10th February 2005, 10:06 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Jan 1970
Posts: 4,437
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by crash
That was a bit slick there Chrome.
'Furpy' ? I don't think so.
In fact your stats. actually prove the furpy correct, which is that it is harder to WIN on heavy tracks [if all thing are equal besides track conditions] than on good tracks.
Stats can be used as 'evidence' to support almost any incorrect conclusion. Mistakenly, I think you have drawn one here.
Your figure perfectly represent 2 things about heavy tracks. One is clearly shown, but the other is the [hidden] uneven playing field in the comparison.
Slightly more favourites win races on heavy tracks, but what is hidden here, is that after scratchings the fields on heavy tracks are a lot smaller than those raced on good tracks. Naturally the smaller the field the better the favourites perform, as races over all distances have far fewer runners in heavy contd. and the smaller the field, the less the favourites pay overall.
'X' number of races with 'y' no of runners per race, raced on both good and heavy tracks would produce a very different stats. outcome if x and y were equal under both good and heavy conditions. Of course they are far from it. !!
|
Hi crash,
Fact is that regardless of field size, the end result is not worse. It does not matter whether there are 2 horses or 100 horses in the field, it does not affect the end result which is a slighty LESS loss on turnover. So there is no reason to avoid those races. That's the point.
And no, they don't pay less as the LOT is least.
It's the reality of having $1 on each favourite on a Fast track versus Heavy track etc. It doesn't matter why to me.
It's the same as field size rules, the favourites salute less, but pay more - so why avoid them? It's because punters get it stuck in their brain out of a bad run, but should they continue, the overall loss would still be very much the same.
Punting and losing is very much like Houdini's curse, the losses stay in the subconscious and create illusions which hard facts tear to shreds. |