Ultimate strategy
 

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

is it written by gary robinson?

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

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.

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.

moeee
 

got a web address there moeee?

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

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

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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!

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.

may i add ?
 

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

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???

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

DINGO BOY
 

Read that Malcolm Knowles booklet myself.

Very interesting indeed.
Cheers.
darky.

Hi Darky
 

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

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.

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!!

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.

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.

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!

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.

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!

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

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.

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

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%

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
************ 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

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.

[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.

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.

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

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.