Someone once told me that there was a rule of thumb in assessing how horses will perform when its weight is changed relative to other horses.

I think the formula was 1kg=1 length per 1000m.

What is the time associated with covering one length?

Can someone please assist?

The accepted standard is 0.15 of a second.

See horseracingaustralia.com.au

Cheers.
darky.

The more accurate measurement is 0.167 of a second which translates to 6.09 lens per second.

In regard to the 1kg = 1 len per 1,000 not sure that this is correct. For instance Don Scott claimed the measurement should be 1.5kgs per length, while others have used a variable kg = a length depending on the overall distance of the race.

Of course, what has been taken into account is the pace which translates into energy usage, e.g. the slower the pace, the less the energy usage. That's why for instance God's Own was able to win the Guineas because of the crazy early pace with the leaders stopping. His last 600m sectional was quite slow - it's just that because of the interference earlier in the race then most thought it a super run, while in fact it was quite deceptive.

Not saying it wasn't a good run, it was but the way it finished was deceptive as it ran its last 600m in 37.64s over two seconds slower than the winner's time in the Toorak over the same distance at the same meeting.

Thanks guys, although I can't get that link to horseracingaustralia.com.au

They seem to have changed the site around a bit.

Try www.**************.com.au

A free download worth reading is " Racing Pays 2 - THE ULTIMATE STRATEDGY.
Cheers.
darky.

I've personally used the Don Scott theory of (1.5 kg per length) ever since I started doing my own ratings. As La Mer stated, the pace at which races are run will quite often throw this assumption around.

I must state that I only rate races that are run at or beyond 2000 metres; my ratings seem to perform better within this range.


dundas lane ............