Down In Distance.
 

Mark, or anyone - have you any comments on horses going down in distance? Looking at today's races there were four horses that were $3.50 or under pre-post that were reducing in race distance by at least 150 metres. They were:
Geelong R6 no.2 - Highly Elated.
Echuca R6 no.2 - Prince Of Scribes
Warren R4 no.3 - Moville Eddie
Kalgoorlie R3 no.1 - Christobal.

None of them won, nor were they placed which I suppose is encouraging.

Out of interest I also looked at $3.50 pre-post that were increasing in distance by more than 200 metres. There were 5 selections for three unplaced and a second - the fifth is still to run (Kalgoorlie R6 no.2). There were three such selections yesterday including Perlin, none won.

michaelg
 

i use a simple rule when deciding wether to back a horse down in distance - unless they have been placed at their last start & that start was within the last couple of weeks they dont get my money. i improved my strike rate considerably once i started aplying this test.

Hi, Davez.

Your posting supports not backing/laying horses going down in distance. I'll look at those that are now dropping in distance by at least 150 metres without any other rules, and will list them in two categories. The first category is placed at last start, and the second will be those unplaced. We'll see how they go...

Unplaced.
Flemington R5 no.1 - Our Smoking Joe.

Yesterday's selection won, paying $2.70 - not a good start.

No selections today.

Two selections today:

Placed last start.
Ipswich R8 no.2 - Finder Page

Unplaced
Ipswich R6 no.2 - Miss Ab Fab

There is a third selection today which I mistakenly omitted. It is:

Unplaced last start.
Sandown R8 no.9 - Mahr.

If it's a sprinter down in distance and that horse has won before at the shorter distance,it's a no brainer as it's obviously got some chance. More difficult is a 2000 type going back to 1600 or so. It's a question of price in that case (so long as the horse has had success at the shorter distance). Two examples: (1) La Bella Dama 7/10/2001 loses by 12.3 lengths Canberra Cup (2000m Quality Hcp),27/10/2001 enterred Group 3 Moonee Valley 1600 (down 400) and wins at 33-1,showing that her trainer wasn't "doing his dough" by shifting her and stumping up the extra costs.That she then won the McKinnon,up to 2000 again,(at 50-1 tote) the next week shows that moving horses around pays for astute trainers (and punters).Example (2) Jameela has been sent to Randwick 10/04/2004 by Tony McEvoy and thrashed 17.7 lengths in a 2600 Group 2, after previously winning at 1600,1700,1800 and doing O.K. at 2000. Now,8/05/2004 she is back in Adelaide in Group 2 1600 (Down 1000m!!!!). Why wasn't she spelled or something?? one might ask. Answer:because she won at$43 on the tote!!! What I'm getting at is that when they go down there has to be an EXTRA angle, something unexpected in the placement of the horse to justify a suspicion of victory ahead.Cheers

Hi, Punter57.

You're right, there should be an angle. From your examples, the horses have failed at a longer distance then the trainer reduces its next-start distance so that a good price is available. Hopefully the angle is the price. The selections I am looking at is the pre-post fave at $3.50 or shorter and not at double figures.

And concerning sprinters - I agree with you. I am not looking at any horse whose last start was at 1,200 meters and is now racing in a 1,000 metre race. It seems (I could be mistaken) that these sprint races do not provide a distinct disadvantage concerning the reduction in distance. There would have been two selections today but I have omitted them due to the above reason. Out of interest, they are
Townsville R2 no.1 - Sea Zulu
Townsville R3 no.1 - Zozulina.

There is one selection for the system today:
Placed last start.
Townsville R7 no.3 - Brunt

have to add that i find the worst offenders ARE those racing over the shorter distances, esp those dropping from around 1200 to <1100, terrible record as far as the shorter priced nags go.

Davez, you've confirmed what we suspected about the sprint races.

And from today's two "sprint" selections, the first won ($1.50 and $1.10) and the other ran second ($1.20) in their respective races. As the shorter priced nags have a terrible "lay" record I'll list any future selections ($3.50 pre-post and under) here as they might be worth backing each way? We'll see how they go.

The system selection ran third - a good result.

One selection today:

Unplaced last start.
Mackay R1 no.2 - Lord Grange ($2.20)

No Sprint selections today.

hmm, actually michaelg i was saying the exact opposite - these nags have a terrible "win" & "place" record, & have had for as long as i have followed this game.

as for backing them eachway, i am sure there are quicker way to the poorhouse, but not too many.

laying them, well the only things i usually lay have 2 legs, big jugs & blond hair, & thats the extent of my knowledge on that subject.

i guess all i was trying to get across is that a horse dropping in distance & not in great form is still just a horse not in great form racing over a lesser distance. whether todays distance is going to suit, or whether the nag is fitter, etc, etc, etc, well that becomes a judgement call. but i never touch them & am the richer for it.

Hi, Davez. I misunderstood your posting - I thought you were avoiding lays on sprint races as they had a good record of winning. I'll still record them because hopefully the pre-post price might have a positive impact.

No Lay selections today.

One Sprint selection.
Cheltenham R6 no.1 - Sparkling Now.

Four selections today;

Placed last start.
Sun Coast R7 no.1 - Perdee
Hobart R5 no.1 - Full Stop
Hobart R7 no.6 - Mimosa Willow
Kalgoorlie R4 no.4 - Star Of Telesto

Yesterday's sprint selection was unfortunately unplaced. I think it missed the start, which was probably the reason for its loss?
One selection today:
Sun Coast R6 no.1 - Mt Gower.

There was one winner of $2.60 from yesterday's four selections.

There have been 10 selections over the past seven days for 2 winners, paying $2.70 and $2.60.

No selections today. However, Dubbo R3 no.9 would have been a selection but it is a Maiden race.

Yesterday's Sprint selection ran third, paying $1.40.

No selections today.

Two selections today:

Unplaced last start
Balaklava R1 no.2 - Tonlyn Spirit ($3.50)

Placed
Belmont R5 no.3 - Holy Bounty ($2.20)

One Sprint selection:
Balaklava R7 no.2 - Gold On Gold.

A good day yesterday - both selections lost, and the Sprint selection won paying $3.00 and $1.40.

Two selections today:
Placed last start.
Northam R8 no.6 - Stone Man ($3.50)

Unplaced.
Rocky R7 no.7 - She's Decent ($3.00)

No sprint selections.

Yesterday our Placed Last Start selection won, paying $6.10 even though it was $3.50 pre-post. That's the problem - it's almost impossible to predict the eventual fave especially in the larger fields. There have now been 8 selections for two winners paying a total of $9.70.

There have been 6 Unplaced Last Start selections for one winner paying $2.70.

One selection today:
Unplaced Last Start
Casino R5 no.1 - Bumper's Smile ($3.00)

I think I'll stop testing the system as it seems it might not be profitable.