The home of intelligent horse racing discussion
The home of intelligent horse racing discussion

Topology of UK Racecourses

Home Forums Horse Racing Topology of UK Racecourses

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1313279
    Avatar photolythamlife
    Participant
    • Total Posts 13

    Can anyone direct me to a website illustrating the topology of those UK Racecourses that are not flat? When trying to assess form, its one thing to consider that a track may be described as undulating but without having a visual representation of the rises and falls in elevation and where these occur, its sometimes difficult to explain performances especially for those interested in sectional timings. The nearest I’ve seen was ITV’s coverage of the Epsom Derby meeting where they used a topology model to show the undulations of this track and how and where the elevation changes for different race distances.

    #1313284
    Avatar photoSteeplechasing
    Participant
    • Total Posts 6114

    I believe Simon Rowlands, who sometimes posts here (as Prufrock) uses Google Earth. If so, it’s safe to assume no better tool is available.

    #1313302
    Avatar photoGingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 33017

    Newbury is thought of as a “flat course”, but didn’t seem very flat when I ran around it once. Surprised me that both the back straight and home straight are both gradually uphill. Starts to descend (more rapidly than you’d notice by the cameras) from the end of the back straight, levels out around the home turn before another short only very slight downhill at the start of the straight, then gradually climbing to the finishing line.

    Value Is Everything
    #1313318
    Avatar photoTheBluesBrother
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1085

    When I first started compiling speed figures, to bring all the different racecourse configurations and race distances into line, I came up with my lbs per length formula.

    Example:
    Epsom 5f = 3.63 (run downhill, the higher the figure the easier the trip)
    Pontefract = 3.25 (last 2 furlongs run uphill)

    The difference between the two race distances is 0.38 (1.9 lengths)

    You will find all lbs per length figures in my standard time list.
    Standard times: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3rVp0WNvwn8anUySlNvSjN1bXM

    Mike.

    #1313320
    Avatar photoDrone
    Participant
    • Total Posts 6011

    The Racing Post maps are reasonable: they point out the highest and lowest points, make an attempt to illustrate the topography and have the Google satellite image attached, though Streetview doesn’t seem to be working: the little chap is taking a walk at midnight on my browser

    Type course name in to the search box, click course on the drop down menu, click name of course and on the course pop-up click ‘course map’

    That’s how I did it anyway!

    #1313353
    Avatar photoCav
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4833

    Cant get the photo to display on the forum.

    Here’s a link to the Towcester 2 mile course. You can do this with Google Earth using the elevation profile tool.

    https://s1.postimg.org/m3iw8b2zj/Towcester.jpg

    #1313376
    Avatar photoDrone
    Participant
    • Total Posts 6011

    That’s a great tool Cav, thanks; and despite having had Google Earth for years have never tried it

    What more could the OP wish for?

    Had a go with York’s 14f course and it fluctuates by about 3m around the mean, comapared to about 15m at Towcester. No surprise there!

    #1313377
    Avatar photoSteeplechasing
    Participant
    • Total Posts 6114

    Cav, do I need to download Earth? Can’t seem to even drop a pin never mind plan a route on the online version.

    #1313380
    Avatar photoCav
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4833

    Hi Joe

    You’ll need to get the download version of Earth alright.
    Then click on the ruler icon near the top center.
    Then click on Path.
    When that window opens tick the “Show Elevation Profile” at the bottom left.

    :good:

    #1313410
    Avatar photoSteeplechasing
    Participant
    • Total Posts 6114

    Thanks, Cav. I see Google Earth Pro is now free. Might as well download that one.

    #1313466
    Avatar photoSteeplechasing
    Participant
    • Total Posts 6114

    Aintree, described by Timeform as “perfectly flat throughout” rises 10 metres from Canal Turn to winning post according to Google Earth

    #1313489
    Avatar photoDrone
    Participant
    • Total Posts 6011

    A 10m rise over a run of 1880m (1.17miles) is a gradient of 1:188 or as a percentage 0.53%. So, largely negigible and it is of course countered by the commensurate drop of 10m from start to Canal Turn

    These graphs are very good but the axes are not set to the same scale: the path (x-axis) is squeezed to fit the page, hence the undulations, inclines and declines are significantly amplified which gives a false sense of their maginitude

    That said, what strikes me about Aintree is how free of undulations it appears to be: the gradual incline is more or less linear, which is perhaps what Timeform mean by ‘perfectly flat’

    #1313510
    Avatar photoSteeplechasing
    Participant
    • Total Posts 6114

    Fair points, Drone. I’m rubbish at physics but wouldn’t the same energy need to be expended to climb that final 10M whether it was over a mile or a 100 metres? Intensity obviously different but overall???

    I just did Cheltenham Old Course and the climb from the turn-in to the post is just 8M according to GE. A good trivia question if nothing else: “which rises more, the GN course from the Canal Turn or the final hill at Cheltenham?”

    #1313511
    Avatar photoSteeplechasing
    Participant
    • Total Posts 6114

    BTW, here’s that Cheltenham profile.

    #1322380
    bobble
    Participant
    • Total Posts 3

    I would just like to thank everyone for the useful insights and especially Thebluesbrother for sharing his Standard Times which I suspect will prove very helpful up the road

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.