Best Race Tracks for Laying or Backing

[Rinconpaul]

Has anyone researched whether certain race tracks suit say front runners, while other courses produce tight finishes more often? If so do you think speed maps of races held on a particular course reflect this bias?
Always looking for that couple of per cent edge!!!
Cheers RP

[UselessBettor]

I haven't done that sort of research but I can say from experience that outsiders get up more often and semi-consistently on the South African tracks.

Apart from those tracks I find most other tracks (all around the world as covered by betfair) are similar in the distribution of winners through the odds ranges.

[beton]

UK race courses have their little book with the bias on every track with every barrier and distance. I know that this is available here as well but seldom utilized. A UK trainer will pull his horse if he gets a particular barrier in a race because he knows it is a race to nowhere.

[SpeedyBen]

If you check the course stats on R&S you will see a summary of where every winner was on the turn at every distance at that course. I've been using it ever since I started betting in running.

[Mark]

Best tracks for laying......those that race on days with an 'a' in them.

[evajb001]

SpeedyBen,

I've started looking at using those figures myself, do you or anyone else for that matter have these figures in excel already or know a fast and easy way to get them there without manually entering them?

In particular i'm looking at using the conditions tabs to seperate the results out as well. (i.e. Good/Dead and Slow/Heavy) for each distance at each track. Tedious task if I have to do it manually but I will end up doing it that way if no other option becomes available.

I'm looking at taking a very structured and systematic approach to coming up with some ratings and this is one of the elements i'll be including. Also been reading a lot about speed and pace on US websites which i know doesn't directly correlate to aus racing but its very insightful and intersting. There really is some great stuff out there if you look hard enough.

[SpeedyBen]

SpeedyBen,

I've started looking at using those figures myself, do you or anyone else for that matter have these figures in excel already or know a fast and easy way to get them there without manually entering them?

In particular i'm looking at using the conditions tabs to seperate the results out as well. (i.e. Good/Dead and Slow/Heavy) for each distance at each track. Tedious task if I have to do it manually but I will end up doing it that way if no other option becomes available.

There really is some great stuff out there if you look hard enough.I forgot to mention the breakdown by track cond as well. It sometimes confuses more than helps as GDH may be good for leaders and Slow poor, but usually it is consistent.
The good news for you Eva is that I do have the info right up to date in xls in the format you desire.
If you email me at speedyben at mail dot nu I'll send it to you. I don't plan to publish it here as it gives me a huge edge and a lot of work goes into keeping it up to date.

[evajb001]

SpeedyBen you are a lifesaver and I understand completely regarding the advantage. I'll email you tonight along with some other queries.

Any findings I have along with any success i'll ensure I share with you. The project i'm undertaking at the moment will be a long one but hopefully its well worth it. I've been reading newsletters, articles and forums day/night over the last week looking at some of this stuff.

Anyhow again many thanks.

[SpeedyBen]

SpeedyBen you are a lifesaver and I understand completely regarding the advantage. I'll email you tonight along with some other queries.

Any findings I have along with any success i'll ensure I share with you. The project i'm undertaking at the moment will be a long one but hopefully its well worth it. I've been reading newsletters, articles and forums day/night over the last week looking at some of this stuff.

Anyhow again many thanks.Flattery will get you everywhere, Eva.
Seriously tho, I know you put in a huge effort with your research, so pleased to help out in this case.
Forget that email address - it's an error. It should be speedyben at bigpond dot com

[Rinconpaul]

If you check the course stats on R&S you will see a summary of where every winner was on the turn at every distance at that course. I've been using it ever since I started betting in running.Speedy, that's a gem!! I've never realised these sort of stats existed on a individual course basis. Based on a first glance, why wouldn't you Back a ride K Mallyon's on 54% POT and Lay a ride D Weir trains -48.9% POT at Kyneton?
Thanks mate, RP

[evajb001]

Email Sent Speedy :)

[Rinconpaul]

I never should have looked at that website Speedy. I layed a 40:1 shot Race 2 Scone based on the jockeys win strike rate. The worst I've ever seen: 1% 484 races for 6 wins!! E Weiszbach just had win No. 7.
RP

[SpeedyBen]

I never should have looked at that website Speedy. I layed a 40:1 shot Race 2 Scone based on the jockeys win strike rate. The worst I've ever seen: 1% 484 races for 6 wins!! E Weiszbach just had win No. 7.
RPYou weren't a wiseback in that case, RP.
It's amazing how that can happen. I know that when I tried trading if I chose to let an oustanding lay go in running it seemed to win every time.

[UselessBettor]

I never should have looked at that website Speedy. I layed a 40:1 shot Race 2 Scone based on the jockeys win strike rate. The worst I've ever seen: 1% 484 races for 6 wins!! E Weiszbach just had win No. 7.
RP
Perhaps you should look at it based on the law of averages. If a jockey usually runs at 5% and is running now at 1% then he should be backed not layed as his strike rate will return to 5% longer term.

And the reverse is true lay jockeys which have a much higher strike rate (double) then the longer term (350 races) average.

[SpeedyBen]

Email Sent Speedy :)You should have it now, jb

[Rinconpaul]

Perhaps you should look at it based on the law of averages. If a jockey usually runs at 5% and is running now at 1% then he should be backed not layed as his strike rate will return to 5% longer term.

And the reverse is true lay jockeys which have a much higher strike rate (double) then the longer term (350 races) average.Well UB, that might be all well and good if she was a "USUAL" jockey, but if after 485 races she has only won 7, then I think you're forever the optimist!
Cheers RP

[SpeedyBen]

I never should have looked at that website Speedy. I layed a 40:1 shot Race 2 Scone based on the jockeys win strike rate. The worst I've ever seen: 1% 484 races for 6 wins!! E Weiszbach just had win No. 7.
RPDespite your loss, RP, R&S would have to be the provider of the best racing stats I have ever seen and it's free. I have found their in running position stats invaluable in giving me an edge over those I am betting against.

[SpeedyBen]

Has anyone researched whether certain race tracks suit say front runners, while other courses produce tight finishes more often? If so do you think speed maps of races held on a particular course reflect this bias?
Always looking for that couple of per cent edge!!!
Cheers RPIf you wish to do this seriously there is a goldmine hiding in the R&S in running stats. Spend a couple of weeks watching races while armed with the stats showing how the leaders and first 4 on pace runners go at the course/ distance you are watching. Take particular note how favourites go when they lead at favourable/ unfavourable CDs. If you can read the ease ( or otherwise ) with which the leader is going by the jock's arm movements then the world is your oyster.
The longest price I have got in running on a leader which won is $33.

[UselessBettor]

Well UB, that might be all well and good if she was a "USUAL" jockey, but if after 485 races she has only won 7, then I think you're forever the optimist!
Cheers RP
Thats still a 2% strike rate. If her last win was 400 races ago then perhaps its coming due eventually. If I was using these stats then I would steer clear of laying her until she had her win and then look if she was above her average and could therefore be layed again.

[Rinconpaul]

Thats still a 2% strike rate. If her last win was 400 races ago then perhaps its coming due eventually. If I was using these stats then I would steer clear of laying her until she had her win and then look if she was above her average and could therefore be layed again.Now that she's had that win, I think I should be safe Laying any of her mounts for the next 69 races( her average). I agree with Speedy and his opinion of R&S, not that I'm into inplay betting/trading, but just combining Win % of horse, trainer & jockey and it's just that extra edge or reassusrance one needs. You see it all the time top of the polls Jock, Trainer & Horse and you've almost got a certainty to Back in a provincial race. Conversely for the Lay, you'll often see a top trainer with a so-so horse put the low Win % Jock on board probably to give the horse the excercise and Jock the experience. Then a race later same trainer puts the No. 1 Jock on board and you've got a winner.
Have a great day all, RP