be sure – could have done with a few more years data – might widen the range a bit more. Interestingly I have just returned to the data set to analyse why the dip in September. I chose to exclude the three trainers but then chose only trainers that showed a straight line of black and had a sufficiency of runners. Then I sorted by month and looked in Chart view at the result. September is not profitable. Don’t know why but the stats state no with regard to the “cherry picked sample”. All very interesting.

Cheers

Ian

Thanks,
Michael.

Good stuff Ian.

Just one further point: that sort of ROI is very likely unrepeatable. Of course, it might not matter if you can still attain an ROI of, say, 15% on the angle.

I would look at your angle by year also, to make sure that the profits a) weren’t all achieved in one or two years, and b) that the win strike rate is fairly consistent from year to year.

It is reasonable to expect a diminution of profitability with any (good) angle, but that doesn’t mean it has run its course yet. As I say in Part 3b, always be asking questions. If it looks too good to be true – and I’m not saying this one does, the three trainers are excellent and get very solid stock to work with – it might just be.

It is fundamentally good discipline not to believe one’s eyes rather than to rush in, enchanted by ROI or P/L data.

Anyway, enough already. Great work with the research, keep the above in mind, and keep at it!

Best,
Matt

Thanks for putting it up. I see what you mean. Actually the results seem to be ok (?) without the month analysis. It was rather late in the night that I suddenly thought I ought to look into whether it was profitable over certain months, (learnt from your video how to do this), I was then also struck by the September total dip. The previous analysis produced an ROI of 40 approx. but the inclusion of only these months produced a rise to over 50. I was a bit too knackered to try to find out why September revealed nothing so will definitely do some more work – really enjoying it. One route might be to see how other trainers fare in September.

Will report back – thanks again

Best

Ian

thanks for that reply matt i check wether i have i think i did but the angles are interesting with those sort of place % you can place place exotics with paddy power betfair sports book short odds you would get but the %are in your favour
sunchu

Hi Ian

The sore thumb here is the absence of September. What is the reason for that? If you can’t explain it logically, it’s going to be questionable regarding sustainability.

This would be what I’d call a ‘mark up’ angle: definitely worth knowing about when looking at a race but the nature of the angle means it’s possibly not strong enough to plough on with blindly. Though I may of course be proven wrong on that!. See part 3b in this series for more info on mark up angles.

Thanks a lot for sharing.

Best,
Matt

I have created an angle which I am happy to share, but please check it over because it would be rubbish if I had missed the obvious. My idea stems from the very interesting article by Sam Darby, insofar as I chose 3yo handicap/turf horses and then simply looked for the trainers showing good strike rates, strong A/E and IV.

The filters are: for the date range 2015 – 2020 (April), Months: May, June, July, August, October
Race: Race code: Flat turf, Handicap: Handicap
Runners: Age: 3min 3max Trainer: O Burrows, G Scott, C Fellows

Summary line: 264 runs; 68 Wins; 112 places; 25.8 Strike rate; E/W 42.4 strike rate; Win p/l 135; E/W p/l 128; ROI 51; A/E 143; IV 258

Best

Ian