- This topic has 27 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 2 months ago by
.
- Posts
I notice only one run over C&D and that was 13 seconds faster off 3lbs lower. So maybe those extra three pounds today slowed him down over 50 lengths according to your logic…………
The Paddy Power was run over a different course (the old course) and a different distance (half a furlong shorter).
Thats cruel you’re using real facts
The Americans have always dismssed weight, though I think some may now be taking note of it. Beyer ignored weight carried in his Speed Ratings. It is understandable for the Americans to ignore weight, because there is only a narrow weight range in their h’caps, and I think in their claimers too. Also in their dirt races, it was the duels for the early lead that were an important factor in deciding the winner.
Mordin ignores weight in his speed ratings.
Raceform Update ignored or ignores weight in its speed ratings.My speed ratings were on a lb scale, and done on a spreadsheet, so I took weight into account as it was easy to do.
The problem with pace is that you need to analyse or scrutinise each race, but I suppose that is the burden with weight and speed handicapping as well..
I don’t know whether people just haven’t taken to placemat, or are just on a wind-up, but pace has always been a factor. There is mention in the Alex Bird book of a race where he didn’t think a 7/2 shot, or whatever, would stay. However, they crawled along for the first couple of furlongs, and the same price was still available in the Ring, so Bird took it.
Gerald, I don’t think it’s a case of whether people have taken to Placemat or not (it’s an internet forum and who cares anyway) but rather other than an unsubstantiated claim what’s Placemat actually offered to a debate on Pace – the effects of or otherwise.
As Glenn has alluded too when people make claims that others thinking/reasoning are subject to a ‘trick’ of Evolutional Psychology at the very least it would be polite to explain why their musings aren’t subject to the same ‘trick’. As Glenn has asked – how has Placemat tested his theory to know his findings are themselves not subject to ‘randomness’.
IMO weight is relevent but not to the degree accepted by the "Industry". As a rather obese person, i know it does make a difference; on tarmac the difference is less than on grass or in extreme boggy mud (walking the dog )
I therefore conclude the same for horses. I would say though even then some horses can carry weight better than others. (there goes my machine theory).Glenn. We have had this discussion before and you failed to accept my arguments, so I don’t see why it should be different now.
However, in the example you give, if Horse A runs 5f in 60 sec and Horse B runs 5f in 62 sec, and (according to your hypothesis) the most efficient way to run the race is evenly, then Horse B would have been better off running the race in 12.4 sec segments and should in fact be capable of running the race rather quicker than that as a result of better pacing. In reality, the reason for a horse weakening so much at the end of a race may have nothing to do with incorrect energy distribution.
As far as proving the efficacy of a method of sectional-timing analysis, then it depends on what you claim for that method. I claim (or did when I was doing sectionals regularly) to be able to quantify results more accurately with sectionals than by analysis of overall race times alone. Overall race times often "suggest" (to those who wish to interpret them in this manner) that a horse is no good when all it reflects is that the overall time itself was no good.
As I set out to make time analysis less one-dimensional, and to bring it closer into line with our knowledge of what horses are capable of through form analysis, it is not exactly surprising that I can claim to have achieved this and that the exercise was a "success" by its own terms of reference. My sectional-time analysis gets closer in general to form-analysis figures than does analysis of overall time. That is what it sets out to do.
The interesting results come when the general methodology that achieves this (i.e. which marks up the time performance of horses that have gone too fast or too slow in an exponential manner but in line with what could be expected of the horses from what we know of their ability) chucks up occasional instances where a horse seems to have outrun its ability. This particularly happens with horses that seem to have run inefficiently but have still recorded respectable, or even better, times.
James might have been right to have attributed the results of all races on the night in question to the vagaries of pace. It is certainly an infinitely more plausible theory than the one that a track is "favouring front runners" with no allowance for how quickly/slowly, efficiently/inefficiently those front runners were racing.
However, a simple consideration of pace is not everything when it comes to determining the outcome of a race and whether he was right or not with his off-the-cuff remarks should really be borne out by the sectionals themselves.
Overall race times often "suggest" (to those who wish to interpret them in this manner) that a horse is no good when all it reflects is that the overall time itself was no good.
I used the above method for a period of time and applied it to the all weather. It was frustrating to say the least; until we had the proper paced racing days when winners grew on trees. with the poorer animals i found i knew what they can do not when they were going to do it. On the other hand i knew the ones that were very unlikely to ever do it! But without a large enough bank and total faith in my findings i wasn’t about to start laying on betfair. As i have stated many times i am a "small" fun mug punter with an interest in horseracing/results, i am not a horsey person..
I guess ive been slagged now look at the win at newcastle over hurdles.What do you see there.
paceform.org
by the way.All the SPACEFORM and piss taking makes no odds to me.Just keep coming to paceform.org to make money.I know what i am talking about and picking winners is enough.
paceform.org
I guess ive been slagged now look at the win at newcastle over hurdles.What do you see there.
paceform.org
pm2
I read a couple of minor digs, but mainly constructive criticism or those expressing an alternative view. Believe me, if we all got cheesed off so quickly by that many of us would have departed long ago.
If your method works for you then fine, good luck to you.
Rob
I guess ive been slagged now look at the win at newcastle over hurdles.What do you see there.
paceform.org
pm2
I read a couple of minor digs, but mainly constructive criticism or those expressing an alternative view. Believe me, if we all got cheesed off so quickly by that many of us would have departed long ago.
If your method works for you then fine, good luck to you.
Rob
It works and out there for all to see unlike the minor knockers as you put them.Knockers they are
I therefore conclude the same for horses. I would say though even then some horses can carry weight better than others. (there goes my machine theory).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.