Question 1 - What is the best way to select a "form" race to follow - based on what criteria?
Question 2 - How long can a form line be followed?

heard a point on form races last week.
where the expected favorite draws badly or for whatever reasons fails through an incident then the race may not be a form race. this would translate to where the expected horse wins it should be a form race.

Unless the whole field is showing up again in the same race the following week I reckon it is pretty much a load of c#$p dreamt up by racecallers! The usual argument seems to go that horse A beat horse B 2 weeks age - horse B then won a race so when horse A lines up for his race the "formline" says he will win. What about all the other runners lining up against A? What about the relative strengths of the various races? Distance changes? Weight changes? etc, etc, etc.

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

I'm with you BC the only way to work out form is to see what the horses has done in the last couple of races and what class it did it in then you look at the class of todays race....you also have to consider weight and a few other things....sorry to the time ratings people...i don't use them....but then most of my races are 1600 up in my view it is the best type of race because your horse can have a bad start or get blocked in or what ever but if good enought can still win

Systems aside Becareful, what would you recommend as an alternative to what is basicly a major part of handicapping ?

Throw darts ?

Cheers.

To offer an alternative view point, form lines ARE one of the most important aspects in racing.

Identifying strong and weak form races is very helpful in doing the form in future events and finding runners you can have high confidence in to run either very well or worse than the market expects them to. Betting decisions depend on race conditions and the level of opposition being faced.

Runners out of good form races can be either good win bets, outstanding place bets if at nice odds, or excellent bankers in multiples.

My own approach to identifying strong races is centred on speed and pace ratings or to put it simply, the overall time relative to the first and last section. For example...a bunch of average horses can finish close up in 1200m race won in 70 seconds with a final section of 35 secs, but only a strong race will be won in 70 secs with a final section of 33.5secs. The final time is the same but the strength of the races are at opposite ends of the scale.

I personally compare the figures from each weeks races against others in my database from the last few years and get a feel for how the race ranks, relative to its own class and also relative to all classes. This historical benchmarking is a big edge in my punting.

Most strong form races I come across are ones that ranks a little better than the stated class. That doesn't mean I'm going to find 5 winners out of the race, but it means I can be confident that certain runners are likely to run very well in their next one or two runs. The opportunity to make money will depend on future race circumstances.

As an example... on 22/11/03 at Caulfield, race 3 was won by Bulbasaur and in my opinion the figures from that race stacked up as a a little better than the average open handicap. I expected the form out of the race to prove strong.

Since then...

5/12 Choreograph (2nd on 22/11 to Bulbasaur) came out and won by 5L at the MOV night meeting at a very generous $4.20 with up to $4.80 available.

13/12 Bulbasaur finished 2nd to Step Ahead at his next start. I expected him to win the race but Step Ahead is smart and was a shade too good. They ran blistering figures that day so Bulbasaur ran up to his form but found one better ont he day.

13/12 Don't Tell Tom (3rd on 22/11 behind BUlbasaur) ran 3rd in the race behind Step Ahead and Bulbasaur (again) at $8 and $2.10 the place.

13/12 Raja Lane (4th on 22/11) ran 2nd to Danrego at $10 in track record time. Again, I expected her to win and the price was sensational, she just found a very smart one better on the day.

18/12 Suit (well beaten 5th behind Bulbasaur on 22/11) came out and ran 3rd at $8 with 58kg's at his next start.

5/12 Little Dozer (beaten over 4L into 6th behind Bulbasaur) came out and ran 3rd at the MOV night meeting at over $10 on the tote.

20/12 Alqasar (beaten 4.6L into 7th behind Bulbasaur) came out and ran 1.1L 3rd in Open company at Flemington at $8

So from identifying one race as a little stronger than the typical Open Handicap the first 7 runners (down to 4.6L away from the winner) have all come out and run very well ..all of them at nice odds except Bulbasaur.

Another example that sticks in my mind purely from the profit that was made comes from June this year. On 14/6 there was a Gold Coast Maiden won by Velvet Mamma and the figures stacked up as especially strong for maiden class.

Out of that race...

Velvet Mama spelled but came back 1st up and ran 0.9L 3rd at 20/1

2nd horse Working Class Man won next start on 28/6 at $4.50 with similar strong figures which became a new race to follow.

3rd horse Squeel finished 2L behind Working Class Man in the race above (a new race to follow)

4th horse Aqua Dor (beaten 7.8L) finished 3rd at 25/1 next start.

Then following the race on 28/6 won by Working Class Man...

Working Class Man (1st on 28/6) came out and easily won next start at $6.50

Reality Check (2nd on 28/6) hasn't raced since

Aqua Dor (3rd on 28/6) ran 3rd in next start at $6.50 and won start after.

Squeel (4th on 28/6) easily won next start at $12

So personally I find the understanding of form lines to be both very important and immensely profitable. My own approach to benchmarking based on figures against events going back a couple of years is an ideal approach to identifying both strong and weak races. Its important that I validate my opinion as time goes on and adjust it if necessary. It also helps to have a good process and supporting tools to capture and monitor that information.

Merry xmas :smile:

Hi osulldj,

Twice in your post you said "but found one better on the day".

Isn't this the whole nuts and bolts of formline?

You got some nice winners and a string of placings from your time analysis, but a stronger horse beat two selections, when, if you'd done the time analysis on THOSE winners, you should have come up with the winner in the race.

I have to also discount the winners that won after a spell, you can't possibly attribute a time rating to today's race first up that was run over three months ago at the end of a preparation, surely?

My analysis of time rating has shown many flaws in using time - wind, rail position, position in running, weight variation, distance variation, different competitors, different track etc etc.

However, I agree that if you're selective about price and can see real value worth the risk, then you have something.

Analyse horses that break track records or win by over three lengths, and you'll see it equates to very poor value because of expectation of repeat performance.

Except for Champions, very few horses repeat their best run time wise, next time out.

Merry Christmas ans Happy New Year.

Crash,

I think you missed my point (or maybe I just didn't make it very clear).

I am not suggesting that form study is a bad thing - my point was that most people who I have heard talk about "formlines" generally DONT analyse the complete form for each horse in a race. Instead they tend to say things like "Well horses A and B raced each other two weeks ago and A beat B in that race. Earlier today B won its race and A is starting in the next race so A is a good bet"

Now as an astute form studier you would know that the above is total ****. Sure the results from the previous race are relevant but you must look at ALL the potential winners of the race and look at their form as well - simply saying that a horse in this race beat a different horse 2 weeks ago which then won its next race is totally meaningless by itself.

Hope that is a bit clearer. Merry Christmas!

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

G'day Chrome,

There were no runners that won after a spell...one placed at 25/1 and I agree its not chased through from the previous form line.


You said...

"Twice in your post you said "but found one better on the day".
"Isn't this the whole nuts and bolts of formline?... if you'd done the time analysis on THOSE winners, you should have come up with the winner in the race."

Not really...do you expect that I pick the winner to every race? like I said...a strong race doesn't mean you have five winners at their next start...horses improve and decline and race circumstances are always different. Step Ahead was first up and on his best with form around Innovation Girl and Titanic Jack he was a super chance, it was a matter if he could produce it on the day and he did. Danrego isn't too shabby either and improved even further from her first up run to win that 2nd up race. It's plausible that they both won.

Formlines are about finding races where you expect good or weak form to follow through to future races. It's obviously impossible to say that horse A will win next start because its coming out of a strong race...especially when you don't even know the field it is coming up agains.

However, when the first 7 horses of one OPen Handicap race all come out and place at their next start, one of them winning by 5L..then I consider that a strong form line.

You also said...

"My analysis of time rating has shown many flaws in using time - wind, rail position, position in running, weight variation, distance variation, different competitors, different track etc etc."

That's your analysis...but my analysis earns me a handsome living and a big part of that is figure based formlines so it can't all be that bad.

Obviously there is more than one way to get the job done....no single one is right or wrong. There are people I know making a living from punting following ideas that I can't quite come into...but they get the job done with it..at the end of the day thats all that really matters.

Osulldj,

Apologies if I seemed to be canning your theories, I was pointing out that my research had pointed elsewhere.

If it works for you, then you've done one hell of a job!

It would be interesting to pit weight handicappers, time handicappers, class handicappers, and statistics against eachother! (and combinations thereof).

If we all came up with the same selection in two or three races per week, if the price was value - you'd think it would have a pretty good chance.

:wink: