I've forgotten the amount of times I have ruled out a horse as a potential winner, due to poor barrier draw, only to see it get up and win! Sound familiar?

I was reading a post [ealsewhere] that stated an analysis of 26,500 races with a min.of 12 runners and max. of 16 runners, discloses that the inside 50% of Barriers win 52.5% of races.
Is that all? If that is the case, then any consideration of Barrier Draw in Handicapping, must contribute a negitive skew result.

Considering the importance that Barrier Draw plays in the betting habits of Punters, it stands to reason that good Horses running from "percieved" poor barriers, must be underbet. That creates overlays and more $$$.

Those Barrier Draw charts showing winners/barriers at various distances arn't what they seem either, as they are skewed by
the fact that the inside barriers, 1 to 8 have far more runs than barriers 9 to 18 etc.due to field size. The futher out the barriers are from say barrier 8, the less runs and less wins they have.
Punters dutifuly note those barrier stats. and a betting skew towards the "winning" barriers result!

[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-11 05:28 ]

I have done a run of the last 513 races with exactly 14 runners & adjusted the barrier draw after scratchings .

For those who might not be aware, the barriers are always adusted inwards if there is an inside scratching .

You will find most TAB internet sites do not show this adjustment e.g.QTAB

RESULT
B- %
1-10
2-6
3-8
4-9
5-6
6-7
7-8
Top half 54%

8-3
9-5
10-7
11-5
12-7
13-6
14-7
Bottom Half 46%

Some observations
Barrier 1 produced a profit of 0.54%
Barrier 2 produced loss -26.9%
Barrier 10 produced a profit 3.54%
If you bet all 14 produced a loss of -26.9%
on turnover.

Interesting ,considering if one backs Favs only ,it would normally produces a -20% loss

__________________
Cheers.

CRASH.in general i totally agree except in the case of a slow beginner.every horse race is different of course but many a time i have bet a horse in so called no mans land and came out a very good winner.

If only your "RESULT" Bhagwan could be applied to Casino Games of Chance, we could send them broke! If picking horses was only that easy, where we could apply Stats. of Mathimatical Randomness to the dynamics of Horse Racing!

Ah, but your outside barriers [after adjusting inwards] didn't have as many runs as the other Barriers, so their loss figure is skewed.
Not that any of it is relevent to picking winners unless a totaly random selection method, such as Monkeys throwing Darts is used to select winning Horses.

Wet tracks increase the inner % slightly[I should have stated from the Stats I quoted and with fields of odd number starters, the middle barrier is left out] as your figures show as most of those races are winter races [wet].

[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-11 10:50 ]

[ This Message was edited by: crash on 2003-08-11 10:53 ]

Darkydog,

When I try to factor in Barrier positions to my Hadicaping efforts, my results go to the dogs!

Someone is bound to point out that trainers scratch horses due to Barrier positions. This is due to the reasons you mention and others. As we all know, some horses are front running, on pacers and swoopers etc. so horse are often scratched because of indevidual Horse/Jocky requirements. That can also mean that inside barriers don't suit a lot of horses either [as much as outside] and can be scratched because of it.
After everything is put through the wash, barriers seem to play no useful role stats. wise, on outcome.

Punting outcome however, is not related to the Stats of course, but to selection criteria from each races unique dynamics. Thats my two-bobs worth anyway.

CRASH.couldnt agree more.

Crash
Couldnt agree more barriers never worry me,but I have a mate who will not back a nag if it is inside barrier 6 and he is very succesfull.I had one bet today Queanbeyan R7 PREZZIE the main and a saver on TINY TREASURE both from extreme outside barriers. 1ST and 3RD. If one listened to the waffle about barriers on SKY I wouldnt have backed either. Makes you wonder dont it.
Cheers
Kenchar

If you apply the Ratio of Observed to Expected , you can only apply bonuses or penaltys with 99% confidence to two barriers.

[ This Message was edited by: woof43 on 2003-08-11 19:10 ]

Woof
Could tou please explain that in english?????????????

I would assume woof means that you need to compare the % of starters from a barrier to the % winners from a barrier. ie if 10% of runners start from barrier 5 you would expect to get 10% winners, if barriers were insignificant.

There is some problems when you get to wider draws or starts that are used irregularly with regards to to using stats as the small numbers produce unreliable statistics. The method I use is based on places rather than wins as you achieve a more valid set of stats of fewer races. Before doing this I checked some starts which have had thousands of races to compare the win/place results and they were remarkably similar. From this data I have a set of base barrier penalties which I use for guidance when looking at each individual horse in an upcoming race. They are not just mechanically adjusted as this practice ignores the uniqueness of each event.

There are some issues I personally still have with how the barrier data is executed (such as the influence of prices, wet tracks) but feel it gives a reasonable guide to work from.