Vig,

Thats why it can be very profitable is because it is so hard to do and very few people have the ability or more importantly the resources at their disposal to do it well.

In short, you need to compare all times run on a day against the standard for the track and distance. However it gets more complicated. The class of racing isn't the same at all tracks so your standards need to take this into account. Using the times comparison you calculate the how fast/slow the track was for the day and correct actual times to reflect this.

You are then in a position to compare correct times against the standard but that is only partially useful as you need to consider the influence of early pace.

By understanding the times horses should run given the early pace, you can compare actual performances against them and determine race quality.

(At tracks where they don't record sectional times it is impossible to complete the pace analysis stage.)

The only way I can maintain a process as detailed as this for every race run in Australian where they record sectionals is through some sophisticated comptuer technology and an established set of standards, parameters etc. that were developed based on analysis of 7 years of racing.

Take my word for it, it can be done but unless you have the resources for automation, its impossible to consistently maintain.

In saying all that, no set of numbers provide the magical answer to racing. You still have to apply common sense to their interpretation and use...and most importantly, bet for value.

hi.osulldj.well dip me in honey and feed me to the lesbians.i learnt from both the masters .both dead now but the teachings still have held me in check for more years than i care to remember.my best to you.

Hi Darkydog,

I too learnt a hell of a lot from the two you mention....they were the pioneers of Australian punting.

One thing I have also learnt is that there is more than one way to win and I have no doubt you can win using class / weight approaches, I never said otherwise.

On the other hand your comment, taken straight from the views of these two men implied that time has no place in racing, which as I said in my opinion is ignorant.

The diversity of opinion on how to go about winning and the fact that nearly all the professionals I know win with a different method means that that we don't necessarily have to all conform to the one magical way....but at the same time we shouldn't be ignorant of other methods simply because we have never tried or if we have, we couldn't manage to make it work. There is a big difference between saying "something doesnt work" and actually meaning "I can't make it work".
Good luck in the photo finishes!

i sympathise with this debate. for many years i tried times and developed with a friend a complicated pascall based program to calculate the times of meetings and to work the cyberhorse meetings automatically.
many top selections win. but the difficulty was there is a top selection in every race and which ones to back and not to back is always the perennially question. its a problem that will alwasy confront us devising a method that does not take too much work, too much betting and is reasonably reliable.
i have done studies also on various ideas as said in another topic on sunday i backed donarch in the coleraine cup even though it got beat by 31 lengths last start.
i also was talking to the local chemist today and he said he was at caulfield on sunday and had $20 on it because it was paying $18 as against 8/1 on the books.
simply on the overs he cracked it. my system is automatic (programmed (perl language ) cyberhorse form based and selected two horses only from coleraine.
prince iluka and donarch which ran 1st and second. i developed this method after years of trying times and weights.
exasperating is the description i use and to give an example of the silliness of my fall backs in great glens race on sunday i looked only at the top 4 horses and backed the two longest prices. i got the winner.
today i had four selections in the last at canterbury, time deposit, britts best, porquoir and forbill.
i backed the two longest prices ones. they finished 2nd and 3rd the even money favorite and britts best 6/1 never featured.
maybe there's no formula. except to determine a safe factor of horses that brings regular good priced winners.

the debate could go on forever so my final comment is.if the official handicapper uses wt as the basis of bringing them together why not devote more time on this area.time in my opinion being a minor consideration.however if times work for you good luck to you.

hi all

value seems to be the key to all that is said
how one determines value is another thing. I like to try and keep things simple and still get results.

At the end of the day the fastest horse may not feel like running too fast on the day.

Weight seems to be a factor on the wet tracks
otherwise horses have won with big weights even though they werent expected to win at great odds.

Luck in running can prevent a horse from running its fastest time.


regards

ubetido