How i tackle filters - Right/Wrong - Whats your opinion?

[Patrik Mellqvist]

First, I set all parameters to zero.

Then, during a hectic weekend, I collect at least 100 selections.

After that, I sort the highest values to the top for each column and parameter. This gives me several columns with the highest values at the top and the lowest at the bottom.

Next, I locate the middle of the total number of selections — for example, if I have 100 selections, I pinpoint number 50.
What happens? I get each parameter’s selection data and stats — the sweet spot.
This also represents the medium value we expect, which aligns with the market’s long-term expectations.

Finally, for parameters that should be lower to benefit the situation, I set them to be equal to or lower than that value.
For parameters that should be higher to benefit the situation, I set them to be equal to or higher than that value.

Now I have a real benchmark and blueprint — not just for finding value in odds, but in much more.
All selections that pass the filter must outperform the sweet spot, which creates both value and upside for me.

"I've noticed that setting a 5-tick improvement for all parameters still provides ongoing selections according to the BTC software. I'm inclined to believe that anything with 3 ticks or better is value, provided that the strike rate of winning and losing streaks eventually overcomes the price structure."

[Alex Rendell]

@Patrik-Mellqvist I guess the proof is in the long-term results? Have you been tracking them? It seems like a very basic approach, but often the most simple of setups are the most fruitful!