Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DR RON
When using strikerates to award bouses or penalties or whatever do we put too much credence in them? for example, A stat I saw stated that tab no 1 had a strike rate of 15.88 % and no 10 a strike rate of 3.97 Does that mean we give tab no 1 a4 times more chance of winning? What we should remember is that tab no 1 will be competing on average against9 or 10 others in each race it is involved in whereas tab no 10 will probably compete against 13 or 14 others on average ( only guessing here for the sake of trying to make a point) so that raw strike rates on their own can give too much of an advantage to some horses. This theory of course can relate to barriers, win and place percentages, jockey and trainer stats or any other factor to do with racing. Maybe some people with data with the number of starters in in each race can give some stats feedback on my theory. My overall point being that Tab no 1 will find it easier to win against 9 or 10 than no 10 will against 13 or 14 yet their raw strike rate will will not show this. Hope this made sense.
|
Hi DRRON,
Yes, I believe too much emphasis is placed on OVERALL strike rate, just as too much emphasis is placed on career prizemoney and API.
All these figures are only relevant to today's class and distance.
For example: if TAB 1 has a strike rate of 15.88%, why can't I just back anything over $6.30 and show a profit. The reason is that the stat is influenced by other factors as you have already stated.
Some figures for TAB #1
Overall S/R 17.45%
3 runners 0%
4 runners 46.67%
5 runners 28.67%
6 runners 30.00%
7 runners 26.85%
8 runners 22.63%
9 runners 18.86%
10 runners 17.52%
11 runners 17.32%
12 runners 13.88%
13 runners 14.88%
14 runners 12.71%
I'll stop there to illustrate a point.
To compare the strike rate of TAB# 10 to TAB #1, you must have equal starters.
So we have...
TAB #1 10 runners = 17.52%
TAB #10 10 runners = 5.78%
But that's just the tip of the iceberg... there is weight added to the TAB number sometimes and other times not, also the gap in weights would be different in a field of 10 as opposed to a field of 21.
Not to mention form!
TAB #1 is three times as likely to win as TAB #10 - all other things being equal, but they're not.
The answer to the question lies in weight, fitness and class.
More class horses are TAB 1 than TAB 10, and even semi fit horses carrying more weight will beat a fit less classy horse carrying less weight, more times than not. Hence the skew in the figures.
If they were Robohorse (pinched from Duritz I think), then you could back them according to strike rate of TAB #.