Hi guys, go easy on me on my first post please. I've recently got into Laying the field after going through and logging all results for the last 2 months. I was pleasantly surprised and have found some edges to benefit me. Obviously the majority of the races have been NH, and the regular All Weather meetings.
Can I expect the forth coming Flat season to be as good as the current NH Season or is there generally no difference?
I have learnt that some courses are definitely better than others over the jumps and that it's better to leave the All Weather Flat races well alone.
I continue to log all results (thanks to Timeform) and will do this until I complete a full year.
Any advice on the above Q would be gratefully received.
Dave.
NH or Flat, which is best for Laying The Field?
A few have asked for this now:
Contains 2009-2016 in one csv.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zp3a9r5vlg9eh ... v.zip?dl=0
Contains 2009-2016 in separate csv's.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ls8d5sdih5hkx ... R.zip?dl=0
Both 46.2mb but excel will struggle with the top one.
COUNT(*): 962425
MAX(EVENT_DT): 2016-12-30 16:20:00.0
MIN(EVENT_DT): 2008-12-31 12:00:00.0
With a few if statements you can easily backtest, although I recommend chucking the data in a database, I plan on doing a short tutorial on how to do this soon.
More data can be found here, viewtopic.php?f=5&t=11883
Contains 2009-2016 in one csv.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zp3a9r5vlg9eh ... v.zip?dl=0
Contains 2009-2016 in separate csv's.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ls8d5sdih5hkx ... R.zip?dl=0
Both 46.2mb but excel will struggle with the top one.
COUNT(*): 962425
MAX(EVENT_DT): 2016-12-30 16:20:00.0
MIN(EVENT_DT): 2008-12-31 12:00:00.0
With a few if statements you can easily backtest, although I recommend chucking the data in a database, I plan on doing a short tutorial on how to do this soon.
More data can be found here, viewtopic.php?f=5&t=11883
Timeform will give you all the running stats you need , every course as its own high and lows
https://www.timeform.com/horse-racing/form-and-results i wish you luck.
https://www.timeform.com/horse-racing/form-and-results i wish you luck.
-
- Posts: 29
- Joined: Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:03 pm
LinusP wrote:A few have asked for this now:
Contains 2009-2016 in one csv.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zp3a9r5vlg9eh ... v.zip?dl=0
Contains 2009-2016 in separate csv's.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ls8d5sdih5hkx ... R.zip?dl=0
Both 46.2mb but excel will struggle with the top one.
COUNT(*): 962425
MAX(EVENT_DT): 2016-12-30 16:20:00.0
MIN(EVENT_DT): 2008-12-31 12:00:00.0
With a few if statements you can easily backtest, although I recommend chucking the data in a database, I plan on doing a short tutorial on how to do this soon.
More data can be found here, viewtopic.php?f=5&t=11883
I have been studying BF data for a while, just wondering how come there are so many races with 0 volume traded pre race / inplay, and both min/max odds are wrong as well?
What I usually do is to ignore all these races, but I am not sure how much will it affect the result in long term. What do you do with these data?
Hi LinusP
Would there be any chance you could post the same data for 2017 please?
Thanks
Jeff
Would there be any chance you could post the same data for 2017 please?
Thanks
Jeff
LinusP wrote: ↑Sat Dec 31, 2016 9:52 amA few have asked for this now:
Contains 2009-2016 in one csv.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/zp3a9r5vlg9eh ... v.zip?dl=0
Contains 2009-2016 in separate csv's.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ls8d5sdih5hkx ... R.zip?dl=0
Both 46.2mb but excel will struggle with the top one.
COUNT(*): 962425
MAX(EVENT_DT): 2016-12-30 16:20:00.0
MIN(EVENT_DT): 2008-12-31 12:00:00.0
With a few if statements you can easily backtest, although I recommend chucking the data in a database, I plan on doing a short tutorial on how to do this soon.
More data can be found here, http://www.betangel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=11883
NigelK has kindly uploaded a excellent spreadsheet to download a whole years worth of SP data in a few clicks
viewtopic.php?f=54&t=14395
viewtopic.php?f=54&t=14395
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Linus, I know this is going back a bit but the data in most of those dropbox files is incorrect. All of the races after 21/4/2013 only show a few runners, not the whole field.
Do you have a source for the correct data in the same format?
Edit...fixed.
I just used nigelk's brilliant utility that Dallas mentioned above and then a quick "Copy /b *.csv alldata.csv" from dos to join them all together. Bit of sorting to remove duplicate headers and ...bingo.
Further edit..the data is wrong on the individual files BF site too. damn.
Has anyone else noticed this ?
...from a file taken at random....most races have lots of runners missing. Final edit Sort the file by Event ID and all the data is there i think. I'd assumed it was sorted already.
That turned into a bit of a stream of consciousness but i'll leave it incase anyone else is as easily fooled as I seem to have been.
Do you have a source for the correct data in the same format?
Edit...fixed.
I just used nigelk's brilliant utility that Dallas mentioned above and then a quick "Copy /b *.csv alldata.csv" from dos to join them all together. Bit of sorting to remove duplicate headers and ...bingo.
Further edit..the data is wrong on the individual files BF site too. damn.
Has anyone else noticed this ?
...from a file taken at random....most races have lots of runners missing. Final edit Sort the file by Event ID and all the data is there i think. I'd assumed it was sorted already.
That turned into a bit of a stream of consciousness but i'll leave it incase anyone else is as easily fooled as I seem to have been.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Betfair seemed to haved cocked loads up this years SP data, from what i can see quiet a bit of 2017 looks to be missing and in parts its very messy compared to other yearsShaunWhite wrote: ↑Tue Jan 02, 2018 2:08 amLinus, I know this is going back a bit but the data in most of those dropbox files is incorrect. All of the races after 21/4/2013 only show a few runners, not the whole field.
Do you have a source for the correct data in the same format?
Edit...fixed.
I just used nigelk's brilliant utility that Dallas mentioned above and then a quick "Copy /b *.csv alldata.csv" from dos to join them all together. Bit of sorting to remove duplicate headers and ...bingo.
Further edit..the data is wrong on the individual files BF site too. damn.
Has anyone else noticed this ?
...from a file taken at random....most races have lots of runners missing.
Untitled.png
Final edit Sort the file by Event ID and all the data is there i think. I'd assumed it was sorted already.
That turned into a bit of a stream of consciousness but i'll leave it incase anyone else is as easily fooled as I seem to have been.
As Liam said on another thread he couldn't get his Volume data this year either, I assume these are both related and possibly to do with there new data site launched last year
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Has anyone found any issues with 2016 SP data?
I'm pretty sure I loaded it properly (as per 2015,14,13 etc) and that my sheets are correct. But when I run some basic strategies the results are very different for 2016 vs those for 2010-2015.
Probably my bug but thought I'd ask before spending another session pulling my hair out.
I'm pretty sure I loaded it properly (as per 2015,14,13 etc) and that my sheets are correct. But when I run some basic strategies the results are very different for 2016 vs those for 2010-2015.
Probably my bug but thought I'd ask before spending another session pulling my hair out.
When I downloaded it last year it was fine (just checked and mine is around 116K rows once cleaned and merged)ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:29 pmHas anyone found any issues with 2016 SP data?
I'm pretty sure I loaded it properly (as per 2015,14,13 etc) and that my sheets are correct. But when I run some basic strategies the results are very different for 2016 vs those for 2010-2015.
Probably my bug but thought I'd ask before spending another session pulling my hair out.
- ShaunWhite
- Posts: 9731
- Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2016 3:42 am
Cheers buddyDallas wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:52 pmWhen I downloaded it last year it was fine (just checked and mine is around 116K rows once cleaned and merged)ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:29 pmHas anyone found any issues with 2016 SP data?
I'm pretty sure I loaded it properly (as per 2015,14,13 etc) and that my sheets are correct. But when I run some basic strategies the results are very different for 2016 vs those for 2010-2015.
Probably my bug but thought I'd ask before spending another session pulling my hair out.
- northbound
- Posts: 737
- Joined: Mon Mar 20, 2017 11:22 pm
I imported 2015 and 2016 Betfair SP data (UK/IRE horses) a while ago into my database. Didn’t notice anything weird in 2016’s compared to 2015’s.ShaunWhite wrote: ↑Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:29 pmHas anyone found any issues with 2016 SP data?
I'm pretty sure I loaded it properly (as per 2015,14,13 etc) and that my sheets are correct. But when I run some basic strategies the results are very different for 2016 vs those for 2010-2015.
Probably my bug but thought I'd ask before spending another session pulling my hair out.
Sorry for the delay, here is the 2017 data:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/vkp2kg5nfr14d ... 7.zip?dl=0
Please note that the format will be slightly different as its the raw file I 'would' upload to my database, I have stopped loading SP data from here, instead taking it from the marketbook once a race has completed. The file size seems good and I only got one missing file (17012017) but use with caution as betfair don't seem to care about the quality of this data.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/vkp2kg5nfr14d ... 7.zip?dl=0
Please note that the format will be slightly different as its the raw file I 'would' upload to my database, I have stopped loading SP data from here, instead taking it from the marketbook once a race has completed. The file size seems good and I only got one missing file (17012017) but use with caution as betfair don't seem to care about the quality of this data.