OK everyone, I am welcoming opinions on this:

If one week a horse runs 6th beaten four lens, then next start in exactly the same class of race with exactly the same weight on the same limit runs second beaten five lengths, which is the better run, or are they the same, and if one is better than the other, by how much and why?

Duritz.

At first glance, running 2nd being beaten by 5 len is probably the higher rating performance. A 5 length winner generally means a high rating race for its class, imo. It would depend on the quality of the horses in both races however.

Having said that, they are both very similar aren't they? Beaten 4 lengths , then 5 lengths in same grade. One rating figure could fit both performances here.

I tend to grade horses now in blocks of 3 pts; eg 100, 97, 94, 91, 88 etc. based on their recent ratings.

my rating method would require me to know how much weight the winner carried.
if the winner carried 6 kgs more than the horse in question neither run was very good.

__________________
laurie

OK what if we assume all horses in both races carried 53 kgs, and they were all about the same standard of racehorse, in the same class, with the same weight, under the same conditions, and this particular horse runs 6th beaten 4 lengths then runs say third beaten five lengths, which is better, how much and why?

Duritz

It would depend on three factors:

The class of the opposition and race time and track condition.

Class of opposition

The race may be the same class but the competing horses may be better or worse.
Look at the API of the horses in the race as a guide only.

Race time

If the track condition was the same, then look at the race time.

Track

Was it on the same track.

OK I don't think I am getting my point across properly. This is not a real race I am talking about, this is theoretical. And I am therefore assuming that all things were exactly the same and things like time etc. are irrelevant because the question merely is a matter of theory - which is the better run, when a horse runs 6th beaten 4 lengths or 2nd beaten 5 lengths. It's a question of theory. For what it's worth my method would assume that the 2nd was 1.5 kgs or 1 length superior to the sixth, I am just interested to hear what others think of this theoretical situation, basically do people look at lengths beaten as the be all and end all, or at finishing positions, or both.

So for the sake of argument say it was over a mile at the same track with exactly the same track speed, but the times ran were irrelevant because the first week was slowly run (hence the small margins!) and they ran 99 seconds when the next week was quick run and they ran 96. They CRAWLED first week though, so their time doesn't matter. The class was the same, the horses the same level with the same API, just looking at this one theoretical horse who one week ran 6th beaten 4 and the next second beaten 5. I reckon the second week is the better run even with the bigger margin.

Any other thoughts?

Duritz.

If it was me i would be backing the ************ horse that ran first by 5 legths

The only sensible response.

Duritz, the question's a bit silly because everything falls into place after you rate the winners. i.e. once you've decided whether it was an outstanding performance on the one hand or an ordinary field on the other or whatever.
The rating given to the winner dictates the ratings given to the horses finishing behind it.

Theoretical questions are allowed to have some leeway...

The point is this. What I was trying to discover was people's thoughts on lengths beaten as opposed to margins. Basically, do people place more emphasis on one or the other or equally. Like say you were going to have a bet today in South Africa and you didn't know the horses, but you saw a two horse race where both horses had had one start in a maiden, right? Both started about 5/1 first start, one ran second beaten 5 lengths the other ran 6th beaten four lengths. Which would you consider better.

Duritz.

What I was trying to discover was people's thoughts on lengths beaten as opposed to margins.

Sorry what I of course meant was lengths beaten as opposed to finishing positions...