And if such a profoundly important factor as lengths from the winner is so open to interpretation it illustrates, I suppose, why almost all simple systems based on pure results data are doomed to failure in the long term.

KV

Yes, energy expended is not measureable unless one can view the footage.

E=MC2

The energy expended = the mass of the horse x (the speed of light) squared, providing the horse is expending it's full potential of energy.

But that can be measured if the horse wins and is pushed out hard and you know the mass of the horse.

It's easier just to watch ;)

Buy the Harley Chrome, with the matt black open face helmet and the wrap- around sunglasses and join the Ulysses Motorcycle Club [15,000 old fogies just like me] .... You'll be fine from then on:-)

No, you would exist as your sister, and thereby avoid being bald, which could be seen as a blessing

Tailwag (woof)...

Was that you crash roaring down the main street of Bairnsdale picking up your Fish and Chips?

I send the Handbrake for food and all other errands, what sort of 1%er do you think I am ?

Definitely the Handbrake on her Japo crotch-rocket you saw old son. She has the saddle-bags, not me :-)

whoah!

hey there crash
 

who skins all the eels then at your place,...cheers...gazman...

G'day all

Been reading with interest the debate of finishing position -v- margin from winner. To throw my 2 bob's worth into the ring, when I did my 2 years stats analysis I looked at both of these statistics.

I found that a horse that had run 2nd at its last start, regardless of distance from the winner, was so much more a better betting proposition than the "lengths from the winner" theory that I included it among my rules when establishing my successful method.

Cheers

Privateer

Hi Privateer,
I found a similar observation when looking at horses who had finished 2nd in exactly 7 days in races that were they are running in events that are exactly 1200m on the day.
The POT was greater than last start winners in a similar situation.

Cheers.