Interesting to hear Brisbane caller Alan Thomas say that in his time of race calling he realises that barriers are much more important than weight , surely he jests.

Out of all of my plans , none of them take into account barriers , but have a big importance on weight.

What does everyone else think?

__________________
Good luck and good punting.

And remember a profit a day keeps the Girlfriend/Wife away.

I heard that bit of wisdom(???) and almost fell off my chair laughing! Not only did he say it was more important than weight but, unless I misheard, it was the MOST important factor these days!

Here I was thinking I had to consider class, weight, speed, etc but all I have to do is back the horse in the first couple of barriers.

In my opinion barrier is fairly UNIMPORTANT except in a very small number of races and I generally ignore it or just make a small adjustment to my required price for wider runners.

I think it just goes to prove that race callers make lousy tipsters!

__________________
"Computers can do that????" - Homer Simpson

Statistically speaking, on average barriers show to make no difference at all from a profit perspective. Inside barriers have a slightly better win strike, but because everyone favours those barriers the price is lower. Outside barriers have a slightly lower strike rate but the avg winning price is much better. All in all, on average across all races, barriers seem to make jack difference to the end profit result.

Of course this doesn't mean the same will apply to your own betting results. On a case by case basis barriers need to be considered in the context of the race under question. Racing is far to complext to make broadbrush statements about the universal importance of any one factor. In some races barriers are extremely important and in others they are irrelevant.

Now onto a different tangent....

In regards to weight, my study has shown that the linear effect implied by 1.5kg equals one length at all weight levels isn't quiet right. Once a horse gets above 54.5kg's additional weight will slow them down and the 1.5kg/L is as good an assumption as any. However once a horse gets below 54.5kg additional weight off doesn't increase its speed / ability. Regardless of weight a horse can only run at a certain speed over a race distance. It's my belief that a horse can run at its maximum race speed with 54.5kg's just as easy as it can with 52.5kg's. The slowing effect doesn't take place until they get above 54.5kg's.

I have come to these viewpoints after tehcnology assisted analysis of thousands of good quality races and to use one example, take Innovation Girl. She ran good pace adjusted speed in her win on 24/8/02 carrying 57.5kg's. In the Ascot Vale she was dropping to 53kg's. Traditional weight theory has it that she would have increased her overall speed by 3 lengths and absolutely blitzed her opposition. However if you examine the implied speed she would have run if she sped up by 3 lengths on that performance you would realise that it was a unrealistic for her. As it turns out her pace adjusted speed was a little better in the Ascot Vale but nowhere near the levels implied by a 4.5kg weight drop. It's my view that even if she only dropped to 54.5kg's in the Ascot Vale she still would have ran the same speed and won by the same margin.

Of course there are all sorts of other race factors that could have influenced that result and she is just one example. However I can guarantee that when carrying 53kg's, for as long as she races she will never reach the speed implied by a 4.5kg weight drop from her performance with 57.5kg's.

The same thing could be examined with Bel Esprit who has been running sensational speed with 57.5kg's. He drops to 51kg's and traditional weight theory says he should increase his speed / ability by over 4 lengths. Is that going to happen? I say of course not! I suggest that it would be a near physical impossibility for a horse for a horse to run 4 lengths quicker than he has been recently. No doubt he will improve some speed, but I will only be treating his weight drop as 57.5kg's to 54.5kg's, not 51kgs as he is listed to carry.

In saying that he still looks a good thing in the race. Looking at the speed and pace form, the others don't even come close. Possibility North Boy if he reproduces either of his two early runs over 1200m where he showed freaksih ability.

Something to think about anyway!

Today Alan Thomas is complaining about the weights the horses have to carry!!!! The Name's Bond was beaten carrying 59kg starting from barrier 3. Now based on his comments yesterday you would have thought this was a sure bet given a nice inside barrier and 2nd last start. After the race Alan said there was no way the horse could win carrying this weight.

Now either weight is important or it is not - it can't be a minor consideration one day but the reason a horse can't win the next! I don't mind race callers having opinions but it would be nice if they could at least be consistent from one day to the next!

__________________
"Computers can do that????" - Homer Simpson

Alan Thomas has to be the most unconsistant and biased race caller of all time , after every race he will come up with a reason of why thw fav lost even though it will totally contradict what he said the race before.

I don't know why Sky Racing persist with having him as their Brisbane caller.

Why can't they sack him and replace him with Wayne Wilson , the chief caller of Brisbane racing with Sky Channel and one of the best callers Australia wide.

Is it because of contracts and commitments for other channels?

__________________
Good luck and good punting.

And remember a profit a day keeps the Girlfriend/Wife away.

I too heard those pearls about barrier being more important than weight. The thing I liked about it was that the favourite rang second, unable to make up ground, BECAUSE IT WAS CARRYING 61KG!!! Alan Thomas was calling a race which disproved his theory in front of his eyes.

I SEEN ID BUD I DONNNNNN BILEEV ID.

I don't even look at barriers although they seem to make up a fair amount of the pre-race comment on the big Cups races (perhaps because it's the only time you get 20+ runners). Several points:-
1. Inside barriers are supposedly the preferred address, but;
2. Inside barriers can be a handicap for slow beginners.
3. Fast beginners wouldn't care if they're near the rail or out in the suburbs - they'll still lead the field into the first turn.
4. Wide barriers only matter if the distance to the first turn is short - probably 150m or less - check your track maps - I personally couldn't be bothered.
There's too many other factors to worry about - like which side of the bed did the jockey get out of.

Hi, I'm pretty new to racing but am learning quite fast. After reading both Dr Turfs guide to better punting (John Rothfield 1987) and Punting to Win (Rod Buttery, 2001) I have come to the conclusion that barrier does count, but it varies from track to track and also depending on the distance of the race, so an added factor is looking at notes for each track you are betting on and taking that into account. While a bad barrier won't stop an excellent horse I have found my place strike rate has gone up considerably from 40-50% to about 70% by taking into account the barrier position depending on the individual track. I also believe that one of the reasons many systems fail is because they automatically assume that the inside barriers are the better barriers, but as has already been pointed out here, that's not always the case.So what I'm currently doing is working on a set of guidelines for each track and race distance that I can just keep in a folder and pull out whenever I encounter those particular conditions. Anyone got any ideas on this?

http://www.racenet.com.au/barriers.asp

this site shows you some of those factors mentioned in this post.

Agree with everything you say about Alan Thomas's pre race and after race comments.
However I find his actual call of the running of most races as one of the best around. He actually points out where the horses are - three wide, on the rails etc. Compare that with Ian Craig's terrible calls of Sydney races. He knows where the horses are but so what! He often gives us no idea when, with a packed field, he reels off one name after another and leaves it at that. In my opinion it's no contest between him and Alan Thomas.