- This topic has 66 replies, 19 voices, and was last updated 18 years, 6 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Reading the comments of connections, it would appear that everyone is happy with their draw. Does that indicate that Redcar is a fair track and that conditions are even right across the course?
I have had a brief and highly unscientific look at straight course results towards the end of 2005 and thought I spotted a slight bias towards the higher numbers, or rather away from very low numbers on GF going, but that was about it.
Has anyone made any more detailed study of the draw at Redcar (that they would be prepared to discuss on a public forum) or experience of the course itself (how wide it is, what the grass covering is like) as its a course I’ve never attended myself.
Thanks
Suggest you buy the Racing and Football Outlook and read Graham Wheldon, the draw king, in there. Last time I looked there was nothing in it at Redcar at a mile, except that it will always be a slight advantage to be near a rail.
Redcar, which I have attended many times(although not recently) is a very fair and relatively flat track. Wherever your fancy is drawn, it will win if it is good enough: there shouldn’t be any excuses over the straight mile.<br>I would say it is similar in character to York in that there is no discernable advantage from the draw on good ground and it isn’t easy to come from way off the pace over distances up to a mile. If the going is soft, the middle might be the best place to be, according to Dale Gibson. In short, forget the draw.
How many of those races had a field of nearly 30, where the runners were evenly spread across the course? Be careful in extrapolating results of smaller fields (even 20 runners average) to full fields like Saturday’s.
(Edited by carvillshill at 7:59 pm on Mar. 23, 2006)
Thanks to all for your contributions and to EC for the sterling work on the stats, much appreciated.
- Total Posts 17716
<br> <br> Analyse away!<br> It’s a fair course, and the best horse will win on the day.<br> Difficult to believe anyone can go to such lengths without even considering the horses involved????
Analyse away! <br>It’s a fair course, and the best horse will win on the day. <br>Difficult to believe anyone can go to such lengths without even considering the horses involved????
Analysis of the conditions under which the horses will be racing is a necessary precursor to studying the race. A strong draw bias can indicate that conditions across the track are not equal, or that they are equal. It may also show us nothing at all. No-one here has suggested it is the sole consideration.
- Total Posts 17716
The point is that one could spend 10 years analysing the draw at Redcar, maybe even prove that certain stalls have a couple of lbs advantage, but it would all be rendered meaningless if there is a horse elsewhere in the field that has more than that in hand. Wouldn’t necessarily be the favourite, either.<br> Each to their own, I suppose.:)
I rather doubt anyone outside a mental institution would consider spending ten years analysing the draw at Redcar.
Draw analysis is similar to looking at trends. A trend has no significance in its own right. But it may reflect something that exists in the real world. For instance, a draw bias may indicate that one side of the track drains more quickly than another, or that the way the course is configured makes it difficult for horses drawn wide to win. It isn’t simply a question of looking at the numbers and saying that such and such stall is somehow magically better than the others. If an apparent draw bias has no basis in reality, then I tend to conclude that it is a statistical anomaly and ignore it.
In the example you give, if I established that certain stalls had an apparent advantage of 2lb, that would hardly be a significant factor and I would largely ignore it.
In the style of Tony Blair, you are setting up a false premise in order to demolish it. Your premise is that I, or people who appear to take an interest in the effects of the draw, do so to the exclusion of all other factors. This is simply not the case. Horse-racing is a physical contest taking place in the real world and so serious consideration should be given to the conditions under which they are racing, notably the track, its contours, the going, the way it drains, the soil, grass cover etc. If you feel that none of this matters then good luck to you. But pay others the courtesy of taking their efforts seriously and if you have nothing constructive to add, consider cultivating a lofty silence.
There is an interesting article aboutthis subject in The Rowley File in the Sportsman today.
Quote: from carvillshill on 5:30 pm on Mar. 23, 2006[br]Suggest you buy the Racing and Football Outlook and read Graham Wheldon, the draw king, in there. Last time I looked there was nothing in it at Redcar at a mile, except that it will always be a slight advantage to be near a rail.<br>
Totally disagree, the rails are not places to be 5 either side will be scrubbed from my reckogning & what does GW know anyway! :biggrin:
- Total Posts 17716
Aranalde
Believe it or not, I was being constructive.<br> It is a horse race, for Christ’s sake, not an agronomy thesis!<br> On another thread, FlatSeasonLover has raised the question as to the ground rules for succesful punting.<br>Far better for him, in my view, to get to grips with the basics of horse racing, learn them, and how to apply them, than for him to believe the answers lie in miniscule draw advantages at Redcar.<br> Nothing lofty, no false premises, just sheer common sense.
Again you try to make a point by going to absurd extremes. Agronomy theses? Investigating the conditions under which a horse is going to run sounds like common sense to me.
Far better for him, in my view, to get to grips with the basics of horse racing, learn them, and how to apply them, than for him to believe the answers lie in miniscule draw advantages at Redcar.
Firstly, as you may have noticed, this is not a thread on the ground rules for good punting. Secondly, you assume that the people discussing the draw in this thread haven’t learnt the basics of horse racing, which frankly is a bit of an insult. Thirdly, no-one has stated that all the answers lie in miniscule draw advantages at Redcar. This is what I mean by a false premise – you are criticising statements that have never been made.
I started this thread because I was interested in picking the brains of the knowledgeable people on this forum who may know more than I about the configuration of the course at Redcar. To suggest that I or the people who reply to this thread are therefore only interested in the draw to the exclusion of other factors is absurd.
I look at a range of factors, as I’m sure others do, including the conditions under which the race will be run. Eminently sensible, I would have thought.
stav,
A fair point about the fate of favourites detracting from the ‘fairness’ of the track, but I think you would need a much larger sample to infer anything from the stats you quote. My evidence for fairness is not very rigorous, either, being only anecdotal based on my own general perceptions and those of several jockeys who have ridden the track.
Although it’s not important, "the lawyers dispute and case is still before the courts".
- Total Posts 17716
Aranalde<br> Absurd extremes? Try this:<br> Horse-racing is a physical contest taking place in the real world and so serious consideration should be given to the conditions under which they are racing, notably the track, its contours, the going, the way it drains, the soil, grass cover etc.<br> False premises based on statements that have never been made? Try this;<br>Secondly, you assume that the people discussing the draw in this thread haven’t learnt the basics of horse racing, which frankly is a bit of an insult.<br> Need I go on?
<br> Stav<br> Maybe it is something of a quantum leap to correlate the price of winners with the fairness of the course?<br> No hard evidence to support this view, but i would guess that the incidence of favourites winning at some of the ‘unfairest’ courses such a Beverley 5f, Chester 6f, <br>or Catterick 7f, is no worse than some of the ‘fairer’ courses. <br>
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.