No response to the first question Barny which is a pity but I,m sure there will be more testers out there.

"Urban Myth Busters" though is a great thread and I,m sure most of us would be interested in what comes out of it.

Q2.In this day and age of Training methods do the Fillies and Mares perform worse than the Male horses?

Cheers and thanks for a enlightening thread.
darky

Hi Darky,

I did not answer your first question because I assumed it was a gee up. Infact I did type a reply but cancelled because you might be up for a bit of mischief.

I will by pass Q1 for the time being because Q2 is a reasonable question. I do not have the statistics but assume the fillies and mares do peform worse then male horses.

Now, I cannot give a link and I am not sure how researched it was, but I do remember seeing a report where one person ( might be a lady ) did some research and on her studies noticed that on a per start basis that males out performed females by about ( 10% just guessing here ) She then factored that percentage into her ratings or system.

It would not surprise me if I saw that on this website and it could of been Lucky Lil or one of her followers.

So, off the cuff, I would say males outperform females, just need to find a source because I have given up assuming anything anymore.

STAR

Very good question DD & my observation for what it's worth is that one can expect on average for male horses to marginally outperform females.

However, just as with other factors such as wide barriers, apprentice jockeys, large fields etc etc, one can also expect on average to secure a marginally longer price about the females.

So are we any better off bottom line wise excluding females & just focussing on the males? No, not in my experience.

Are you talking Colts, Stallions and Geldings or all?
Also when you talk about outperform are your taking it on a strike rate of total wins or a strike rate of the ratio of runners.

Also as a punter do you measure by each group and the Loss on turnover?

Darky

You know those weighed 56kg+ win more races than lower weighed horses
You also know Geldings are the most consistent beasts to bet on.

Or I have let the cat out of the bag :D



What else have I got in my armory:
1. Also those that have not won at the distance are a better betting edge than those that have...DS rating @ R&S
2. and forget those that have won at the Track...divvy killer. (DS rating @ R&S)
3. Barriers are a myth, except those >11, not so good IMHO
4. Apprentices are not worth going near even with Mooeee''s money
5. 4 and 5 yo's are more reliable than the Melbourne Metro Trains....
6. Queensland tracks (non-Metro) and Wa & NSW Metro tracks in neural ratings aren't worth the bandwidth in down loading them
7. Don Scott R&S ratings are best applied to those that have less than 4 wins
8. Days Last run don't make a fig of difference to the top DS rater in R&S ratings
....these are all my experiences...so they are not right or wrong, but may help :D

Thanks Stix.

Interesting bit of information. Looking forward to more words of wisdom from you.

Star

Hi Stix,
Q1.was to get the ball rolling and your answer is correct of course.
Not sure if the TIME rating people agree as I,m strictly a Weight rating man.
Would love to know what they think though.
Thanks for yours and everybodys contribution so far.
Cheers.

Star,
The lady might have been "Felicity" who used to post some quite good stuff.
Cheers

I had to come back to Darkies Q1. And after reviewing Stix's I feel I can sum up the question like they do in the Myth Busters.

" BUSTED "

If anybody wants to unbust ( is that a word ) please chime in.

Star

The amount of 4 and 5 yo geldings running around is massive. I would say that mares would be a better bet, only because everyone has the geldings angle covered.

As to the weights, geez, does it matter ? Weights are good as a guide as to whether your horse is going up or down in class. Under 50 kgs in the Cox Plate for instance and weights come in to it, but that's about it for mine.

So You Think eh ...