Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Thanks for providing the numbers Ken, it gives a much better idea of how the column is performing. Any tipping service yielding a profit is always a welcome one but I would just point to this "more scientific" approach giving 221 losers from 375 selections and perhaps question the strike rate, given the edge the sectionals should provide.
I will try to explain the quote:-
in how many races did the sectional time actually be reflected as the relevant and probable factor in the result?
What I mean by that, is that we can take any system that generates tips and then measure the success of it in terms of win/lose/profit/loss. A winner is a winner but what I meant was whether you can analyse the sectionals of the race just won and directly tie it to the previous sectionals that led to the horse being tipped in the first place. I am wondering if some of the winning selections actually won but the sectional times didn’t reflect the theory.
Punters were brought up without sectionals and I suppose it’s hard to change their habits. There is enough to consider in a race already and until the data becomes consistently and widely available it is unlikely we will see more people beginning to embrace the concept. Some punters will still be picking a horse on the basis that it is "Due a win"
The Timeform Sectionals method is a cut down version of sectional timings that uses just single races to identify horses that "could" achieve a higher (or lower) Timeform performance rating in that race had the pace been more even. There are far better methods if you have more data but it is suited to the scarcity of sectional data in UK. From identifying horses that should be rated higher but cannot be by traditional methods, Timeform identify horses that are possibly well in for future races. They have a theory – they apply and test the theory, and it works in practice to a far higher level than chance. That is the scientific method.
When it comes to future races there is often no applicable sectional data for other runners. Sectionals are not used for prediction of that race. The well-in horse either proves it is well-in or other horses with no data are even more well-in or the pace is wrong again and the Timeform well-in horse does not rise to the expected extra potential. If you ignore the actual causal conditions of the race (cause not correlation) you are not being scientific at all – just pedantic. The method has proven to work in that the predictions of extra ability are predicted and published by sectional data ahead of future races.
It is exactly the same with speed ratings except you have these for each horse in the predicted race. A horse with an outstanding speed rating may win a slow or fast race or lose to a "slower" horse that has greatly improved on the training grounds, or lose as the pace shape was not at all suited to its best performance. These are part of the imponderable’s of racing. All you are doing is having some evidence that it is possible that your selection is superior. If it is profitable long term ,and it is, then that is all that matters.
Robert, I accept that STs are much more useful in the USA where many races are pillar to post affairs and, crucially, where 99% of the tracks share the same layout, and in many cases, the same surface.
I’d struggle to name one track = Chester might be the closest – that resembles a USA track closely enough to bolster your argument.
How many jockeys took part in that trial you mentioned? On what ground, and how many chances did they get to do it? How far out were they?
Doubtless some would benefit from a stint at these foreign tracks, but I believe most of the guys earning a living riding here are pretty good at judging the pace of a race while they’re involved in it.
You may be missing the point. I have only said USA has had sectionals for over a century and they have worked out how to use them. Sectionals are far less use in USA because races are run wire to wire. Sectionals are far more informative where the tracks have different layouts and gradients. If you only have one number – a final time – all tracks in effect become the same.
My memory of the trials was about 16 took part.
It was at Newmarket so the ground was not an issue.
They were asked to do 12’s so 12’s must have been possible.
Don’t recall how many chances – but you only get one chance in a real race. I think the worst was 15 seconds – not one achieved close to 12.You have no evidence that UK and Ireland riders in general are good at judging pace unless you have sectionals to prove it. I have been taking sectionals since racing was first televised and base my conclusions on that.
There is absolutely nothing to stop you considering other aspects together with sectionals. Sectionals are just a far better series of "facts" than final times. The proper use of such facts can transform your betting. The facts are the most important facts in racing. Few can use final time type speed ratings properly but would you argue we should not even have final times on the same basis?
USA punters have had sectionals for over a hundred years. They can use them and do so. Are you saying UK punters are too stupid to read about what USA punters do and how?
Mainstream UK and Irish jockeys are not able to ride effectively to a pace unless they have had long stints riding in USA, Hong Kong or Australia. That was proven by trials at Newmarket where they were asked to ride a couple of furlongs at 12 seconds – none could. It is proven time and time again any day on a race course.
The irony is that without sectional data they can look at after each race they have nothing to help them to learn from or tell them exactly what happened pace-wise in a race. That was one of the key points considered by BHA recently on sectionals introduction.
Thanks.
The link does not work for me from Internet Explorer but is fine when I tried with Firefox and Chrome.
Have you got access to Listowel’s course records by any chance?
I got the going as Good to Firm at Ayr both days as well. They did some watering Thursday night.I haven’t got the records times for Listowel, but I have a file with all the winning times for each racecourse going back to Jan 2010, just use the filters to sort the racecourse you want to look at.
Not been able to open your virginmedia cloud page
Agreed.
The modern media only print what they are told and ask no questions even when a query of what they are being told is obviously needed.
It makes the media an ever more pointless waste of space as a reliable information source.It is very poor that a top class racetrack such as Newbury cannot be bothered to pay Turftrax to provide a going map for them each meeting. The going varies around the track even if they only provide an average, but still wrong figure.
BHA makes them go to the effort of taking going stick readings all around the track before racing but they are too unaware that having done all the hard work the information is best presented as a map.Chester used to be scrupulous about providing all the information they had together with a going map but even they have decided not to bother with the map any more. Sad BHA cannot regulate tracks to be forced to communicate information. as part of their licence.
The link is working at:
http://www.smithycottage.com/Looks like some staff had the initiative to not take illegal and arbitrary sacking lying down and got £43k compensation from W Hill. With the pathetic Gambling Commission so gullible and naïve and totally in the pockets of the "Big4" they need all the help they can get from the Courts.
Let’s hope in this case they did not get reinstated and have found worthwhile jobs with decent employers.
See below from a real bookmaker:
"BEN’S BLOG: ‘More collusion between the Gambling Commission and the Big Firms’
Published On September 10, 2014 | Ben Keith
ben_keith_team-150x150Today, on Corporate Hypocrisy Watch, we’re off to Hamilton, I’m afraid, Blog… Those who read Tuesday’s Racing Post (I find that corporate types rarely do), will have seen the article, written by Graham Green, on page 6. William Hill have been found-out, for being the holier-than-thou, suck-up wets, that they are, and ordered to pay £43k, to three Staffs, they’ve unfairly dismissed.
gcThe three, had served a 16 year old, who was using fake ID. I am ABSOLUTELY DELIGHTED that Hills have lost this case. As I’m CERTAIN, that the management, who were trying to sacrifice the previous employees, only to look good to the Gambling Commission, neeevvveeeerrr eeevvvveeeerrrr, would have had a drink, or a bet, before they were 18 years old, themselves. Oh no, no, no, no, noooo, Blog! CORPORATE PEOPLE’S FARTS DON’T SMELL ONE BIT!!
In other news:
rpI then moved along (like I think it’s fine if the moaning Jocks do (with nothing) and reached Betting Window, on page 10, where Bill Barber informs us, that the GC have been testing, to see if under-18s, are being served in betting-shops. Oh, but they only checked out the independents. Why’s that then, Blog? Because the Big Firms have told them that they do their own checks. HAHAHAHA! I’M DELIGHTED to hear that!! If the Firms have said they don’t need to be checked, we should all just believe them, and let the Gam Comm concentrate on bullying small operators out of the game. IT’S NICE TO KNOW THE RULES AT LAST.
It sounds like the GC’s recent efforts at Royal Ascot, where, using a tarted-up 17 year old girl, they spent the afternoon, helpfully trying to put bets on with the busy bookmakers. On questioning the Gam Comm rep, the bookies asked ‘But did you check the The Tote?’. The answer that came back, Blog? ‘Oh no, we were just doing the on-course bookies’.
JUST KEEP COLLECTING YOUR MONEY-FOR-NOTHING, RIP-OFF CHARGES, AND LET US GET ON WITH OUR BUSINESS IN PEACE, PLEASE.
Over and out, B x
It is appalling that the hardest working staff are all on minimum wage so the taxpayer picks up the tax and housing credit bills instead of the employer paying a living wage.
It is even more appalling that the CEO gets paid for failure.
It is beyond any rationality that the failing CEO gets paid in 1 year what the exploited shop staff would take 335 years to earn.
No politician will stand up against the growing inequality in what is supposed to be an all in it together society. No wonder the Scots want out.
As the Weatherspoons’ CEO said it is frightening that the 2010 corporate responsibility code has 65 clauses for shareholders, 3 for staff and a fat zero for customers. He also approves the Yes vote as good for Scotland.
"The boss of one of Britain’s biggest bookmakers, Ladbrokes, has been handed a staggering 85% total remuneration rise as the firm’s operating profits plunged.
Richard Glynn, the chief executive of Ladbrokes, was given a total pay package of £4.7m ($7.8m, €5.6m) last year, an increase of 85%, thanks in part to a one-off £3.9m share plan that was voted through on his appointment in 2010 and vested last year.
According to Ladbrokes’ annual report, the first performance test under the plan occurred at the end of June 2013.
David Martin, chairman of Ladbrokes remuneration committee, said: "We recognise that our share price has decreased recently, and as our executive directors have voluntarily not sold any shares they have been exposed to the decrease in share price in the same way as all other shareholders"
Perhaps the boycott should be on the two Saturdays before Epsom Derby, Cheltenham and Grand National with just the threat that the bandwagon could grow to wipe out betting at those big meetings.
The big plus is that the popular media would grab hold of it as they are very much against the FOBT exploitation of their readers etc. They are also becoming very aware of the huge amount of well earned abuse bookmakers are getting on social media when they yet again pull out their tired old PR bullshit tricks and spout non existent mega bets. They would also pretend to be shocked when "scooping" that these brilliant businessman were too scared to take a bet of under £5 in some cases to odds the very same bookmakers are pretending to offer.
Bookmaker shareholders would be even more concerned at how badly these firms they are investing in are run and the total disdain they show to their customers.The second big plus is that the racing media stooges could no longer hide away or stick their heads in the sand. Their bosses would be waking up and enquiring why they had kept so quiet when there was so much ill-feeling amongst punters for them to even contemplate such action.
Finally, BHA, Gambling Commission etc might realise at last that it is punters money that pays for their gravy train and we now certainly want something back in return.
In these days of widespread corruption in every institution from banking to policing can it be that only racing is honest? You will point out correctly that there have always been crooks in racing but in line with modern Britain there must be a darn sight more today.
Agree, but folks are looking at the wrong end of the telescope.
The real corruption is within the higher echelons of racing. The race results prove that time and time again. Of course no one is saying they are shipping drugs over by helicopter – that would never happen.The figures do not clutter the screen but I agree unless the so called pundits can be trained in their usage there is no point. I think C4 commentated on the figures from time to time (just read out the figures on the screen) but gave no views on what they might mean.
It is a typical British affair with the racing executive bluffers no clue as to what sectionals are and no organisation such as Turftrax tasked with explaining them. But they apparently seem to be the thing so we will occasionally provide them for the "big" meetings to pretend we are in the know.
Timeform are trying to inform but only with a very limited and peculiar version of sectional timing application. You would think that their owners Betfair would have the business acumen to fund universal UK sectionals to market and help raise the profile of their in-running markets. Something that would make mundane racing more exciting once more.It also does not help that there is no Sectional Form Line of every race each runner has performed in, nor are there public available standard times for each section even at the courses they do show at. So the media is even more at sea with nothing to compare anything against – not even a twitter of a "narrative".
Totally agree.
It is a bit like these morons on phone-in programs who always have to ask the host "How are you doing?" when every other moron has asked the same pointless question right through that program.
I no longer listen to, read, nor watch any racing journalists.
Can’t remember a single time they have uttered something which has the slightest worth as information. They add nothing to my life – just drain it.I asked BHA why their own RSS feeds are no longer updated. They said they don’t own the rights to their own information.
Someone has a screw loose somewhere.PB in 2011
"My priority on taking up the role will be to work with the board and stakeholders to secure a sound business footing for the industry, whilst further enhancing its world-leading racing programme and standards of integrity and welfare."
On that basis he has hopelessly failed in all his ambitions.
It is idiotic though to ever think that one man can change things around in a short time.
CEO for BHA is a low status post with a salary of £100k.
I suppose he did his best but was clearly not up to the job nor were those who appointed him in the first place.Haven’t they had some nasty accidents on the turn in. Is this why they have made this decision?
No the bend has been realigned already and judged safe.
Perhaps they realised that they were not losing anything from cancelling flat meetings whilst the bend was sorted out.
Many courses exist because they exist and once something or someone really questions things as to why, they close downWhen BHA announced the crack down, the number of self certs tumbled. It has taken just a few weeks to drift back to the old bad ways. Perhaps they have called BHA’s bluff – ie seen it as all talk and no enforcement.
It is a bit ridiculous when self certs allow horses at Redcar to pull out because of the going when the going is Good. Good should not damage any horse.
Enforcement by BHA is like being savaged by a proverbial sheep.
