Ultimate strategy

[moeee]

I downloaded a book called Ultimate Strategy.
I've as yet not read it.
Just thought I'd let ya's know it exists.

[efunovasky]

is it written by gary robinson?

[moeee]

Dunno Buddy
It has something to do with Winform ratings I think.
Been reading,and find it quite informative.

[Top Rank]

I think ultimately you will be disappointed, if it is by Garry Robinson and the book is about times.

It is a rather simple read but I don't believe that it works.

[moeee]

Yes it is by that fella.
But ain't no simple read.About a hundred pages I suppose.
Don't know if it works or not,but there sure is some good information in it.

[davez]

got a web address there moeee?

[punter57]

I dont want to be a spoilsport but frankly Ive not seen any ratings method using times or "beaten lengths" or,even weight (!!!) which is anything other than wishful and arbitrary nonsense. Thus any book by Gary Robinson (if there's only one G.R.)has to be a lot of reading for little result. Times dont tell you how the race COULD"VE been run if other tactics were employed by the jockeys (as they may be in Today's race}. Nor do beaten lengths tell you if the horses were "ridden out" etc.Or if the jockey/horse was really trying at all!!! Take a HUMAN example like last years Olympic 5000m final.
El Ghouruj is 1500 champion and world 1500/mile/2000 record holder(and second fastest over 3000/2 miles; Bekele is 10000 champion and world record holder at 5K as well. El Ghouroj is getting older now, moving up and is a 12:48:25 runner (Bekele world record 12:44:30).Every runner in the field (16) is sub 12:56. The race ends with El GHouruj 1st by hundredths of a second to Bekele and the rest many metres back. BUT the time is.......13:15!!!! On time everyone should've beaten 1+2 by 20 to 30 seconds!!!! However it was CLASS that told, no matter the time. Looking backward at this race,in which you can be sure everyone WAS trying ,time is hugely deceptive and margins mean absolutely nothing:many of those athletes would be CLOSER at near world record pace!!
Apply this to horseracing (where many animals are being constantly restrained) and the difficulties multiply. Oh and weight? Is a Kilo Penalty worth more/less if the horse itself weighs 100Kg more/ less? Is a heavier horse (like a heavier man) disadvantaged by longer distances? Is a kilo of lead harder to carry than a kilo of jockey?etc etc.If anyone's got the answers I'd like to know
I await everyone's blistering replies and wish you all good luck this afternoon,
P57

[punter57]

I dont want to be a spoilsport but frankly I've not seen any ratings method using times or "beaten lengths" or,even weight (!!!) which is anything other than wishful and arbitrary nonsense. Thus any book by Gary Robinson (if there's only one G.R.)has to be a lot of reading for little result. Times dont tell you how the race COULD"VE been run if other tactics were employed by the jockeys (as they may be in Today's race}. Nor do beaten lengths tell you if the horses were "ridden out" etc.Or if the jockey/horse was really trying at all!!! Take a HUMAN example like last years Olympic 5000m final.
El Ghouruj is 1500 champion and world 1500/mile/2000 record holder(and second fastest over 3000/2 miles; Bekele is 10000 champion and world record holder at 5K as well. El Ghouroj is getting older now, moving up and is a 12:48:25 runner (Bekele world record 12:44:30).Every runner in the field (16) is sub 12:56. The race ends with El GHouruj 1st by hundredths of a second to Bekele and the rest many metres back. BUT the time is.......13:15!!!! On time everyone should've beaten 1+2 by 20 to 30 seconds!!!! However it was CLASS that told, no matter the time. Looking backward at this race,in which you can be sure everyone WAS trying ,time is hugely deceptive and margins mean absolutely nothing:many of those athletes would be CLOSER at near world record pace!!
Apply this to horseracing (where many animals are being constantly restrained) and the difficulties multiply. Oh and weight? Is a Kilo Penalty worth more/less if the horse itself weighs 100Kg more/ less? Is a heavier horse (like a heavier man) disadvantaged by longer distances? Is a kilo of lead harder to carry than a kilo of jockey?etc etc.If anyone's got the answers I'd like to know
I await everyone's blistering replies and wish you all good luck this afternoon,
P57

[moeee]

got a web address there moeee?
I believe it to be a commercial site davey,so I won't mention it.
But if I say horse racing australia,plus "garry robinson",maybe you could find it with google.

[shoto]

I'll spare you the blistering reply, P57 - an interesting post. The big problem with times is pace. As you alluded to, horses don't run the fastest time they possibly could, but most time-based calculations seem to be based on the assumption that they do. This is most clearly demonstrated with times becoming more unreliable the longer the race distance, however the unreliabilty exists even in shorter races. All this before you even consider the rather dodgy (in my opinion) area of calculating track variants, and the difficulty of accurately comparing times run at different tracks.

The question of weight could be argued back and forth forever. It can be demonstrated using physics equations that the change in weight has an effect, independant of the weight of the horse, or of the net weight carried. And at least you have the certaintly that a kilo is always a kilo, not some arbitrarily assigned values that are unavoidable in time-based calcs.

Your post begs the question, and I'd be interested in your reply - on what basis do you determine class?

[moeee]

On account of this book I mentioned being about a hundred pages,I haven't got 1/2 way through yet.
But I dare to suggest perhaps only 5% seems to have any relation to speed ratings.
And that would be the chapter about time and speed.
There are 20 or so other chapters on other stuff,like odds and stories.

[kenchar]

punter57,
Although we don't agree on keep betting or stopping for the day, I just loved your post and have to agree with you completely, how can a kilo make difference in a horses performance.
I watched a race recently (can't remember where but has stuck in my mind) the fav was fighting it out with a 20/1 pop head to head in the straight and the 20/1 saluted the judge, the race commentators reaction was that the fav was beaten because of the pull in the weights.
I have never heard so much crap in my life, the weight difference was 1.5 kg's.
The 20/1 pop was just better on the day.
Beaten lengths is another misconception, and I have to agree with you it all depends on how the horse was ridden out in the final stages.
Did you see the post of the person that broke into a racecourse with his tape measure to check the marks on the rail to see how far a length was so he could put it into his data base:confused: , I have never laughed so much in a long time.

Cheers, and good punting.

[moeee]

punter57,
Although we don't agree on keep betting or stopping for the day, I just loved your post and have to agree with you completely, how can a kilo make difference in a horses performance.

You seem to make comments that are illogical.
Try this tomorrow morning.
Run a lap of your block tomorrow morning and time yourself.
Next morning do the same only with a housebrick in a knapsack on your back.
I've got to abmit I've never tried it,but logic tells me I must run a slower time because I would get more tired and have less energy left.

[kenchar]

Would knock the hell out me BUT I weigh 80 kilo's think about it.:rolleyes:

[Top Rank]

Yes that is correct moeee but when you have an animal which weighs, 600-700kg (correct if I am wrong there but ballpark) how much difference is 1 extra kg going to make.

The book is an interesting enough read and there is some mathematics in it which may take a little time to grasp, but it's not War and Peace.

It is basically taking a time that a horse recorded for a distance in a previous run, usually the last or 2nd last run. Converting it to todays distance with an adjustment for weight, up or down and Hey Presto.

[kenchar]

moeee,
Don't want to bother you but I just went and and weighed 2 housebricks, the one with the holes weighed .5 kg and the one without the holes weighed .6 kg, which one do you suggest I use as I know it would make a difference to my performance. I suppose if I used the .5 kg I would be 2/1 and if I used the .6 kg I would be 10/1 according to your theories. THATS how much 1 or 2 kilos would make the difference to a horse. It's the BEST horse on the day that wins the race. How you work that out I don't know, and that's why I bet the way I do.
Money talks, learn to work out what is going on in a race ( if anything and if not leave it alone ).
When you see a 50/1 winner and there is an even money fav everybody jumps up and down BUT I bet the trainer of the 50/1 backed his horse, because he knew what the horse was capable of ON THE DAY.

Cheers and I mean that because I am not as bad as you think.

[Chrome Prince]

Yep, I agree kenchar - weight is overrated.

More and more myths and wives-tales.

Consider if a horse is 700kg and carries 2.5kg more penalty.
That's 1/280th of it's mass.

So if Kenchar weighs 80kg (sorry mate), then he has to carry 286 grams around the block.

I don't think that would impact on his time ;)

He'd be running home from the corner shop with a jar of jam for his toast!

[good 4th]

I agree.
A kilo here and a kilo there will not make to much a difference to a horse that weighs 500 kls, now if it was a human running around the paddock that would be a different story.
I have read Garys book many times and i think it has merit but................
it dos'nt work.
Time and weight ratings i have found, dont not find the winner enough to make a level stake/return profit.

[dingoboy]

Yep, I agree kenchar - weight is overrated.

More and more myths and wives-tales.

Consider if a horse is 700kg and carries 2.5kg more penalty.
That's 1/280th of it's mass.

So if Kenchar weighs 80kg (sorry mate), then he has to carry 286 grams around the block.

I don't think that would impact on his time ;)

He'd be running home from the corner shop with a jar of jam for his toast!

Knowing a little bit about carrying weight on my person (green backpacks) i would say that most people i know try to remove as much weight as possible, if one walks 40 kilometres, thats say 1 metre per step, which is 1000 steps per km, therefore 40,000 steps, times that by .286 kg would mean you would be lifting an extra 11.44 tonnes over that 40 kilometres, therfore over 1600 mtr, a human would be lifting (carrining) over that distance an extra 458 kilos, a horse ???

Just a thought

Dingo

[punter57]

Hello on a great morning in Paradise! I'm feeling fantastic and went for a beach run (soft going today: firm last time out!!) carrying an extra 250g in my singlet (fruit and nut) to put this all to a real life test. Must say there appeared to be an unexpected IMPROVEMENT despite the weight increase. Could this be because on Saturday morning (previous start) I was feeling a bit rough and didn't let on (to my trainer or the stewards) that a barking dog had kept me awake all night? If only the horses later in the day had let me know how THEY were feeling I could've eliminated quite a few of them.
Anyway,what really illustrates the "fallacy" inherant in miniscule weight variations is that the TOP weight wins most often (in Hcps of course!!) followed by the second toppie,then the third etc. Remember that the Handicapper has,basically, decided that as horse X is the "best",it should carry the most and be No1. After deciding which is 2nd best (and so on) and all the weights are assigned, OVER TIME, the handicapper is proven right in his assessment of the "class" of the animals BUT his weights haven't stopped em!! You might say the toppie should've been more highly weighted but in that case we're back to where we started from:when is enough enough? How much weight DOES it take to stop a train???

[dingoboy]

nice,
read some material by a fella who looked into weight and he stated that weight wont stop a train

[darkydog2002]

Read that Malcolm Knowles booklet myself.

Very interesting indeed.
Cheers.
darky.

[dingoboy]

I didnt wont to drop names here but yeh, very interesting reading on weight, other great stuff from him in that package also !

Take care

Dingo

[kiwi]

Disagree guys put enough weight on a train and it will stop.Goes for anything.

Why handicap horses at all if the weight makes no difference.

[punter57]

Got me beat too, Kiwi. Make em all set weights or WFA and don't worry about it. Of course,even that doesnt work correctly (since 50-1 shots still get up in "classics" like the SA Derby 9 days back) Or, more fairly, every horse in every race carries a set percentage of it's bodyweight (say 10 or 15) ,meaning that we would then see which really is "pound for pound" the best horse!!

[moeee]

My logic about an extra kilo is right but my argument was wrong.
One kilo on the back of a 500 kilo animal don't make jack of a difference to the horses performance.
But once the horse already has 50 kilos on board,that extra kilo then could be a huge difference.
Here's my proof.

Olympic Games - Weightlifting.
We all must have seen it.
3 chances to get the 3 white lights.
Once these huge athletes get close to their limit,the extra kilo or so seems to be too much of a burden.
And the event only takes a few seconds to complete to its finale.
If they had to carry that weight for a kilometre?.It ain't gonna happen.

And if you can accept that then it opens up another form factor that could increase profits.

Weight carrying ability.

I'm sure in a previous life I read about a horses maximum weight carrying ability.Maybe in Rem Plantes' book.
Once a horse gets handicapped to a certain weight,he stops winning in those types of races and is moved up in class or WFA.
How many horses do you see win carrying 60 kilos or more?

So what I am suggesting is that a horse can win a city race with 48 kilos,but would not be able to win an improvers in the bush with 60 or so.

And having associates in the building trade,Kenchar,housebricks in fact weigh 3 kilos,with or without holes.So if your bricks are weighing under a kilo on your scales,I shudder to think how much you would weigh on a set of accurate scales!.

6 x 80 = 480kgs.AWESOME!

And Dingoboy.You never cease to amaze me.

[moeee]

nice,
read some material by a fella who looked into weight and he stated that weight wont stop a train
Sure did stop my son's motorized scooter from taking me up the driveway.
Locomotives ain't bin horses since the Wild,Wild West days.

[moeee]

Why handicap horses at all if the weight makes no difference.
Nail on the head there Kiwi.
Talking about heads.Nice to see someone else using theirs.
Unless handicapping is some sort of sinister New World plot to stop us from reaching Nirvana!

[xptdriver]

nice,
read some material by a fella who looked into weight and he stated that weight wont stop a train

gday all

i drive em for a living and trust me. Weight will stop a train every time. It's not just a saying it is a fact

But don't let that stop you backing the toppie carrying 62 kg in an open handicap.. If you keep backing those horses you will go broke.. Neil runs an intersting article on horses that weight did stop in the newsletter. I think ( he can correct me) that horses carrying 59kg or more as a general rule are dud bets ..

For those who have a decent data base, run your successful sytems thru and play with the max weight carried and I reckon you may be surprised what a difference a kilo here a kilo there does make over a period of time.. Personally, 57.5 - 58 kg (on the flat) is about as much as I want a horse to carry if it has my cash on board.. and I prefer them to have less if possible.. but as ever each to their own.

[moeee]

But don't let that stop you backing the toppie carrying 62 kg in an open handicap.. If you keep backing those horses you will go broke.. Neil runs an intersting article on horses that weight did stop in the newsletter. I think ( he can correct me) that horses carrying 59kg or more as a general rule are dud bets ..


Almost a perfect argument except there arew always exceptions.
Only examples I remember were Forest Boy and Prize Lad back when The Professor used to ride for Armanasco.
These horses won plenty of races carrying over 60 kilos.
64 even.
So most can't but some can.Suggest there are many who struggle with 52 kilos or more!

[punter57]

I'm not sure if Moeee means there is an absolute limit a horse can carry before IT BREAKS IN HALF or.....just that there is a sharp fall off in performance at some point. However I feel it would vary from horse to horse either way,especially when you consider that they put 70 Kg on the Jumpers and then expect them to run MUCH further while leaping over the obstacles as well!!!
As for thw Olympic weightlifters; they are lifting TWICE their bodyweight.In the case of a thoroughbred I can see how being allocated double their bodyweight (ie 1 tonne) might slow 'em up (though, as I've said many times before,I MIGHT bet even them if the odds were long enough!!!).Cheers

[Chrome Prince]

Sure weight will stop a train, but we are talking about weight ratios.
An extra kilo will not make any difference to a huge beast like a horse over racing distances.

The reason that toppies perform so poorly over others is not that they are weighted down, but that they are out of form.

Why then can jumps horses carry 10kg more than flat horses and still win and not even be puffing?

I know I'd rather be sprinting than jumping with any weight.

Example:

Let's look at the strike rates of last start winners within 30 days to keep it even.

#1 24.53%
#2 19.56%
#3 17.51%
#4 14.89%
#5 13.60%

Conclusion, the penalty imposed by the handicapper is not enough to stop the winning advantage. The horses which carry the most weight are the most successful. The horses which carry the most weight, but are out of form do not perform, as does any other horse, no matter what the weight.

[davez]

spot on chrome, lots of punters send way too much time trying to make sense of what weight changes will do to a horses chances, as i have done, & end up none the wiser.

facts are that if the horse is fit, maintaining its form, & has a bit of luck then a extra kilo or 2 up or down aint going to make much diference to its winning chances.

a much greater factor is, i believe, the class of nags it is now facing.

also after having a quick read of the mentioned book, well looks like a lot of work to me

[Chrome Prince]

Davez,

Class is about 10x as important as weight in my opinion. In fact more horses win rising in weight than dropping in weight - go figure!

Horses rising in weight 17.47%
Horses dropping in weight 12.33%

[kenchar]

Hey moeee,
You dead set had me worried that I had anorexia and that I only weighed 11.4 kg, but I just went and reweighed the female brick ( the one with the holes ) and it weighed 2.5 kg.
Congratulations you caught me out.
RAH RAH RAH
Bloody chardonny again, I'm glad I don't bet at night.:rolleyes:
The interesting thing though about reweighing the brick is that it confirms my opinion that if that was in the jockeys undies ( except for being very uncomfortable ) it would not make a damn difference if the horse was good enough on the day.

Cheers

[shoto]

Keep in mind also that the spread of weights has been compressed in recent times compared to what it used to be. In the days when weight rating was the be-all and end-all, you could have had a the toppie carrying more than 64kg, and the bottom runner carrying 47.

It stands to reason that as weights have compressed their affect on the outcome of the race has diminished.

Punter57 - Do you have a response to answer my earlier question to you? Of course it's OK if you don't want to.

[BJ]

[QUOTE=Chrome Prince]

Why then can jumps horses carry 10kg more than flat horses and still win and not even be puffing?

QUOTE]

And not even be puffing? You must be kidding. Yes they are carrying 10kg more than flat horses, but they are racing against other jumps horses not flat horses so the comparison is irrelevant.

Obviously the performance of a horse will decrease with the more weight it carries. It is just crazy to suggest otherwise.

Try driving a car 1000 kilometres by yourself. Then drive back, but fill your car with people and fill the boot. I guarantee that you will lose a lot more fuel, hence decreasing your performance. If this is the case for a car, with 100 horse power? surely similar results can be expected from animals.

[racingnovice]

I think this is going nowhere lol.

I think you people are all missing the point and the real factor which is the weight of the horses.

If horse A was 650kg and horse B was 750kg and they both carried 58kg then yes the weight would be a factor as Horse A would be carrying 8.9% of its body weight and horse B would be carrying 7.7%. This would effect horse A much more then horse B over a 1200m race.

If both horses had roughly the same class/ability then id be backing horse B everyday of the week. Horse B would need to carry 67-68kg to get it to the same level as horse A.

It would be no different to having 2 people a 70kg and 100kg person both carrying the same weight. I can assure you the 70kg guy would struggle more then the 100kg guy.

[kenchar]

This is an interesting thread seeing all the different opinions, can I just throw another worm in the woodwork, and believe me it is something I have a bit of knowledge about having made a LOT of money years ago from stable information.
The word is bloodcount, only the stable and the stable vet know on the day whether the bloodcount of the horse is 100% correct, and as I was told IF the bloodcount was not spot on even though the stable ran the horse they would NOT back it.
We can go on forever about weights and how long is a length ( If it was me measuring the rail and it was night time and I'd had a few glasses of my favourite the length could be 10 metres).
There are so many unknowns in this business that you will not find information on.
I admire people that can do form and CONSISTANTLY win as they are few and far between.
Just my two bobs worth.
I just wish I knew a friendly vet that doesn't mind copping a sling.

Cheers

[Chrome Prince]

And not even be puffing? You must be kidding. Yes they are carrying 10kg more than flat horses, but they are racing against other jumps horses not flat horses so the comparison is irrelevant.

Obviously the performance of a horse will decrease with the more weight it carries. It is just crazy to suggest otherwise.

Try driving a car 1000 kilometres by yourself. Then drive back, but fill your car with people and fill the boot. I guarantee that you will lose a lot more fuel, hence decreasing your performance. If this is the case for a car, with 100 horse power? surely similar results can be expected from animals.

No joke BJ, I've seen it - remember Rick Hore-Lacey's Fast Food before he was put down? Wouldn't have blown out a candle.

I wasn't comparing flat horses with jumpers, I was comparing the ability to carry weight and still perform. Jumping with 10 kgs more than a flat racing horse and still the weight doesn't stop them. Because the weight ratio is insignificant. It makes a difference of probably 1/100th second.

It might be crazy to suggest otherwise, but why then do more horses win going up in weight than down in weight, why do more top weighted horses win more than any other horse - because the weight impost is insignificant.

Yes if I added three more people, and gave the horse a full meal before the run, it would stop, but a kilo here or there is nothing - the stats prove it.

[kenchar]

And 2 tubs of marge stops a dishlicker every time, used all the time, a few runs full of marge, odds go out and out, time is ripe, no marge, big odds and wins.
I know I'm getting off the subject, but what I'm trying to get through is this business is about money, not the love of dogs or horses, and thats why I Admire anyone that can consistantly win doing form as there is so many unknowns out there that the best form student can ever know.

[moeee]

also after having a quick read of the mentioned book, well looks like a lot of work to me
Yes I had a good read as well.
I don't suggest to follow the method,but I believe there is much knowledge there regardless.

[moeee]

Some people can't see because they choose not to.
Even me sometimes.

[punter57]

Sorry shoto; I was distracted and forgot to answer the question about "class".
Since it's a big one I'll start a new thread for it!

[davez]

I think this is going nowhere lol.

I think you people are all missing the point and the real factor which is the weight of the horses.

If horse A was 650kg and horse B was 750kg and they both carried 58kg then yes the weight would be a factor as Horse A would be carrying 8.9% of its body weight and horse B would be carrying 7.7%. This would effect horse A much more then horse B over a 1200m race.

If both horses had roughly the same class/ability then id be backing horse B everyday of the week. Horse B would need to carry 67-68kg to get it to the same level as horse A.

It would be no different to having 2 people a 70kg and 100kg person both carrying the same weight. I can assure you the 70kg guy would struggle more then the 100kg guy.

all this is simply not correct, small horse, big horse - who cares? horses are not people & to compare them as above, it just dont work that way.

in your example of horse A has ability & is fit & horse B doesnt & isnt, whats going to happen? B's going to win because it ways 100kg more than A? pppfff!

what counts is not a nags weight but the size of its ticker, & since we cant cut em up to have a look how big it is until they have karked it, we can only guesstimate the size of it.

[Privateer]

G'day all. Nice to see that there are still a few of the diehards here. I've noticed Moee, Kenchar and Chrome Prince already and of course my old mate Baggy! Hope you guys are hammering the bookies!

On the subject of weight it is only one of the many factors we punters have to consider when studying form. To concentrate solely on weight as a deciding factor when assessing the chances of a runner is not going to work in your favour for very long if at all.

I believe that the weight hype is just a bit of punting lore from years ago when there were massive weights carried and huge differences between top and bottom weighted horses. Today, with much higher minimum weights, weight doesn't become as important as in those earlier years but we (older) punters still have that weight thing embedded in our minds and of course younger punters always listen to us wise old sages! Yeah, right!

Personally, I never support a runner if it is carrying more weight than it has ever won with before AND I have a "weight maximum" that forms a part of my selection method but then again it is only one of 9 considerations for me.

I can't cop the "lengths = weight" theory either but I still see punters religiously working that factor into their selection methods. Unfortunately, it is not as simple as that and individual race circumstances cannot be covered by a blanket theory.

Punting experience is probably the most important asset when considering whether or not weight will influence your final selection.

Final thought: Many course records have been broken by horses carrying big weights (Century Kid comes to mind) but generally that will only happen in sprints with lower class opposition where the pressure is not as intense.

Cheers

Privateer

[punter57]

Davez has had enough, and I'm not surprised!!! When I started all this about weight of horses etc (see POST #6) I had a suspicion it would lead to exasperation as I,once upon a time, falling for the whole ratings hokum, trying to quantify that which is not quantifiable, became exasperated. The more you try to be "scientific" the more imponderables crop up: the more "factors" you discover, the more the variables multiply. As I 've wondered before: did MY horse have a barking dog keep him awake all night prior to that "disappointing run" at Eagle Farm? Was MY "boom colt" thinking of girlies last Spring, instead of races?? Was YOUR jockey dwelling on the breakfast bust-up he'd had with his missus instead of today's pace tactics? Who could possibly know?
The key to it all is to keep it simple. We punters are not working for the astrophysics dept of MIT!! We are not required to have a slide rule,or a complete set of Algorithmic tables, to place a bet!! Ratings are often a waste of time and rarely work at all unless applied with "feeling". But then......... you're better off working on your "feel", in that case.
Having got thus far,the next step is to decide who/what to have a "feel' FOR!! And here I look at the trainers since it is they who place the horse and it is up to them (almost alone) to do it right. They have ALREADY "rated" the horse and decided on where it should be.The "odds" are not really about the horses chances in any given race but, more importantly,are a direct judgement of the trainer's decision to PUT the horse in that race!! So ,all my punting colleagues, here's the clue:Assess the trainer's motives correctly and you're 90% "home" without even doing "the form" at all!!! By, and good punting to all

[Privateer]

Sot on Punter 57. "The key to it all is to keep it simple" See my post in the thread entitled "Am I old fashioned."

[Chrome Prince]

I'll just keep backing the horses lumping huge weights around, who are fit and in the market ;)

Belmont R1 1 Geil 57.0kg +2.5kg Won $3.90
Belmont R3 1 Money Exchange 60.0kg +4.0kg unplaced
Belmont R6 1 Stir Pak 59.0kg +2.5kg unplaced
Belmont R7 1 Impressive Stats 57.5kg +.5kg Won $3.50

[xptdriver]

I'll just keep backing the horses lumping huge weights around, who are fit and in the market ;)

Belmont R1 1 Geil 57.0kg +2.5kg Won $3.90
Belmont R3 1 Money Exchange 60.0kg +4.0kg unplaced
Belmont R6 1 Stir Pak 59.0kg +2.5kg unplaced
Belmont R7 1 Impressive Stats 57.5kg +.5kg Won $3.50


Gday all

kinda bears out my comment about horses carrying over 59... by all means back them and sure the odd few will win.. but in the long term they are duds, and duds that are usually overbet at that..

[Top Rank]

A reasonable point Racingnovice but of course there are many more factors at work which will decide who finishes in front. I guarantee you I, at 70kg, can easily account for some 100kg blokes around no matter what weight is being hauled.

Of course I would reach my optimum weight carrying level and then I would tire considerably. I think that is the point. Some horses can carry weight, some can't. It is no secret that better class horses can and still beat lower class animals. I think this is why horses going up in weight win more races, they are better horses.

[kiwi]

A small horse or human can be a ball of muscle and beat their larger (fatter) protagonist, winning depends on fitness, ticker, bottle and ability.

[punter57]

It seems to me that a lot of people are getting sidetracked by "Big Horse/Little Horse" and missing the main point that tiny weight discrepancies are OF NO IMPORTANCE in horse racing due to numerous other factors (of which size MAY be one) acting as counter-influences. That Kiwi jumps to the conclusion (see below) that Bigger means Fatter, and therefore unfitter, shows the enormity of the problem. We can't know the effects of most variables and shouldn't be breaking our heads over every miniscule difference between the horses. Let the trainer decide if his/ her horse is "right" and look for clues that the Trainer is CONFIDENT. They know their horses better than anyone else and THEY have weighed ir all up for us. When Cinque Cento appeared at Doomben in The Roses (Group 3 2020m) last Saturday it was senseless to analyse at all. Up 420m and 8 grades after a moderate class 1 win at Gosford, it was "obviously" in too hard a race. So; were the punters right or was Tony Wildman???
The punting public got it horribly wrong because that didn't listen to Tony. The bookies GOT IT RIGHT (for them) because the punters were scared off by the 20s on offer which left them (the bookies) cheering!! They were cheering because the punters were hooked on ratings and thinking of what SHOULD be instead of what COULD be. Keep it simple and keep on winning. Bye for now

[kiwi]

What of the other trainers in the race.Why weren't you listening to them?
They all had opinions on their horse's ability and were probably trying to win, given it was a Group 3

[punter57]

Hi Kiwi! I looked at all the visiting trainers only, since, as I've said before, if it's less than a few hours by float(or within minutes as is the case Doomben/Eagle Farm) to the races, it really is tempting to "give it a go" even if it's just wishful thinking:costs nothing and you might get a few grand for 5th or 4th even. Better in fact than winning at the Gold Coast where they probably should've been.
There were 6 of these, and three were short-priced Waterhouse animals. Overbet due to the Golden Gai tag, I ignored them. Remember, Kiwi, that we dont want to know why the favoured horses are in the race (ie that is clear), but why the OTHERS have been sent a thousand Kilometres. Not wanting to tempt fate (or treat the horses like a predictable Physics experiment) by trying to whittle it down further I let the old risk/reward equation guide me and took the 2 over $20. That's it!!

[kiwi]

Thanks punter57 travelling trainers have always aroused my interest too. I will pay this aspect more attention in future.

[kiwi]

Hi punter57

I've tried some trainer ideas with mixed results.Any more ideas?

My thoughts include preparation patterns, using winning jockeys and first up specialists.

[punter57]

Morning Kiwi!! Yesterday was one of the days when, in a moment of weakness, I might have considered putting a place bet on. Just for a second when River To The Sea looked like winning the BTC sprint I was counting the $1100 (ie $20 at $55 the win) then wondering if $12.40 the place would've made up for some of the disappointment. Likewise in the very next race with Natural Blitz looming in the Doomben Cup at $22 and paying $4.90 for 3rd. Or earlier with Igotthelaststone at Rosehill (not really looking the winner but still $6.50 the place).
These things happen but I've never been able to make Place Punting as profitable as Win Betting IN THE LONG RUN.,though a smaller return makes you "feel better" at the time!!!
By the way Kiwi, there were many possibilities in the main races at Doomben.Take the five from Interstate at LONGER THAN 20s in Race 6 (The Sprint),which I got down to 3 contenders. I eliminated Amtrak because he was down in class for his second run in Brisbane (from Melbourne) This is the trainer telling you he "got it wrong" the first time (too tough) and has therefore decided on an easier race; a sign of "loss of confidence"....BAD. Tsuimai (from Sydney), maybe for real, (probably I should've left him in but as he hadn't won for 18 months and then it'd been 1600, I'd say Denham had something longer in mind,next time). Youthful: from Melbourne after a reasonable effort at Warnambool the previous (now coming 2000 kilometres for this) and with 2 earlier wins 1350,5 at 1400; definitely FOR REAL. River To The Sea (from Sydney,running recently over longer) his trainer has sprung many a surprise before so I gave it "a chance", especially as it had been rested almost 2 months (several wins and places fresh at 1200/1400) for THIS.
For Face Value I thought that Laming was more "hopeful" than CONFIDENT (he's a Queenslander and often takes his horses to Brisbane from the Victorian stable "on holidays" in the winter) though, since he was putting the horse UP in class, Laming must've had some 'expectations". That's it Kiwi: 3 longshots in the same race and a near miss at $55: could've been different as it WILL be, next Saturday. Hope this gives you more feel for trainer "motivations" and why they spend time and money on travelling around. Cheers

[kiwi]

Hi Punter57
I noticed Spuruson was along way from home.Didn't back that one but on checking it's form saw Mi Casa ran second to it as a maiden.Thought if Spuruson was good enough for a Group race then Mi Casa is a good horse too and backed that.Sad part was i couldn't believe Spuruson could beat Willy Leica or Svenska otherwise i would have really have been celebrating.
Did you see anything of note?

[Mr ed]

I think this is going nowhere lol.

I think you people are all missing the point and the real factor which is the weight of the horses.

If horse A was 650kg and horse B was 750kg and they both carried 58kg then yes the weight would be a factor as Horse A would be carrying 8.9% of its body weight and horse B would be carrying 7.7%. This would effect horse A much more then horse B over a 1200m race.

If both horses had roughly the same class/ability then id be backing horse B everyday of the week. Horse B would need to carry 67-68kg to get it to the same level as horse A.

It would be no different to having 2 people a 70kg and 100kg person both carrying the same weight. I can assure you the 70kg guy would struggle more then the 100kg guy.

You are certainly living up to your name RACINGNOVICE, your thinking there is simply illogical. If both horses were allocated the same weight then they must had the same class and ability dispite the weights they have been carrying. E.G both may have won a bush maiden by a length with 57.5, in the same time, both horses start in a C1 next start and are allocated 58, your ratio is only valid if at all on the .5kg difference as at 57.5 they are at the same level.

[punter57]

Morning Kiwi!! I WAS on Spuruson and ,surprisingly, Unitab paid better (40.70) than the on-liners. That was a relatively easy one (race 4) as there were only 2 over 20-1. I bet #9 too but don't know what it did. The tougher races at Brisbane were the last two as there were quite a few possibilities. In the end I took 2 runners in R7 after eliminating Gordo (too short;looked like being aimed at longer next time) and Legally Bay (had two runs in Brisbane and now being DROPPED in both class and distance.....a sure sign of Hawkes losing confidence).
Race 8 was just too tough. There were 9 longshots over 20s including the winner and 2nd who both "plummeted" to about 16-1,which was FAR TOO SHORT,by the jump. Don't forget Kiwi that longshot winners are nothing unusual and should be bet if you "suspect" something. When Dane Ripper won the '97 Stradbroke at 40s after Cummings took her from Sydney, it might have been excusable to mumble "how could you expect a 3yo filly to get up at those odds??" but 5 months later when she won the Cox Plate (also at 40s) after another "trip"(to Melbourne that time)no-one had ANY excuse to not be in the queue COLLECTING. Afterwards in the Manikato and The Australian Cup everyone was on her and HAPPY to be taking 2-1!!! Go figure.
Anyway,Kiwi,keep looking at it and good luck next weekend on the TWO big days.

[Napalm]

Hi All,

Have read with interest the debate about weight. I think we have moved off the topic some what.

I was on Garry's webpage and he has books, software, systems and ratings. Are they any good? How have the systems really gone? Is the mag any good (got one free at Newcastle races once)?

Cheers,

[Bhagwan]

Hi Napalm,
With GR some of the stuff can be good , but as far as selecting winners , he is no better than others a number of the products are on the pricey side, especially some of the staking plans that use a form of progression & one does not need to spend $900 to do that.
I bought the first software edition of his Power of Ten , was not worth it.
I wish it was was, it well laid out & presented but struggled to break even on a set of figures which break even at level stakes.
The manual version was good thats why I ran with computerised version.

Some of the tools that reframe the market could be good & some tools for Dutch betting could be of interest or useing ratings but one can get these things online at no cost at all e.g.Ozrace tools have a good selectionat no cost at all.

There selection service without fail 7 days a week give out horsesthat were cosistantly veru short , at the time over 3mnths it rarely selected winners paying $3.00+
The results of profit are usually based on best price available for each selection
If selecctons were bet on the TAB , they made a slight loss ar level stakes.

I feel it would be best to do your own thing targetting races with exactly 9 runners only .
Target the top 2 selections of amy tipster e.g. Radio TAB selections from UniTAB are good. & break it down from there mmaybe using the Neurals.

Cheers,
Brian.

[Sportz]

Exactly 9 runners???

Why? What's wrong with 8 or 10?

[watsonnek]

9 sounds good to me :)
and nice to see old threads being recycled!

[go4it]

G'day all,

Been AWOL for a while,find this thread interesting and can't help but throw my hat in the ring here.
Baghwan,not nitpicking here but The Power of Ten was by Malcom Knowles,not Gary R.
Can't agree with the general concensus about weight being an irrelevant form factor.
Comparing examples with humans and trains is a futile exercise and has no relevance to the sport of kings.
Someone said there wqas no need for handicapping at all,let's see who the best horse is pound for pound.
That's why there is a handicapper,so the lower class animals can be competetive,class being the key word.
So looking at handicap races only,if a horse is going up in weight by 2kg or more,then the handicapper is obviously telling us it is down in class.
Obversely,if a horse is going down in weight by 2kg or more,he is telling us it is up in class.
So you have to ask the question about the one going up in weight,has it won or placed with this weight(or close to it)in the past?
With the other one,do you think it can handle the class rise?
Have to agree with Chrome,horses going up in weight win more races than those going down.
Also agree with XPT,a lot of them are duds and overbet,especially if last start winners.
As to the key word,CLASS,here is a method I have used with considerable success to determine the class runners in handicap races.
You will need a copy of the Sportsman to do this.
1)Go to the Zipform section
2)Handicap races only
3)Field size 10/14
4)Delete the lowest 3 horses in the average prizemoney column
5)Calculate a sum AVP total of the rest of the field
6)Divide this by the number of runners you have left(after deletions)
7)Once you have this figure,eliminate any runners in the AVP column that don't match or surpass it
8)Eliminate any runner that surpasses it by 1 fluke win in a good race
It,s not infallible,but once you have the class runners,you can do your form study from there.
I tend to focus on the top 5(if there is 5).
My filters are fairly stringent,maybe I'll post the actual method in it's entirety one day.
cheers

[Michal]

Hi All,


Some of you that have been here longer then me might know if punter 57 ever goto to writing his Class thread. If so I would dearly like to read it, would anyone know its link?

Michal

[Bhagwan]

Hi Sportz,
With 8 runners exactly, all sorts of wild things tend to happen. For whatever reason.
I recon one could bet every double digit runner in the race & still be no worse off betting the best form horse in the field , provided there are no odds-on runners in the field.

With 9 runners exactly , one is competing with 8 others.
Must be $3.20+ SP or PP.
The form horses seem to be able to do their thing more.

With 10 runners exactly one is competing with 9 others, a 11% difference.

As a test, run any reasonable selection process over races with exacly 9 runners .

Then do the same with other size fields of 10 & see if there is much difference.

I think one will find the SR slightly higher for 9 runners.

Just for fun, I did this...
I ran over the results for Sat28th Sun29th Mon30th July.
. Races with exactly 8 runners.

. No bet in races where the fav is $2.00 or less.

. Sometimes there were up to 5 horses bet at a time in the same race.

. Betting all runners $10.00+

4 wins from 13 races = 31% SR
O/L 46 ret 56 = Profit +10 = 22% POT
No form - No nothing.

Prices $17.50 10.70 10.70 17.80
Most of the form horses with nostrils flaired & flatulating just before jump , had their butts kicked.

Cheers.