@Adam said in The exit target tool isn't accurate:

@Patrick-Murphy: As Martin says, I need examples to be able to look into this. Please at least tell me the name of the strategy which you think is incorrect.

Currently none of your saved strategies have an exit target of 10 ticks and none of them have any exit time restriction.

@Adam copied from PM:

An example would be: Newcastle, January 4, 2023. Race time: 12.50.

Horse name: Endofastorm.
His BSP: 276.83.

I took the BSP in my strategy, and set a target of 10 ticks and to exit within 30 secs of the "actual" race time (which was 12.54).

However it's showing the exit time as 12:56 and an exit price of 1.01, which is impossible given what I instructed it to do.

If you put in these instructions, I'm sure you'll find the same results.

Ideally, I want a scenario where it tells me what my profit/loss would be no later than 30 secs into the race.

@Adam would it be possible to have two metrics for the going? Predicted and actual? Predicted would probably be more useful to us and what we are trying to achieve. I know. Bfbm uses predicted and it doesnt change as the day goes on.

@Martin these work well over jumps. Just have to accept once in a while you are going to get a jockey thrown off.

19.00 Kempton
Just Rita looks a decent lay tonight
cant see it troubling Valtellina on known form needs to improve
and why its now favourite is totally beyond me

Laying to liability Win and laying place

Exocet missile for you guys now get on lol

@Danny-Bridges Actually I was wrong about it being a backwards compatibility issue.

It's actually being caused by a bug when you include "draw bias" in the individual trades results columns.

I'll fix this today but for now, just exclude that column in your results 👍

@Danny-Beal thanks, I have betangel, but if it is possible on bfbm I have a hope that I can somehow do it with betangel, thanks.

@Martin I'm really looking for a standard approach to calculating my stakes as a percentage of bank across various strategies (rather than based on a specific strategy). Generally I'm backing but some lay strats.
So for example, one strategy might have a 4% strike rate, odds range 20-100, average odds 38, longest losing run 133 and an ROI of 24%. I know I'll need to ride out long losing periods and my gut feel is I'd want at least a 200 point bank, probably more. If I plug the above into a basic Kelly calculator it gives me 1.41% as the 'Fraction of bankroll to wager' which equals a 70 point bank. That's way too low in my view.
2nd scenario - 24% strike rate, average odds 8, longest losing run 22 and an ROI of 37%. The basic Kelly calculator gives 13.14% as my stake %age (!) but my feel is this would work with a 100 point bank.
I've seen Kelly calculators with options to add multiples for a more cautious bank size (BFBM has a 'Divisor') and maybe I just need to use that but adjust the Divisor based on the average odds?
I've always used a level stakes approach and that's probably why I'm struggling with the percentage of bank that Kelly calculates. I also need to adjust to the percent of bank betting approach rather level stakes
Anyway, any thoughts from others with more experience using a percentage approach will be very welcome
Cheers

@nigel-stone welcome it's great to have you here! if you get stuck just let me know

@Andrew-Hopkins For today, yes

That's massive bad luck, for two horses at single figure odds to be withdrawn after the off time and then such a big priced outsider going on to win before a retrospective rule four is enforced. Going to be a very rare occurrence, but can be pretty painful when it does happen.

That's why I tend to do this type of trade with National Hunt races only because there's no messing about with stalls and you can see exactly how everyone is lining up.

@Martin thank you as usual Martin

@Danny-Newby It will be horses that are expected to be held up. If they don't yet have enough history to satisfy the pace calculation, their rating will be null and the horse won't appear in the results.

Nice one Adam.

Yea I would be more of the thinking that if certain rules should not be selected at the same time it should just auto unselect them (maybe with a brief flashing animation of the unselected option, to alert user to what just happened)

Then it will be obvious that those two are incompatible (You could do this with the Max Qualifiers and Fav settings as well, same logic as we previously discussed, isn't it)

Cheers

@simon-topper said in The Forward Testing Thread:

@John-Folan This one looks interesting, set it up myself as well.

Bad downturn in September but only 10% of the years profit

@Andrew Ok, thanks

Has anyone else found that quite a few strategies seem to have almost flipped round when you compare 2022 with 2023 (nearly a full year of results). Guess the challenge is to crack that and find something that is consistent over the two years of data (I'm ignoring 2021 for now due to covid disruption). Any thoughts?

@Julian-Drake-Clarke If that's the case then we need to do some work on mobile optimisation!

Can you let me know the make, model and OS of your tablet and I'll get this fixed ASAP. We want the software to be usable on all devices.

@Nigel We did a big audit of the database and in fixing one set of data, I think we zero'd a bunch of values temporarily and it threw off some strategy results.

Glad it's all back to normal now 👍

@Brigitta-Nagy the thread is for discussion about BFBM so if you ask there one of the experts on it will help, I am far from an expert on it myself!