Forum Replies Created
- Posts
…I don’t Post here very often!
…but loved the Barry interviews. I used to be an ultra Lingfield AW regular in the 1990s/2000s, who would bet with Barry when his prices were best. would often ask for fractions and he would say “what are fractions”?
Barry projects a gruff exterior, but I think he might be a Teddy Bear really…
The following quote from the BHA Handicapper’s blog might be of interest to you:
"The weights for all the Cheltenham handicaps were revealed last Wednesday in the traditional press conference held at Prestbury Park, writes Martin Greenwood.
Part of the process involved telling members of the audience the likely cut-off point for their runners (i.e. what rating will likely give your horse a run). I also pointed out that if you were able to win between times you would incur a 5lb penalty, which would help the horses slightly lower down the handicap, and that scenario played out at Newbury on Friday.
Poole Master, trained by David Pipe, was rated 130 prior to the race, which in normal years would just about get you into both the Coral Cup and the Pertemps, which he is entered in. Poole Master is also entered in the Martin Pipe Handicap for conditionals on the Friday of the Festival. This particular race always attracts a mammoth entry, and the weights on the day are usually very compressed, usually only around 12lb separates top weight from bottom, meaning you would normally need to be rated in the high 120s to get in. This year the race has moved from a 0-140 to a 0-145, meaning the likelihood is that you would have to be rated around 133 to get in which of course would have put Poole Master’s participation in the race David would clearly love to win for the first time in serious jeopardy.
Luckily, Poole Master will be able to race off 135, thus enabling him to run in any of the handicaps at Cheltenham, after he scooted up in a novice at Newbury. Top rated on BHA figures after winning his last two novices, Poole Master was pretty impressive in accounting for Nicky Henderson’s promising Let’s Get Serious (who was receiving 4lb) by five lengths, the winning distance not doing justice to his superiority. With the rest of the field well strung out this looked a decent renewal of the race, and Poole Master is now rated 144, meaning he will be 9lb ‘well in’ at The Festival."
I was going to say very much the same, but got sidetracked by another thread!
As said, the RP communication makes no mention of the 50% price increase and disguises it with fluff about meaningless additions.
They really must think that their customers are gormless. I wish they had come clean, rather than being over-clever, because I have to say that even the new price is value for money, at least for my requirements.
JimF
Crazy Horse,
Many thanks for the JW link.
I haven’t posted here for a long time, but I thought I would drop by today and winge about the forthcoming 50% hike in the RP online price. The Racing Post header caught my eye, so I stumbled upon your post (and link) by chance.
We also have severe autism in the family and I can easily identify with JW’s heartfelt thoughts, particularly the slow dawning and the compulsion to bury ones head in the sand.
JW is a lateral thinker and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. It is the lateral thinkers who can unearth "Value" by pointing in directions different from the pack. I frequently disagree with his thoughts on horse racing, but he is always worth listening to in case he drops a gem of an idea that is worth developing.
Good luck to him and his son, Jossie.
JimF
In a couple of days she had managed to train me into how to walk a mare from the field into her box.Colin
… what a lovely story!
Horses are horses, humans are humans. Right from the start of this thread there has been a bias towards shaping a horse into human thinking/conditioning. Clearly, if you ‘compare’ horse intelligence to human intelligence, using a human scale of comparison, the horse loses. But anyone who takes the trouble to closely observe/understand the animal kingdom from their (the animals) viewpoint will quickly be rewarded with some special quality of mutual understanding – I like to think it is (mutual!) intelligence.
Just to give a slightly different angle to what has already been said, I think you have to add to the equation that CH4 are currently in the midst of an important future funding negotiation, in many ways their future is at stake. The prize that is up for grabs is whether or not CH4 will become a serious competitor for the BBC public sector broadcasting funds. It is therefore a particularly bad time for CH4 to be promoting loose cannons such as Mac, having what are mostly dated, controversial and sexist views. Just my pennyworth!
So this was when the horse was generally 7/1 but Blue Sq were standout at 9/1 with no one offering 8’s. I saw the same and clicked on it, but when the Blue Sq bet slip came up it was clearly marked on it that the 9/1 was for the Royal and SunAliiance.
… I didn’t know that, many thanks, it makes a bit more sense now, so clearly the price was well out of line, but I suspect that my son simply ‘knew’ the race as the 2:35 at Cheltenham, rather than the Arkle or the Royal and SunAlliance, but I will ask him about it.
Thanks Zoso, I’ll pass on your good advice … it just seems so unfair to me.
FoF, I’ve just checked, and according to the Racing Post site, Tidal Bay is still declared for tomorrow!
they will argue if it lost would he be saying he actually meant to back him for the Sun Alliance for which he will undoubtedly be a non-runner?
They might do, but it was his intention, and obviously so from his actions, that he wanted to back Tidal Bay in the Arkle … As I said, he was viewing the Arkle market on Oddschecker. He then clicked on the Blue Square price to place a bet, that then opened a Blue Square betting slip, he completed the log-in details and amount, then placed the bet.
In these circumstances, would anyone even think of checking details beyond the correct selection name and amount?
Yes, great to meet everyone and to put faces to names. The Moules mariniere frites was divine, just ask Clive! Then there was the bottled beer at 8.4% … ouch. Lovely evening.
As it turns out it looks like I was wrong to say horses never quicken at the end of a race but it sounds as though they only quicken in about 3% of races.
Careful, if the 3% refers to my earlier post, that only applied to 5 furlongs at Kempton AW, I wasn’t making a general statement about the 3%. Nor was I directly addressing ‘quickening’, the stats compare average sectional speed with a reference average sectional speed (it being the average speed between the 3 and 4 furlong markers), hope that makes sense! The bottom line is that you have to read the fine print.
Jim
Here are a few hints at what happens in the final few furlongs in AW races. The average speed achieved by each horse in going between the 4 and 3 furlong poles is taken as the reference. By way of example, taking the first line of the table, 5 furlongs at Kempton, 9% of horses exceeded their reference speed in going from the 3 to 2 furlong markers; 11% of horses exceeded their reference speed in going from the 2 to 1 furlong markers; 3% of horses exceeded their reference speed in going from the 1 furlong marker to the winning post. There were 528 horses in the sample. Looking at those same numbers slightly differently, we can say that 97% (the complement of the 3%) of horses were going slower in the final furlong than they were at about 3 furlongs out.
Lingfield is interesting because most horses quicken after coming around the final bend. At Southwell they just go slower and slower, which is perhaps not too surprising given the course configuration.
Hope this helps.
5—KEMPTON (A.W)—(9,11,3,528)
6—KEMPTON (A.W)—(67,45,9,1207)
7—KEMPTON (A.W)—(77,59,18,1397)
8—KEMPTON (A.W)—(82,66,19,1627)
10—KEMPTON (A.W)—(37,54,38,867)
11—KEMPTON (A.W)—(85,71,29,414)
12—KEMPTON (A.W)—(84,72,35,665)
16—KEMPTON (A.W)—(79,61,24,403)
5—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(82,23,10,611)
6—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(87,30,12,1699)
7—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(96,51,31,2253)
8—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(96,54,33,2048)
10—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(96,66,43,1763)
12—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(95,65,46,938)
13—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(96,59,40,247)
16—LINGFIELD (A.W)—(92,53,27,242)
16—LINGFIELD (A.W) NHF—(85,38,31,13)
5—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(0,0,0,207)
6—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(56,26,0,288)
7—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(54,31,4,272)
8—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(52,27,1,329)
11—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(74,51,11,123)
12—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(62,42,12,147)
14—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(63,39,22,41)
16—SOUTHWELL (A.W)—(70,55,5,40)
5—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(2,2,0,1122)
6—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(5,9,3,1713)
7—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(12,21,9,1971)
9—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(18,32,15,2001)
9—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(18,37,20,1465)
12—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(20,36,19,1018)
14—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(14,35,19,542)
17—WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W)—(17,35,21,232)I often feel that the finishes at Lingfield seem quite different from those at Wolverhampton.
… yes, I have thought that too, it is the next thing on my list to look at! My guess is that when they come down the hill to the final bend that they may have to be going less than flat out in order to safely negotiate it. This would imply that most horses would then ‘quicken’ as soon as they get into the straight proper. Just a hunch, but it should be evident one way or another in the data!
… you might want to enter some of your work in the annual writing awards for young people, see http://www.mrwc.org.uk/willswritingawards/. It is a chance to get yourself noticed, I think the winning article(s) is printed in the Racing Post, The Irish Field etc I also seem to remember that the prize includes work experience at the Racing Post. Hope this helps.
Here are some numbers from the Turftrax data. Distance in furlongs, course, % of horses displaying positive acceleration (of more than 0.1m/s/s – a tiny amount in other words!) as they crossed the finishing line. N is the total number of horses. The conclusion is that there are very few horses that are still displaying (significant) positive acceleration on the line. I will try to post more stats of what happens in the final few furlongs if there is sufficient interest.
D Course % (N)
5 KEMPTON (A.W) 0.38 (528)
7 KEMPTON (A.W) 0.14 (1397)
8 KEMPTON (A.W) 0.12 (1627)
10 KEMPTON (A.W) 1.04 (867)
12 KEMPTON (A.W) 0.30 (665)
16 KEMPTON (A.W) 0.74 (403)
5 LINGFIELD (A.W) 1.47 (611)
6 LINGFIELD (A.W) 1.24 (1699)
7 LINGFIELD (A.W) 2.49 (2253)
8 LINGFIELD (A.W) 3.13 (2048)
10 LINGFIELD (A.W) 1.76 (1763)
12 LINGFIELD (A.W) 3.52 (938)
7 NEWBURY 0.47 (425)
7 NEWMARKET 0.14 (719)
10 NEWMARKET 0.66 (305)
6 NEWMARKET (JULY) 0.17 (582)
7 NEWMARKET (JULY) 0.28 (721)
5 SOUTHWELL (A.W) 0.28 (725)
8 SOUTHWELL (A.W) 0.07 (1525)
11 SOUTHWELL (A.W) 0.41 (482)
12 SOUTHWELL (A.W) 0.80 (500)
6 WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W) 0.06 (1713)
7 WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W) 0.10 (1971)
9 WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W) 0.15 (2001)
9 WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W) 0.55 (1465)
14 WOLVERHAMPTON (A.W) 0.37 (542)
6 YORK 1.14 (528)
