- This topic has 13 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
as someone who loves studying handicaps and being stuck with racing post god how i miss the sporting life (still got last copy printed wonder if its worth anything)would it not make more sense to print the runners in handicaps according to there weights instead of alphabeticaly that way you know the first horse you look at is top weight the last the bottom that way when you study the race form you know the position of the horse in relation to others in race i hope this does not sound to trivial but would make form so much easier to read thought i would post this had to get it of my chest
They are in alphabetical order in the form section so that can be found easily. The alternative would be looking for a particular horse in the form list when you weren’t sure where it was in the weights list. It’s swings and roundabouts really, and dependent upon what a particular reader requires.
I always found the Racing Post easier to work with than the Sporting Life, but then that’s just my feeling.
Rob
P.S. endevour, please find a few punctuation keys. I know I get a bee in my bonnet about such things, but seven lines without punctuation is hard going!
i am sorry about punctution, will try to do better as it used to say on report card,as far as i can see the handicap form is in alphabetical order i just thought it might be easier to read if the form was listed by weight, just one of the things i thought could be made easier
The cards appear in alphabetical order on the day of 5-day declaration (eg – Monday for a Saturday race) and then racecard order the following day.
sorry guys i am obviously not explaining very well, if you take say the5oclock at lingfield to day the first horse you look at in form guide is city for conquest, i just thought it would be easier if first horse was top weight lady bahia and then in weight order down to bottom horse,just one of these things that bug me never get old guys its bad for your health
In weight order i could see it being frustrating for a big field such as the Stewards Cup, you’d be forever flicking back and forth between the racecard and form to find a horse.
thanks for that guys i was beginning to think i had lost my marbles, not for the first time by the way
I’d imagine you were in the minority there, endevour. Alphabetical is the only logical way to do the form, especially when it’s usually on a separate page from the card. As mentioned elsewhere, a big field listed in weight order would be a pain!
Endevour – you are not alone in mourning the Sporting Life – I do so but for different reasons to you.
I find it difficult to find the information I want quickly. I think this is for 2 reasons. I’d rather have a slimmer broadsheet than a 100 page tabloid. Then there is the problem that information is ordered differently on different days..
In the index meetings are sometimes listed alphabetically sometimes not. In the paper the evening meeting cards and form is sometimes in the middle, sometimes at the front and back etc.The same problems apply to the news, editorial and tipping pages
A new Saturday paper lists cards for the weekend in dat and time order, which is handy, though it contains far less information than the Post.
If the Post wasn’t the only daily racing paper it might pay a bit more attention to organisation.
I’d imagine you were in the minority there, endevour. Alphabetical is the only logical way to do the form, especially when it’s usually on a separate page from the card. As mentioned elsewhere, a big field listed in weight order would be a pain!
Why is it?
well i may be in the minority,but to me the logical way to read handicap form is from top weight to bottom weight not alphabetically that way you can read from one horse to the next in correct weight order,but hey everyone to there own.
Newmarket (July) 23 August 2008
3:35 JUDDMONTE INTERNATIONAL STAKES (GROUP 1) (CLASS 1) (3yo+) Winner £141,925.00 1m2f GOODLive updates to the latest betting intelligence for this race will appear here
08:40 Meeting ABANDONED due to a waterlogged track.[/color:3gpxt9tz]
——————————————————-
Standards have slipped a tad.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.