- This topic has 8 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 11 months ago by
.
- Posts
Conflict of opinions on the RP and SL sites, RP seem to think that a low draw is a disadvantage whereas SL believe the opposite….seeing as it’s quite a stiff left handed track those drawn low would tend to get the best position?
Very soft ground definitely favours those coming wide. But I did my own research about ten years ago and found high numbers also had an advantage on all bar very firm ground. Presumably it hasn’t changed.
Value Is EverythingGround/distance obviously have an effect but just raised it as a topic due to the two differing slants on the draw from the big two racing sites – surely they would’ve come to a consensus instead of adding further woes to the already hard job of the form student?
The relevance of the draw at Bath like most courses is minimal, though some people like spend lots of time on minimal factors in trying to guess the outcome, each to their own.
I would say the RP is simply out of date – there was an historical bias in favour of the low draw but results in recent years seem to disprove the theory and there does not seem to be a bias except where, as Ginge pointed out, very testing ground (not that common at Bath)
From what i’ve seen at Bath the low draw, in the sprints, seems to ‘force’ jockeys in the low number stalls to use a lot of energy (horse and jockey) trying to ensure they keep their ‘favoured’ position in the first couple of furlongs.
Then come 1 to 2 furlongs out the horses on the inside become tired out and start to lose position.I suppose the same can be said at Chester….were a few winners coming from double figure stalls at the last meeting. I guess the draw is only significant within the context of a race…
I looked at races of 9 runners and more, and again 16+ handicaps. Splitting fields in to three camps, low, middle and high. High numbers did significantly better with ground on the soft side. As you might expect, the bigger fields had bigger bias. Bias became gradually less pronounced on good and good-firm (but still there at most meetings) until no draw bias on firm and firm-hard.
As Wilts says, the kink in the rail after the first couple of furlongs in sprints may have something to do with it, those on the rail going too quick early-on to keep a position and having nothing left at the finish.
It was years before I noticed anyone (even Timeform) change their "draw advantage".
Shame I can’t find my notes.
Value Is EverythingThe relevance of the draw at Bath like most courses is minimal, though some people like spend lots of time on minimal factors in trying to guess the outcome, each to their own.
I agree, draw advantage is minimal at most courses, but if you’ve got information that not many punters know about it can help give you an edge.
So many punters know about the Chester draw now, that it can be advantageous to go against the bias. As high draws are neglected by punters, prices become too big, making it worth investing in some poorly drawn horses.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.