Standard Times - Timeform
KLeary91
Timeform base their findings on ? I have tried speed ratings with a lot of
success (a modified version of Andy Beyer) and changed my betting from very
negative to a small but consistent plus outcome for the last four years. Money
is one thing but the sheer satisfaction at seeing your selected horse cruising
up at the two furlong pole with a bundle in hand is something else ! This
season has been slightly less successful due to a series of doubts in the
accuracy of my own standard times and I believe that frequent modifications
have only served to make matters worse,not better.I may have over-reacted to
the wildly changing going that has been the norm this season ? My hit rate this
year is down from 60% to 40 % on over 130 races analysed to date.
At the start of this season I came to the conclusion that Raceform were not
that accurate and adjusted my standards to allow for Dave Edwards and Ken
Hussey but believe that this has only introduced more inaccuracies. Comparing
speed figures calculated my way using Nick Mordins,Dave Edwards,Ken
Hussey,Raceform and Racing Post standards seems to yield wildly different
figures for going allowances and eventual figures up to 10 lengths or more over
a mile. Clearly they cant all be correct, or all wrong, so something must be
incorrect some where.I make an adjustment of 2lbs per length and this has been
very consistent since I started so will not change this but am looking to
settle on a more consistent set of standard times to work on from next year. It
would appear that Timeform with its successful record must be using a set of
times that have been developed as a result of professional analysis of results
of actual times against expected performance according to class to determine
their standard to use as a yardstick. The methodology used is also important
since it appears that Nick Mordins standard is approximately a performance
expected of a 130 group one horse yet others are to a 100 performance of about
Listed class.
We cant allow completely for clerks moving the stalls 40 yards on a 6f dash but
refining accuracy here must help. My analysis of last years times shows some
surprising patterns with Nemarkets July course splitting into two bands on a
graph of the 6f and 7f races indicating 5 lengths difference - it could be due
to drainage or another factor? Any comments ?
Kevin Leary
Tim Yatcak
>Does anyone know if it is possible to get a copy of the standard times that
>Timeform base their findings on ? I have tried speed ratings with a lot of
>success (a modified version of Andy Beyer)
Don't know how European races could be accurately predicited on the
basis of speed rating since the trainers seem to (at least they SAY
thay do not) NOT rely on time figures. Here in the Pacific Northwest
(live near Vancouver, B.C.) folks have given way almost entirely to
the vaunted speed figures without loking at class, consistency,
current form etc (all the tradtional hall marks). Sprints here are
going so fast early that it is crazy (pening quarters under 22
seconds...not wonder we have all the breakdowns! Not to mention all
the DRUGS.
Personally all of this has alienated yours truly. Hope that your
racing does not get polluted by an overreliance on the damn speed
figiures becuase they will burn you!!
Tim Yatcak (a.k.a. dan...@uniserve.com)
Derek Fitzpatrick
Tim Yatcak wrote in message <35dfb96e...@news.uniserve.com>...
tracks ALL have the same type and depth of dirt? Our three dirt tracks have
different surfaces.
Here our clerks of the course keep on moving the running rails to save or
give better ground. The only distances I would rely on are from straight
courses. Last week at Musselburgh the running rail was moved ( a slippery
bend ) between races. So we had two 7f races over differing distances.
Regards
Derek