- This topic has 14 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 19 years, 9 months ago by
.
- Posts
To me, going preference is one of the most important parts of race analysis, but determining a horses ground preference without a fair amount of past performance data is at best, a guess, or is it
Can we determine the going preference of a horse from it’s Sire/Dam statistics <br>
(Edited by empty wallet at 5:06 am on July 20, 2006)
I agree with the importance of going and is the next impotant variable after raw ability of the horse. The last time I looked at sire stats for going preference a few years ago the results were not very encouraging. Got some new tools now and planning to revisit this.
Agree Wallace,
Sire stats are in the main too generalised, a more detailed analysis is needed for determining the going preference, although even this is still guesstimation
<br>
(Edited by empty wallet at 12:15 pm on July 20, 2006)
Agree that this information is seemingly overlooked, which is very odd given that its certainly a characteristic that seems to be passed down. I have often found myself scrabbling around for the sires preferences when there is an element of doubt about such and such runner trying a new surface
Not sure that we have to give everything a number, but if there is a reasonable indication thats easily accesible, i would like to see it
One idea I had for determining going preference was to use the stats published for each horse in the RP. They are published in the form
A – B – C for both extremes of going i.e 1. good to firm or firmer and 2. good to soft or softer.<br>A is the number of wins<br>B is the number of places<br>C is the total number of runs on that type of going(either 1 or 2).
My suggestion for putting values to ABC would be 3 for a win(A), 1 for a place(B) and 3 for every run(C) and then express the going preference as a percentage using the simple formula:
Going Preference = [(3A +B)*100]/C (g/f) – <br> [(3A +B)*100]/C (g/s)
A positive result would indicate a preference for good to firm and a negative result the opposite. It wouldn’t work with horses that have only run a few times, but might be useful for those who had run about 5 or more times.
A worked example from today’s racing:
Epsom 8.20 MISTER BENEDICTINE(13 runs on turf)<br>g/f 1-2-7 g/s 0-0-0
23% -0% =+23
This sort of analysis has its limitations but it might be useful under certain circumstances such as sudden changes in the going.
Interesting idea Artemis and including a stop loss would be a good idea, but my worry would be the accuracy of the RP going descriptions
EW,
Fully appreciate the possibility of inaccurate RP going – I have complained about it often enough.
I’m not with you on stop loss. Can you explain?
The clear problem here is that a placed performance (or even a just out of frame) on its prefered going might be a far more meritous achievement than a win (in a soft maiden say) on going that wasnt ideal. But the win would be rated higher
yer put a limit on (say within 5 lengths of winner) to not including stragglers, so to make yer data a little more accurate
You can adjust it for distance and maybe going
EC, Clivex,
I entirely agree. It is almost impossible to get a true picture of a horse’s going preference without delving deep into the form book and being able to interpret the information. I’m always looking for short cuts that give me a blurred snapshot of some aspect of a horse’s ability, but I realise that this is a lazy approach. Still, life is short and we cannot spend all our time in this quiet area of life’s hubbub. I think this particular area lends itself to analysis using Raceform Interactive which might look at ratings achieved on particular types of ground. But it still wouldn’t be all that reliable.
Some interesting points .. when I am looking at going preference I tend to concentrate on the extremes of going where any advantage would be exaggerated.
Instead of looking at stats, which can be misleading, I reckon you are better off looking at a horses leg action and try and assess those which will be suited to fast ground and those suited to soft ground.
For example, Mylo, has a ‘skipping’ action when trying to quicken which may be suited to either going, but would be an advantage on fast ground.
Just a thought.
True EC .. the main point, as with all things horsey is knowing the preference before the horse has won, so unless you know about gee-gees then your stuffed really, imho.
Im not sure what the problem is here
A perusal of most top class horses career will give a pretty good indication of the going preference (if there is one) and most decent trainers get to know that sooner or later. Just because there is no statistical model doesnt mean that its information that should be ignored
All I need to know is how clearly this is passed down through the genes. Suspect that it has come through the sire more than dam
not so sure about that clivex, preference from the dam side can e v informative too. i remember a discussion on here re a maiden race a while ago and i pointed out that while the sire stats showed no particular preference either in the sire race career or its hundred (too many?) of offspring, it had won on soft, the dam had won her only race on soft and the dams 4 other offspring all showed a preference for soft. problem being of course when a dam has no other offspring to compare but you can compare siblings going upwards – not sure i have any conclusion here but definitely v interesting and worth looking at for unraced maidens, imo
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.