- This topic has 59 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 21 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
I think that was some time ago, Ultimate Nightmare.
In the equitrack era it sometimes seemed as if it was impossible to go too quickly in shorter-distance races there.
The first two races at Lingfield today saw horses coming through from the back (though not quite enough for those who backed the luckless Piquet). Rather than imagining that this was down to some sort of "track bias" I reckon that it was down to both races being strongly-run, and the clock backs that impression up.
Having not followed artificial-surface racing closely in recent months, I’m finding myself struggling to pick winners.
First off, I have an unfavourable impression of Lingfield. There seem to be a large number of races (particularly middle-distance races) that have ridiculously close finishes. When the horse in 8th or 9th is beaten only two to three lengths, it must inflate beaten horses speed ratings at the track.
Are there fewer races than I think with such close finishes? (and I think there are a lot by the way!)
Also, I find a lot of races have several or more contenders and that I can’t choose between them.
Basically, I’m struggling at all three tracks to pick winners. Artificial-surface racing is my favourite code – it’s how I became interested in racing in the first place. But I can’t get a hold on it now so if you guys could help me out with some opinions I’d be very grateful.
Rob.
If you want a good example of what codswallop so-called pace bias applied to an entire track can be, today’s card at Lingfield provides a pretty good example.
In the early races horses came from further back than usual and there was talk of its being impossible to win from the front.
Well, the leaders in those races all went faster than ideal to the 2f point.
Race 6 and most of the jockeys rein their mounts back, Miss Porcia sits in second before striking for home 2f out and wins a race in which she probably shouldn’t even have been placed. Her final 2f was the fastest by a winner all day to that point.
(Edited by Prufrock at 2:42 pm on Dec. 8, 2004)
I agree Pru, trying to use a track bias across the board in all races is madness, but if I think over the extended 9f at Wolvehampton there is a bias towards horses coming from off the pace, and in the race im looking at there are three front runners, and another three that race handy then I find it a relatively quick way of cutting the field down.
Any opinion’s on the draw at lingfield up to 9f
southwell up to 7f
<br>
(Edited by empty wallet at 5:26 pm on Dec. 8, 2004)
Sorry EW, cant help with draw on the AW but ill ask you a question – I found mid way through the Flat season that even if my selections hadnt ran well, in races of 1m and more I could usually study the race and find a reason why, therefore learning from my mistakes. However when I was backing sprinters, quite often they just ran below form for no apparant reason, so now I leave sprinters alone.
Does anyone else specialise in a particular type of race or distances?
Not enough data at Wolves.
Just done a draw analysis at Southwell which suggests that stalls 1 to 4 are good at 5f but that there isn’t much in it at 6f/7f (which I grouped together). I’m not entirely happy with the criteria used, however.
I specialise in 2-y-o races, twinkle, though I am prepared to bet on pretty much anything on the Flat (the worse the race the better in a way).
pru
edited post,should have been Lingfield
SOUTHWELL,all races upto 6/12/04
6f   10 runs  7 wins from D10 +<br>7f   8  runs  5 wins from D10 -<br>8f   14 runs 11 wins from D9- ÂÂÂ
(Edited by empty wallet at 6:17 pm on Dec. 8, 2004)
LINGFIELD all races 01/01/04-06/12/04
<br>6f   78 runs 66 wins D9-<br>7f  102 runs 73 wins D9-<br>
(Edited by empty wallet at 6:26 am on Dec. 9, 2004)
Thats interesting Pru, its not for me to say but I thought the common cosensus was that the lower the class racing, the more inconsistent the horses, do you not find this to be the case?
I usually dont bother with many races below D class, but it could just be im not as familiar with the horses involved.
I’m not saying it’s easy, but I have an edge if I find it less difficult than others do. Something’s got to win those sorts of races after all.
At the other end of the scale I find it very difficult to outdo people on Group 1 races. Every Tom, Dick and Harry seems to know the form. It’s not often that you can catch them unawares.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.