Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Regarding Ascot: I’m as confused as anyone about the apparent fast time of the VC. Can only assume the sample size from which the standard time is derived is not large enough to be robust.
From my records.
Average standard times in seconds for all European courses ( Chase ), at this class and distance, over the past 10 years, are :-
Good 254
G/S 264
Soft 270Ascot 13:45 winning time was 253.4.
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
aaronizneez
Extract from Picking Winners – Andrew Beyer.
“The only time-consuming part of the process is the compilation of a set of average times for all the classes that a track offers. With these averages, a horseplayer can construct a parallel-time chart so that he can compare, at a glance, the performance of horses who have been running at different distances. With averages he can use the par-time method and make track variants in only a few minutes a day. He will be able to assess, more accurately than the vast majority of bettors, the real meaning of horses’ times.â€
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
Maxilon
1st MASLAK (IRE)
Last three times out has improved each time by an improved corrected time by 6.717 and then 2.041. Has run previously in a corrected time of 154.204 on 21/9/07 which is the fastest time over this distance. Has the 3rd fastest average for the last three runs at this distance. Has the fastest corrected time over ANY distance.
2nd CALCULATING (IRE)
Won LTO in a corrected time of 162.229, which was a corrected improvement of 6.118 on the 3/1/08 run. Has run in a corrected time of 156.179 on 8/12/07.
3rd BENTLEY BROOK (IRE)
Won 2nd LTO in a slower corrected time than LTO. Last three times out has improved each time by an improved corrected time by 4.837 and 0.785. Has run in a corrected time of 154.320 on 28/4/07. Has the second fastest time over this distance. Has the best form for the last three races run at this distance. Has the 2nd fastest corrected time over ANY distance.
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
Racing in 2/6 Good, 3/6 in Soft and 1/6 in Heavy could produce a G/S race time.
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
http://www.turftrax.com/html/coursecond … 97569&id=2
So it was Soft, Heavy in places. That explains it.
And the race distance was 2m +/- 110 yards
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
Fist of Fury
To ONLY way to determine the going is by the race times on the day.
Picking out why a horse won and anther lost is irrelevant.
If it wasn’t G/S yesterday at Ascot, what was it?
Fist of Fury
In view of the comments from Prufrock, I apologise for coming back a bit strong.
We are all leaning
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
Fist of Fury
To ONLY way to determine the going is by the race times on the day.
Picking out why a horse won and anther lost is irrelevant.
If it wasn’t G/S yesterday at Ascot, what was it?
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
Cheltenham Festival got it wrong last March. Warwick got it wrong last Saturday and Ascot got it wrong yesterday.
I agree that Ascot times were Good to Soft.
Sssssssssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh …….. keep it a secret
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
davidjohnson
I beg to differ.
Warwick 13th January 2007 – Saturday
Conditions Heavy
2:30 Ballymore Properties Leamington Novices’ Hurdle Grade 2 (Class 1) (4yo+) 9 hdles 2 omitted 2m5f
3rd Hills Of Aran @ 33/1
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
Thedarkknight
IMO Carruthers rating should have been – NO AVAILABLE DATA for the conditions.
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
Thedarkknight
I’d be interested to know how Whitley had a rating for Carruthers in Heavy when he had only raced 3 times, in going no worse than Soft. Or was the rating for Good going ?
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
So, does Timeform etc etc rate Warwick as Heavy or Soft or Heavy with a variance, which is nowhere near Soft ? Now it’s huge BOLLOX.
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
Ratings are useless when the Official going is heavy, at it was at Warwick – your looking for a differerent animal.
Even more missleading when the Going was actually the on the G/S side of Soft with Heavy in places – giving Soft times. In short, BOLLOX.
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
WINS – RUNS 3-12 25%
£1 Level stakes -£2.25
Longest Losing Sequence 4.NAD AL SHEBA,Fairmile,9/4,1,25/01/2007
NAD AL SHEBA,Alzerra,3/1,6,25/01/2007
NAD AL SHEBA,Notability,100/30,12,18/01/2007
NAD AL SHEBA,Golden Velvet,9/2,3,18/01/2007
NAD AL SHEBA,Zaafran,2/1,2,18/01/2007
NAD AL SHEBA,Formal Decree,11/4,1,18/01/2007
NAD AL SHEBA,Tax Free,9/2,4,25/01/2007
NAD AL SHEBA,Diamond Quest,4/1,3,18/01/2007
NAD AL SHEBA,Asiatic Boy,7/4,1,18/01/2007
NAD AL SHEBA,Engrupido,11/4,8,18/01/2007
NAD AL SHEBA,Tiza,11/8,8,25/01/2007
NAD AL SHEBA,Bennie Blue,5/2,11,25/01/2007Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
If you are going to blow your entire bank with a run of losses, perhaps better to have a stop loss. Say after 4 losses, go back to £5, accepting the £75 loss.
After a run of possible 8 losses, your loss is restricted to £150 instead of £640. And you NEVER have to place a bet more than £40.
This would have reduced the profit to January 13th to £147. On January 9th you would have broke even.
Funny how the longer the run of losses, the bigger the gain!
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
Leopardstown 13 January 2008
1:50 PIERSE LEOPARDSTOWN HANDICAP CHASE (GRADE A)VDW STIKES AGAIN.
Backing two runners is the relentless pursuit of value. Backing each way is a shortcut to the poor house. Only 7% make a long term profit.
