- This topic has 86 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
When there’s an abandonment, any antepost bets are void unless the postponed race is run on the same course over the same distance and not a reformed race (with new runners)… Because it would have different aspects of form than punters who studied the original race. Yesterday’s Chester Cup was a different race to what I studied for.
Ante-post betting should never be a factor for any decision making in racing, it accounts for such a tiny precentage of betting on a race in any case.
There certainly wasn’t anywhere enough change in yesterdays race to consider voiding ante-post betting on it.
When any ante-post betting took place on the race, yesterdays scenario was a possibility no matter how slim, this should have been taken into account when placing a bet on the race.
If anyone doesn’t want to take that risk maybe they should bet just before the race or not at all.1994-1999 winners
mid div
Rainbow High was held up off a fast pace.
rear
Silence In Court came from behind, unlike many got a clear run through.
held up
Top Cees won just a 12 runner race.
held up
Merit came from behind off a good pace.
held up
Top Cees had a massive advantage, being thrown in after the "worst" ride of Kieran Fallon’s life (at Newmarket).
mid fld
In my form book it says Doyce "chased pace".
You’d be kinda sick waiting on the prom bias after that run, no? Yup. It all gets sliced and diced to suit. All change, a new century, a new bias.
EDIT: Am afraid going back only to 1994 (end of Sportinglife.com’s data base) gives a somewhat (unintentioned) misleading account.
Let’s look back to previous years:
1993 Always prominent.
1992 Always prominent, 2nd also always prominent and 3rd to 5th tracked pace.
1991 Held up
1990 Always prominent
1989 Tracked pace
1988 Tracked pace, 2nd led.RacingPost.com go back to 88.
Those 1994+ figures have I’m sure misled some people eg Betlarge.
EDIT: Apologies to Indocine who I was wrong in accusing of misleading people. Wasn’t his/her fault.
Value Is EverythingNice to see Dettori and Godolphin in such sparkling form…
Frankie is now 4 from 51 rides.
It is one thing to "slice and dice" things to "suit". It is an entirely different thing to
try and mislead
Indocine.
Absolutely uncalled for.
Your earlier post saying "
I did since 1994 for horses placed in top 3. I get 18 placed from stalls 1-6, 16 placed from stalls 7-12 and 14 placed from stalls 13-18
".
Why did you go back to 1994?
Why not 1990 or 93, 98 or 88? Not 10 years or 15 or 20, not to the beginning of the century, but instead 17 years.
1994 is the online limit of Sportinglife search facility; that simple.
Had you gone back to
any
other year your figures would not have misled people eg Betlarge.
Betlarge and others are capable of drawing their own conclusions about all scribblings on TRF including yours. I seek to convince no one of anything.
When there’s an abandonment, any antepost bets are void unless the postponed race is run on the same course over the same distance and not a reformed race (with new runners)… Because it would have different aspects of form than punters who studied the original race. Yesterday’s Chester Cup was a different race to what I studied for.
Ante-post betting should never be a factor for any decision making in racing, it accounts for such a tiny precentage of betting on a race in any case.
There certainly wasn’t anywhere enough change in yesterdays race to consider voiding ante-post betting on it.
When any ante-post betting took place on the race, yesterdays scenario was a possibility no matter how slim, this should have been taken into account when placing a bet on the race.
If anyone doesn’t want to take that risk maybe they should bet just before the race or not at all.Yes Yeats, in this or any race we know it is something that could happen, so at the moment I suppose it should be "taken in to account" with antepost bets. Although in practice it happens so infrequently to be not worth allowing for.
However, what I am saying is, when it does happen it has such a big effect that is akin to say changing the King George VI Chase from Kempton to Sandown where all bets (day of race (26th Dec) and antepost) are VOID. Therefore, it would be good for all punters to be able to say to bookmakers "Whenever (not just one race) stalls are dispensed with VOID all my bets".
Value Is EverythingIs this aimed at me SBerry or Indocine?
from wiki: "Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments. It is also sometimes colloquially used to doubt statistics used to prove an opponent’s point.
So, where the winners aren’t from a low draw it was a weak race or there was some other perfectly valid reason, but when the winner does come from the low draw, that’s it, obviously.
It is not as simple as to say every race has exactly the same draw bias. Obviously it doesn’t. It may sound as if I am making excuses SB
, but tose are the facts.Question: Why is there a draw bias at Chester?
Answer: Because it is usually (please note "usually") advantageous around Chester to get the rail, so as to go a shorter distance from Start to Finish. So those from a "poor draw" can negate the effects by getting out quickly for a prominent position at or near the rail. With Chester being a turning track can also enable the leaders to slow it down. Particularly in a big field where those in behind have to sit and suffer, as going around the pack would give away far too much ground and energy. So those prominent being in the best position when pace eventually increases.
If however, two or more horses take each other on up front, or the leader’s jockey misjudges the pace and goes too fast early-on… Then it can turn a so called "poor" draw in to a "good draw", with those who did not get a good start going the optimum pace for a faster over all time. Passing those who went off too fast too soon.
As I’ve said, there are obviously many influences and in certain types of races one or other influence have more or less of an influence. It is obvious that in a 7 runner conditions race or maiden the field will have varying degrees of abilities, so much more likely for the runners to have room to move around (even at 5f) – therefore having less draw bias than an open 16 runner handicap.I like reading what you all post and can understand the logic behind what you say
Nice of you to say so SB.
but still think you are attaching or implying attaching too much importance over the draw bias, which even if it is significant enough to give a length or few advantage, this advantage is likely lost before or during the race.
Draw advantage is less of an influence unless a punter allies "draw" with "pace". In the case of the inexperienced Shubaat (just 5 races all in starting stalls) who’s form has been shown when racing prominently – His chance was severely effected if not almost eliminated. Not knowing what to do at the start and unable or unwilling to race in behind horses. A matter of "a length or few" can be of major importance to a horse who needs to race prominently. Overturn (another who likes to race up there with the pace), and to a certain extent Ile De Re’s chance were greatly enhanced, because Overturn could get away fast and Ile De Re to get away how he wanted from their standing start experience. For sure, with some horses it made little difference, but with others it was significant and always likely to be so.
Let’s see how it affects the 3 days results then, we can poo-poo every high drawn winner by concluding the race was weak, it was a fav, stable was in form or it got a flyer, had luck in running, or as others imply, low draws don’t matter as much over shorter distances than the maximum, etc.
I’ll put my excuses in again SB before the racing continues.
I suspect the longer racing continues the less important draw will become. With ground on the inner getting cut up and jockeys looking for unpoached ground. They also might start to come stand side in the straight. So you can "poo poo" all you want to.:wink:
Value Is EverythingAre you serious? The draw is of little consequence, particularly in this race. There are too many other factors involved and if you’re going on the draw to influence you, you maybe should be ignoring the race if you’re letting a factor of such minor influence lead you.
I can understand why you might think that the draw makes little difference in a 2m2f race. But I have to say I am with Gingertipster on this one.
In a 2m + race it normally would not make a difference, but this is one race where it very much has been the case that the draw has influence on the outcome. The last 3 winners of the race came from stalls 1, 5 and 4. That was with 17, 17 and 16 runners in the field.
I fancied Torminator, who was drawn 2 and can front run or be up with the pace. Unfortunately The app jockey on him, Paul Pickard, managed to get him plumb last on the inside rail and pretty much remained there as the field stretched away in front, till the jockey realised it wasn’t going to be his day and pretty much downed tools.
I’m not moaning out of my pocket, I accept that that is racing and sometimes the good luck swings with you. I’d rather be a lucky punter than simply a good judge of horses (which of course I am
)May the God’s of racing smile on us all, and when they don’t, just get the shovel ready for the roses.
Absolutely uncalled for.
1994 is the online limit of Sportinglife search facility; that simple.
It just seemed very convenient to go back to 1994.
Fair enough Indocine, I can see now it was not your intention to mislead.
Sorry Indocine.
I withdraw my comment and have now edited previous post.Ginge / Mark
Value Is EverythingGinge,
I’m not sure when the Chester Cup was first started with stalls but I think it would have been circa 1994 (previously flag start over 50yards shorter).
As regards draw bias, I’m with you in the sense that the draw would still be a huge factor. As the race involves over 720 degrees of turning, to be just one off the rail must give a few yards in ground (2 circuits x 360).
PS did not have a bet in the race anyway.
Ginge,
I’m not sure when the Chester Cup was first started with stalls but I think it would have been circa 1994 (previously flag start over 50yards shorter).
As regards draw bias, I’m with you in the sense that the draw would still be a huge factor. As the race involves over 720 degrees of turning, to be just one off the rail must give a few yards in ground (2 circuits x 360).
PS did not have a bet in the race anyway.
Think stalls were first used in 1985, but that’s not gospel.
Mike
Rare occurence, track had little option.
Put it down to one of those random things that’s going to hit you now and again (from a punting perspective) and get on with it.
But I never had a bet on it so I WOULD say that.
So to summarise, though stats don’t show any marked advantage for low drawn runners against mid or high drawn runners in finding winners, if you’re not looking for winners but just want to spin the stats towards horses that place, or don’t win, then you could do that, particularly by ignoring results for high drawn winners by excusing the form as it was a weak race, dodgy start, etc.
Though starts generally aren’t that important in distance races they really are in the chester cup and while the SL and other sites say a low draw is crucial at chester in races up to a mile, it’s wrong, as are others who say so.
Also, if high drawn horses place or win there are mitigating exceptional circumstances for this mistake happening, if only you look deep enough to find a false reason that suits, which isn’t too onerous as you don’t need to do this when low drawn runners win or place as that’s solid form.
Got it now, ta.
Have backed trap 1 across the card today, now choosing colour schemes for my Ferrari
Taking this year out of it:
Out of the 11 Chester Cups this century 9 were drawn low. Go figure.
Value Is Everythingsberry,I think the word Naieve would describe you well as Chester is historically renowned for its draw bias,as is Beverleys 5f course. Pontefracts 5-6f is renowned for its low number bias too,would you believe both 5f sprints at Epsom and Musselbrough have noticeable draw trends aswell,Incredible eh?
Taking this year out of it:
Out of the 11 Chester Cups this century 9 were drawn low. Go figure.Not sure how you ‘figure’ that out…if we exclude this year and look at the previous 9 years, we still have…
Bulwark drawn 11 in 2008,
Greenwich Meantime drawn 16 in 2007 and
Anak Pekan drawn 15 in 2005.Hope your not so sloppy when when calculating your 100% books
)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.