Thanks for your replies, with which I totally agree.
My first response on reading this system was that 100 consecutive results is nowhere near a meaningful sample! Then, because I tend to concentrate on outsiders, I noticed that from the 40 in the given range, eleven of them (27% of the 40) are priced at 12/1 to 16/1 incl. Now THAT’S an angle worth looking more closely at! Furthermore, 33 of the 100 races were won by 11/1 to 33/1 shots. That, too, is pretty interesting. Another weird (sinister?) thing that I find really hard to accept is the contention that there are NO odds-on shots in 100 winners. Not that the latter fazes me at all, because I’m not really too interested in the bottom half of the spectrum anyway.
As Tigris said, so many losers with that C to F range, and I would reckon that the majority of the field of each race would also be in the 9/2 to 10/1 range, so that leaves us searching for a filter (or filters) to detect a possible winner.
Anyhoo, I’m going to replicate, actually no, I’m going to do a much larger sample than the one we’ve discussed, and from a much more up-to-date year. In fact – with a view to studying a whole year of actual results – I’m thinking 2014 and I’ll start at 1st January of course. I’ll come back to you all when I’ve finished, which might not be today because I have my Friday club this afternoon (A nerds discussion group where we put the world to rights over a pint or three. Members are required to bring to the group a trivia fact every week that none of the rest have heard before. and yes, we all ALL ardent quizzers!)
Back tomorrow with an update. Live long and prosper, as that nice Spock guy used to say.