[Tuffers]

good tuffers!!!

I think you’ll find that Derren Brown’s point is that this is the basis on which lots of tipping lines are run

[Tuffers]

Just worked it out – he has given different people different horses so one of them was bound to win. The woman featured is just the one who happened to have been given all five winners. Presumably hundreds of other people were given tips that lost

[Tuffers]

Any ideas what the trick is yet?

[Tuffers]

I haven’t had a NH bet since Aintree last year. On the flat I only back my own horses or those from Mark Brisbourne’s stable. My last bet on the flat was Gamesters Lady. I find that I can only bet horses I know enough about to be sure they will have ideal conditions and the race run to suit as well as being 100% and well. Unless you know the owner or the horse is running at one of the major festivals it is difficult to be sure of this IMHO.

That said, I bet exclusively on Betfair so that I know whether I am winning or losing and my account history tells me I have withdrawn more money than I have deposited but not nearly enough to give up the day job

[Tuffers]

Thanks Tuffers
It’s certainly not run for those who keep it on the road Tuffers

Too true – but all of us involved in racing (even the small number that actually make decent money out of it) do it for the love of it rather than to make our fortunes. It is the curse of racing that those running it can afford to disregard the views of owners, trainers, jockeys and stable staff whilst pandering to the needs of bookmakers

[Tuffers]

Thanks Tuffers

Not right is it allowing people who have no real interest in a sport deciding how it should be run???

Racing certainly appears to be run by people with no real interest in the sport

[Tuffers]

Tuffers
Seroiusly? I’d be outside the house of commons burning ephigys of mike hancock…

Don’t worry – it won’t ever happen. Nothing that has been as appallingly administered as racing could have survived unless it touched something very deep within the human psyche. I defy anyone to watch Persian Punch’s 2nd Goodwood Cup victory and feel unmoved by it.

[Tuffers]

Tuffers

Answer the question please

Charlie

I have been a racegoer since the age of 11. I had tears in my eyes the day I got home from school and watched the rerun of Desert Orchid’s Gold Cup victory (in fact I still can’t listen to Peter O’Sullivan’s commentary without feeling the emotion that makes NH racing so compelling). I cannot think of anything I would enjoy more than watching those horses go round and round every day of my life

Would I object – of course I’d f***ing object but I’d still have to live with the fact that that is how decisions are made in this country.

[Tuffers]

Tuffers

So you would have no objection to seeing horse racing banned if the majority of the public voted for it ???

If an Act of Parliament is passed banning racing then (as the banning of foxhunting has shown) the objections of those who believe they are better placed to decide on its merit are irrelevant

[Tuffers]

Tuffers: I don’t think it’s helpful if you persist in wilful reductivism of the sense of my point down to a pithy soundbite. Does the feeling of Mrs Wilkins from number 63 about the use of the whip in racing, a sport she does not watch, have equal weight to that of a vet with extensive experience of horses? No, it doesn’t.

You’re still missing the point Lydia. If the majority of society believes that use of the whip should be banned then it should be banned whether or not the majority consists of ill-informed non racegoers.

To take your argument to its logical conclusion, only those who can demonstrate expertise in a subject would have the right to express an opinion on it.

It ain’t a perfect world, Lydia, but it’s the only one we’ve got

[Tuffers]

We are talking here not about the electoral system but about a sport that, at this stage anyway, can regulate itself on this matter. Provided it has a coherent, reasoned and justifiable stance on the use of the whip, should it pander to ill-informed public opinion, often misinformed by agenda-led groups or individuals and starved of the counter argument by bodies such as racing? Or should the sport have the courage in its convictions? Has it done enough research and thinking to know what those convictions are? Would it carry the majority of its constituents, united, with it? Should its conclusions be based solely on science? Or is there an element of modern mores it necessarily has to take on board?

Lydia – the ‘we know better than the ignorant masses’ argument really is the thin end of the wedge. It’s intellectual arrogance of the worst sort.

[Tuffers]

I think it is what Uncle Matthew would call The Thin End Of The Wedge (copyright Nancy Mitford) to ban something because the weight of public opinion perceives it to be wrong.

Isn’t that what happens in a democracy?

[Tuffers]

Official going would have been Good to Fast, Heavy in places. First race – Chase 2m 1f – +/- 220 yards – 2 fences omitted. Actual race distance 1m 7f 127 yds.

In this example, the official going is a hundred times more accurate than the race distance and will have a hundred times more effect on a race time correction for future analysis.

I think that fighting a battle for an accurate official going and an accurate race distance is pointless. It just will not happen.

I for one, am exceeding pleased about this.

I think this is a big problem for those trying to assess the state of the going from the race times for NH races. Flat racing is more reliable and obviously the most reliable is the AW where the rails are never moved.

I still think that if I was taking an early price in the morning I would rather make my punting decision based on the Going Stick reading than the official going

[Tuffers]

Tuffer’s who is Lottie? damned if I can find a horse called Lottie that won at Warwick.

If Lottie is a sprinter the opinion of one jockey who raced up the outside/inside /centre may not be a reflection of the overall going..that is why I ask……..I think there has to be a bit more to it than what you are saying……..Good to Heavy? is basically what you are saying………not many groundsman would make a mistake like that……..I went to Warwick a few years back and when we got there it had already been abandoned. It was flooded down the RH side of the course while the other end looked dry to the naked eye………by that I would imagine it’s definitely not going to be the same all round any time they have heavy rain…..how can any two people agree on going under those conditions?………..The best you can expect is the groundsman assessments and if it changes drastically then you would expect the course official to announce that which I assure you they do when they have the grounds to do it.

Sorry Fist – Lottie was Elopement’s stable name

[Tuffers]

There is a reduced recovery of kinetic and potential energy for each stride when a human runs on a soft surface such as dry sand. There is also a reduction in the recovery of elastic energy (mostly in the tendons). Because of these effects we tend to tire more quickly when running on a soft surface.

If we wanted a widget (a state-of-the-art stick!) to measure this in horse racing it might look a little like a pogo stick, bouncing its way along the track, measuring the reduced energy recovery on some suitable scale. The scale would, at some point, then need to be correlated with "Good to Soft", "Soft" and so on.

Patent pending …

If you are interested in the science of the going stick the thesis in the link below is well worth a read

http://dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk:8080/ … s+2006.pdf

[Tuffers]

I’ve been trying (without success ) to stimulate some debate on this topic. What are members views on the going stick reading as opposed to the official going? IMHO the going is the most important variable and for a serious punter accurate information in this respect is essential. I have undertaken some informal research which leads me to believe that the going stick reading agrees with Timeform’s post meeting assessment of the going more often than the official going but I’m interested to hear whether anyone has looked at this scientifically.

.Jockeys and trainers report back to officials if the ground is not what they said it was and if it far off they announce the change in the going do they not?………….if you wanted to be scientific about it you would have to check the whole course before and after every race as ground does change after 30 horses gallop through it…is it windy is it not windy did it drizzle did it rain?……taking a readings after the last race could have what kind of bearing on what the ground was truly like in the second race?…especially of they said it was good to soft and it was actually more on the soft side of good to soft to start with…….then they might get a reading of soft….or it can go the opposite way if there a drying wind and it was more on the good side of good to soft to start with………so which races do you apply it to…….the last race the last 2 the last 3 or the last 5………you need more than a guy with a silly stick to work that one out I’m afraid.

When Lottie won at Warwick the ground was officially soft, heavy in places. The going stick reading before racing indicated the ground was good to soft and in the parade ring Jamie Spencer confirmed that assessment. The official going wasn’t changed at any point.

As punters and owners it is surely critical to obtain the most accurate going assessment available before the first race. As a punter you may wish to take an early price and as an owner you may want to withdraw your horse (although ludicrously you still have to transport your horse to the course but that’s a topic for another thread). As I see it we have a choice between the official going and the going stick. The official going has everything to do with maximising field sizes and nothing to do with accurately assessing the true state of the ground (although Fiona Needham clearly hasn’t appreciated this as her going descriptions for Warwick last year indicate). The Going Stick is IMHO currently the best tool available to us and I cannot believe that serious punters aren’t factoring the reading into their assessment of races.

[Tuffers]

I have not carried out much in the way of scientific research but the official going is something I take little account of. Going based on time is the best option open to most but going stick reading should provide the way forward. The main problem with going forecasts produce by employees of the course is their assessment will have more to do with business development to ensure plenty of entries.

What we need is a truly independent assessment of the going by a third party organization.

I’m not exactly sure who carries out the going stick assessment. Before the first day of the last Cheltenham festival I telephoned Turftrax and ended up speaking to the guy that had actually taken the going stick readings. I assume Turftrax’ own employees therefore take the readings for the major meetings

I agree that racetimes are a good guide to assessing the going after racing but knowing the state of the ground before racing is essential for the punter/owner

[Author]

Posts