Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cheekyshiraz
Hi guys
Im just trying to do some calculations to see if i can more accurately predict the winners....i know horse racing is not a science...its more difficult than that  however, if you can shed any light on the following questions i would be obliged.
- How many lengths on average is a horse handicapped by per extra kilo? so say 2 horses were carrying 55kg for a 1000m and both ran it in .59s. if we put and extra kilo on horse A before the start...what would we expect his time to be then or how many lenghts behind horse B?
- How much slower on average would horse carrying the same weight run a 1000 in different conditions. So say the average time for 1000m on a dead 4 track for horse X is 59.5. What time could we expect on a good 4 track, a slow 4 and a heavy 4?
I understand that some horses prefer different conditions but is it right to assume that most horses will run faster on a dead track and slower on the heavier?
would be great to hear your opinions and analysis on this.
cheers |
Can't shed too much light on this, but I'm working (slowly) on a time ratings method to incorporate into my database. I'm extremely dissatisfied with the way in which time ratings are worked out by most places. I'm taking a different approach to calculations.
For example par times don't handicap (either way) enough.
Beyer failed because our pace and surface is different to the USA.
If he had bothered to put in some effort, he'd have realised adjustments need to be made, but the principles are sound.
USA races tend to be run at a faster clip than here, they tend to go all out and it's survival of the fittest and fastest, whereas here it tends to be a calculated pace and the horse with the fastest final burst often wins or goes close.
In the UK it tends to be even worse, the pace is even slower and final bursts are faster.
It's quite a culture shock.
Time "ratings" is a science, a fairly precise science, which is why a lot of people get it wrong. I'm not saying I'll get it right either, as missing information kills a lot of what I had intended, but I think I'm closer than I thought I'd be.
To answer the latter part of your post, it will all be different.
Times vary track to track, distance to distance and going to going.
Each is a subset of the other.
I've found it's dangerous to take a blanket approach.
Good to Dead 1000m at one track is not the same as Good to Dead at another.
Apart from the best time ever recorded under those conditions, the slowing down effect will also vary.
It might be 1 second at one track, and 2 seconds at another.
Then there's rail position which can impact the time dramatically and pace.
A lot to chew over, but what started out as fun has become an arduos task.