- This topic has 148 replies, 32 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
….Racing is part of our culture and certain things should not be changed for anyone.
………..I know the world is round and things change but you guys are beyond a joke.
…and this is a joke to me Fury.
Now I’m not getting involved in the subject of this thead but I’m going to take issue with you here even though you may not choose to respond but this one line has inflamed me a little.
You tell us frequently that you live in Thailand, although I’m admitting that I find this hard to believe at times, as you have been asked about it on occasions and you seem deliberately vague, however, to take it at face value, as you no longer live in this country what right is it of yours to dictate or complain about changes to this sport whichever way that occurs.
This really angers me when people go and live somewhere else and then whinge and complain about things going on in the UK when they no longer live here
.Anyway, enjoy your bean sprouts.
Well, at least we got him to say something constructive about stride length!
Thanks for that, Fister.
I didn’t go racing today, but i did manage to watch a little jumping on a screen. At the time, I hadn’t read your post, but, luckily enough – perhaps because of this thread – I did pay particular attention to the way animals finished.
On today’s showing, I regret to say that I didn’t spot many "quickeners" or much of a "turn of foot".
I realise it was only jump racing, but to my eye, "staying on dourly" seemed the recipe for success. The Dosage index is not something that interests me a lot, but I’d say that most of today’s winners demonstrated more "stamina" than "speed".
Of course, it may be that I’m just a dork or something, I guess, but I’d value the opinion of others who may have been watching.Anyway, as it’s now about one o’clock on Sunday morning out there in Pat Pong, I’d assume that you have found something more exciting to do in place of chatting on a messageboard about dumb animals and their stride patterns!
Chok dee!
I often feel that the finishes at Lingfield seem quite different from those at Wolverhampton.
Would a horse that appears to quicken and show a good "turn of foot" at Lingfield be just as likely to do so at Wolverhampton?
Here’s hoping the topic did not veer off course from stride length.
Shorter stride = sprinter.
Longer stride = stayer.That was my opinion. Now, it does not mean sprinter = races over 5-8 and stayer 10-16. Just means the longer the stride the more the horse will stay but a "sprint" is difficult to manage because he is covering more ground but longer time between pushing off the ground.
Thoughts?
I often feel that the finishes at Lingfield seem quite different from those at Wolverhampton.
… yes, I have thought that too, it is the next thing on my list to look at! My guess is that when they come down the hill to the final bend that they may have to be going less than flat out in order to safely negotiate it. This would imply that most horses would then ‘quicken’ as soon as they get into the straight proper. Just a hunch, but it should be evident one way or another in the data!
I don’t think we’re veering off course, MDeering, and thank you for your reply. I don’t think I quite grasped the significance.
When we’re looking at real racing with a view to working out the validity of the theory on which this thread is predicated, we have to look not only at the animals which can deliver this "turn of foot" or "quickening, but also at the track, the jockey and, as you have pointed out, the distance.
Btw, in Ireland/UK, i don’t think that one mile races ( 8f) are normally classed as "sprints". Here we tend to think of 5f and 6f as sprint distances.
The transition and dodgy distance is 7f. It’s a bit in between!Also, when I was chatting about "the distance", I was thinking more of the latter part of the race, when jockeys and their mounts, hopefully, make their "winning manoeuvres".
To me this is anything from the 2f out marker, but more learned scribes can put us straight on what is meant by "the distance".Yes Jim,
I’d tend to think that the data would show us the actuality, but this "turn of foot/quickening" which non-dorks found so plainly obvious, may, in fact, be more of a visual phenomenon than something that the measuring devices can pick up!
I still think we need that yoke that the speed cops use. Then we’d see who are the prize dorks and who are mere simpletons like myself who are struggling to understand.I intend to persevere with the thread as I believe the difference between "going on" and "finding f.a." is crucial to winning the race. Once we know what really happens when " the button is pushed" ( isn’t that a dorkish expression?), I’d say we’ll be well placed to separate the wheat from the chaff.
Don’t you just love the fkn bullshit?! I’m too long in this game, I think.Here are a few hints at what happens in the final few furlongs in AW races. The average speed achieved by each horse in going between the 4 and 3 furlong poles is taken as the reference. By way of example, taking the first line of the table, 5 furlongs at Kempton, 9% of horses exceeded their reference speed in going from the 3 to 2 furlong markers; 11% of horses exceeded their reference speed in going from the 2 to 1 furlong markers; 3% of horses exceeded their reference speed in going from the 1 furlong marker to the winning post. There were 528 horses in the sample. Looking at those same numbers slightly differently, we can say that 97% (the complement of the 3%) of horses were going slower in the final furlong than they were at about 3 furlongs out.
Lingfield is interesting because most horses quicken after coming around the final bend. At Southwell they just go slower and slower, which is perhaps not too surprising given the course configuration.
Hope this helps.
5—KEMPTON (A.W)—(9,11,3,528)
6—KEMPTON (A.W)—(67,45,9,1207)
7—KEMPTON (A.W)—(77,59,18,1397)
8—KEMPTON (A.W)—(82,66,19,1627)
10—KEMPTON (A.W)—(37,54,38,867)
11—KEMPTON (A.W)—(85,71,29,414)
12—KEMPTON (A.W)—(84,72,35,665)
16—KEMPTON (A.W)—(79,61,24,403)
5—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(82,23,10,611)
6—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(87,30,12,1699)
7—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(96,51,31,2253)
8—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(96,54,33,2048)
10—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(96,66,43,1763)
12—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(95,65,46,938)
13—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(96,59,40,247)
16—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(92,53,27,242)
16—LINGFIELD (A.W) NHF—(85,38,31,13)
5—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(0,0,0,207)
6—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(56,26,0,288)
7—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(54,31,4,272)
8—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(52,27,1,329)
11—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(74,51,11,123)
12—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(62,42,12,147)
14—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(63,39,22,41)
16—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(70,55,5,40)
5—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(2,2,0,1122)
6—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(5,9,3,1713)
7—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(12,21,9,1971)
9—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(18,32,15,2001)
9—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(18,37,20,1465)
12—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(20,36,19,1018)
14—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(14,35,19,542)
17—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(17,35,21,232)Thank you very much, Jim.
I’ll try get my head around it.
It’s probably more significant to look only at those runners that are in contention.
Perhaps this wouldn’t be so clear cut at Lingfield, where it seems even a runner in eighth position can fly up and win. That doesn’t happen so much at Wolver, and hardly ever at Southwell, imo.Kempton and Dundalk, I don’t know whether we can generalise.
When I get a few hours I am going to study this thread over. Although the title was a ludicrous suggestion, this thread has ended up being such a deeply discussed encyclopaedia.
I think the benefit of perseverence will make it worthwhile, Mdeering.
While fossicking in the Outback, I learnt that good things can be found in the most unlikely of places. A "Black Tracker" taught me that.
Everywhere I go I ask anyone and everyone what makes a horse go faster?
99% cannot give me an answer that satisifes my desire to know the real factors involved.
But, I still keep asking!Taking away the pain seems to be a big part of it.
When I get a few hours I am going to study this thread over. Although the title was a ludicrous suggestion, this thread has ended up being such a deeply discussed encyclopaedia.
The thread title was merely that, a title. You should have read my opening post. As it turns out it looks like I was wrong to say horses never quicken at the end of a race but it sounds as though they only quicken in about 3% of races. I agree this thread has discussed some interesting ideas (despite the attempts of some posters to derail/rubbish it). It would be useful now to see whether we can use the knowledge (that horses that appear to be quickening at the end of a race almost always aren’t quickening at all) to improve our analysis of form. AP kind of used this knowledge to develop his ‘Power’ theory but I think we can also use it to oppose certain runners next time out (in fairness to AP, laying horses wasn’t an option when he wrote ‘Against the Crowd’)
With regard to Dancing Brave, one of the great examples of change of gear, acceleration, quickening, whatever slant you want to use, see the
below URL where Guy Harwwod gives an insight into the horse`s ability to quicken.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jIwyBInYTeI
Regards,
Llanrumneyboy
A good thread, Tuffers, imo, with the title being a good enough hook to catch even those who had no interest in the subject.
llanrhymni; thanks for that. Interesting.
As it turns out it looks like I was wrong to say horses never quicken at the end of a race but it sounds as though they only quicken in about 3% of races.
Careful, if the 3% refers to my earlier post, that only applied to 5 furlongs at Kempton AW, I wasn’t making a general statement about the 3%. Nor was I directly addressing ‘quickening’, the stats compare average sectional speed with a reference average sectional speed (it being the average speed between the 3 and 4 furlong markers), hope that makes sense! The bottom line is that you have to read the fine print.
Jim
with the title being a good enough hook to catch even those who had no interest in the subject.
And if the content of the original posting hadn’t adopted such an opinionated tone it may not have generated such antipathy in some quarters! Can we all agree on that?
Well, I can’t comment, scallywag, as I have no opinion on the title at all. It’s immaterial to me.
I am trying to work out what is the equine equivalent of a rev counter or whatever it is that measures acceleration.I’m a long way off understanding, imo.
" Press the button". " Ask the question". Hans Blix.
.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.