Forum Replies Created
- Posts
I’m not sure why BB thinks i was having a pop, if anyone else can see that they are welcome to point it out.
I think the standard is out by quite a bit Steve. The one question you have to ask yourself is do you think Kempton is a stiffer track than Leopardstown? Given that Kempton is flat, Leopardstown has a slight uphill finish.
I can’t see it is, in fact the other way round if anything with the slight uphill climb. The Racing Post standard though is 16 seconds quicker for a stiffer track, which is why no horse can get near it in relation to other distances there. Even if both courses are of the same stiffness why is one standard 16 seconds faster for roughly the same distance.
The times at York, a flat track, are quicker than Newcastle or Haydock for instance, which could be a fair comparison between stiffness of these two tracks. If the Newcastle or Haydock standard for a set distance was quicker than a York distance you would know straight away there was a problem.
It would be unlikely any Lexus would be run near even a correct standard though as the going is usually slow anyway, the chance of getting near that standard quoted even on Good ground would be difficult.
Prufrock
Would you expect the Leopardstown 3 mile standard to be less than the Kempton 3 mile standard by 16 seconds? Both distances look very similar using Google maps. Kempton maybe 30 feet more.
I would have thought Leopardstown was a stiffer track than Kempton.
There is also the issue of the large difference between the 3m standard at Kempton and the 3m standard at Leopardstown.
The first question to ask would be which course is stiffer, imo I would say Leopardstown.
The fact that Leopardstown’s Racing Post Standard is 16 seconds faster than Kempton’s should ring alarm bells, something isn’t quite right there just in isolation to the fact that the per furlong times do not tally between the distances at Leopardstown. Even if the courses were similar that is a large difference, and it seems in reverse to the actual stiffness each course actually displays, surely Leopardstown standard times should be greater not less than Kempton’s.
Its not possible to have horses run faster furlongs at longer distances.
The
Lexus
chase is a grade 1 race, they run faster.
I have noticed in previous posts that you like to have a pop at me.
Please, I do not need somebody telling me I don’t understand the subject of standard times.
My French contacts would not have ask me to compile the standard times for French racing if they didn’t think I knew what I was doing, I can honestly say that I am the only person to ever have done this.
If we use American racecourses as an example:
The horses travel on average
12.8s
in sprint races to cover a furlong, and in routes they take
13.2s
, that’s a difference of only
0.4s
.
As a rule of thumb, in flat races I use
13.0s
per furlong, and over the jumps I use
16.0s
.
Mike.
Where have i had a pop at you? I don’t understand that comment I’m sorry. I haven’t questioned anybody’s knowledge on anything that I am aware of. All I have done is checked the actual distance on Google Maps and found it to be correct, but spotted that the Racing Post Standards do not follow a logical path at this course.
Its obvious that they run faster in the Lexus, but I didn’t quote the Lexus time, I quoted the Racing Post standard times. All standard times should reflect a slowing per furlong as distance increases, unless there is a course variation to change that, the Leopardstown Racing Post Standards show they actually decrease, that is what is causing Dave Edwards to give small speed figures at 3 miles. Until the standards are modified, you will always get slow speed figures over the 3 miles there.
You use 16.0 seconds for every NH distance? In what way? Each distance increase will slow the per furlong time down, you can’t run as fast per furlong at 3 miles as you do at 2 miles, all standard times should reflect that I would have thought.
The problem with the Racing Post Standard Times at Leopardstown is the other distances that are wrong which make the 3 mile look incorrect.
The Racing Post standard time for
2m3f
is 4:32 which is 14.31 per furlong.
The Racing Post standard time for2m5f
is 5:00 which is 14.28 per furlong.
The Racing Post standard time for3m
is 5:42 which is 14.25 per furlong.
There lies your problem. Its not possible to have horses run faster furlongs at longer distances. The 2m3f and 2m5f standards are too easy to achieve which will throw out calculations for the other distances.
The problem is not the distance of the Lexus, which measures correctly, it’s Dave Edward’s standard times that are incorrect.
It may be that the 3 mile standard time is too hard to get particularly highlighted when you compare it to a course that should be faster, like Kempton, the Racing Post Standard Time there for 3 miles is 16 seconds slower than Leopardstown’s. I doubt very much that Kempton is 16 seconds stiffer than Leopardstown.
I’ve checked the Lexus distance on Google maps, it’s 3.04 miles, or 3 miles and 211 feet.
Sectionals for last night show three races were run to even or near even pace. At the two furlong marker the figures would be 0.00 seconds for even pace. A minus figure is a slower than even pace, a + figure is faster than even pace.
-1.22 FROGNAL BEAR
+0.52 GEOLOGICAL
-2.33 ELSYIAN PRINCE
+0.13 BLACK GRANITE
-0.63 DUTCH ART DEALER
-2.52 SILVER RAINBOWAll National Hunt times are faster at every course now since they started timing from when the first horse passes the tape. The old standard times all need adjusting to make track speed measurements accurate. If you use old standard times I would estimate they are will make the ground appear a full description faster. ie G/S will now look like Good.
Blues Bros, How did you get a faster figure for Random than Encore D’Or? The time for Random was 73.77 & EncoreD’or was 73.24.
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.
MARSH HAWK looks an exceptional prospect based on her win at Newmarket in a time that very few debutantes are capable of producing. She produced a speed figure on my numbers bigger than Kingman did on his debut. Those behind her will be worth watching over the next few weeks as they certainly bumped into a smart one here.
Steve
Did you see her win today?. The ground was pretty bad at Newbury but she ran faster than 106 rated 3yo Lady Lara and carried 7lb’s more. Today’s run makes her a solid Group 1 horse.
Just an update on the Raceform wfa allowances.
Month*** 2yo** 3yo
Jan/Feb** n/a** -6
Mar/Apr** -11** -5
May/Jun** -10** -3
Jul/Aug** -9** -3
Sep/Oct** -8** -2
Nov/Dec** -7** -1Races contested by fillies only -3
Those aren’t lbs Blues Brothers, they are
lengths
, lengths measured as in 0.2 seconds. So Raceform aren’t a deal different to Topspeeds. For example Raceform’s allowance in Mar/Apr for 2yo’s is 11 lengths, or 2.2 seconds.
I think she has done well, Group 3 race after one run and nearly won. As I pointed out those who finished in 2nd & 3rd at Newmarket were worth noting next time. The horse that finished 2nd to her Faddhayil won the 3.45 race a great value price considering she ran into a Group horse at Newmarket. I also backed the 3rd horse Light Fantastic when she beat Commadaria at Kempton. So the race owes me nothing. I will be backing Marsh Hawk again next time too.
MARSH HAWK
looks an exceptional prospect based on her win at Newmarket in a time that very few debutantes are capable of producing. She produced a speed figure on my numbers bigger than Kingman did on his debut. Those behind her will be worth watching over the next few weeks as they certainly bumped into a smart one here.
I think using the fastest three will give over inflated figures over a period of time. I also think that maiden races shouldn’t be part of the allowance calculations because you don’t know what level the winner is capable of.
Sometimes there is only one truly run race on a card, using the 3 fastest figures from that card will give speed figures totally unrepresentative of ability.
As a test for anyone interested, whoever makes speed figures would you post up your figures for Newmarket 11 July 2014. An interesting card.
