- This topic has 29 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Come on Clive, i’m with Reet on this..
At what point are we earmarking the front and back 10? When they leave the stalls? Half way through the race? Furlong from home? Difficult substantiate an argument using this kind of methodology.
There’s a fairly lengthy straight at York and plenty of room to manouver. Its not like the track favours front runners in its conformation.
Why substantiate it?
I would say that the criteria is that you have fairly close up within the last two furlongs (not first 10…thats obviously dependent on how dispersed they are) in a way that is not essential at other courses
Of course there will be exceptioins , but its surely not an illusion that races pan out this way more at York (and especially newmarket in the autumn) than elsewhere
The majority of winners come from nearer the front than the back of the field approaching the closing stages in races. That’s because, unless a race has been (overly) strongly run, that is the best place to be with a relatively short distance to go.
I did a similar study at Lingfield a couple of years ago which showed that the average distance back of the winner from the leader 2f out in races up to a mile was about 2.5 lengths, and that was at a time when some people were stating that you had no chance if racing prominently at the track.
The idea that certain tracks have immutable "pace biases" is bunkum. There are many factors that go into determining whether there is a pace bias in a given instance, but the over-riding one is, unremarkably, the pace of the race itself.
Reet,
My research back then was my way of earning a living, so I don’t think it was a ‘daft theory’ mate
I also said, in connection with the research I did on York 6 years ago, it was ‘far from bomb proof’
Mike
Prufrocks method represents a more measurable approach.
Clive, if you can’t substantiate it with relevant empirical evidence its just an opinion and nowt more. Not that it makes your opinion necessarily incorrect.
I live 300 yards from course and walk it each day and hav theory on why frount runners do well (earlier argument in thread() -the course is flat ish at finish and I think that this helps those at frount last home more than courses wit up hill finish
- Total Posts 17716
According to the Sporting Life website GW is now a non-runner and Dylan Thomas will be the main AoB hope for this race.
Clearly AOB has taken heed of my observations about the difficulties with coming off the pace at York. Its good to see he reads this forum
Clearly AOB has taken heed of my observations about the difficulties with coming off the pace at York. Its good to see he reads this forum
Love it
I have a feeling you could be correct Clivex
Mike
- Total Posts 17716
Clearly AOB has taken heed of my observations about the difficulties with coming off the pace at York. Its good to see he reads this forum
Had he run, they would have ensured there wasn’t a pace to come off.
Peeping Fawn surely has to be considered a real live contender for the Arc now. She’s beating all the other fillies without Murtagh ever having to get serious.. What do the time bandits think? Has she posted any figures that would give her a chance? She’s not likely to get knocked about either as she’s a big girl…
And what’s happened to all this pace bias stuff?!
We had Pricewise yesterday telling us that it had been difficult to come from off the pace on the round course on the opening day, despite clear evidence to the contrary, and winners making all, coming from well back and racing in mid-field.
Is it just possible that, while the course and the state of the surface are essentially a constant on any given day, the one significant variable is the PACE SPECIFIC TO EACH INDIVIDUAL RACE?
Heavens: it can’t be that simple, surely!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.