If weight is such a great factor and leveller, then why is it that saddlecloth number 1 wins more races than any other saddlecloth?

Butternut,

If you conduct the same analysis over various distances from 1000m to 3200m you will see some vagaries on the No. 1 win percentage.

Remember "weight by distance equals velocity". The further a heavier weight is carried the slower a horse becomes. Even if it is just a kilo or two!


Cheers,
Luckyboy


[ This Message was edited by: Luckyboy on 2004-07-20 10:53 ]

so true luckboy, probably the main reason I rarely bet above 1600m.

try doing the form on those country cups we have every other week & see what a total disaster punting on them is! :smile:

Weight is largely overrated.

The opinion that the longer the distance the less the topweight or higher weighted horses win has no factual evidence to support it:

Take for example the strike rate of horses carrying 57kg's or more by distance category. Fgures are for every race M/P/C 1/1/04 to 18/7/04 (excluding hurdles and steeples:

800-1199m 14% SR (2976 races)
1200-1599m 12% SR (6410 races)
1600-1999m 13% SR (2130 races)
2000-2399m 13% SR (695 races)
>=2400m 15.5% SR (only 135 races)

Alternatively, examine the strike rate of TAB number 1 over the same distance categories.

800-1199m 18% SR
1200-1599m 15% SR
1600-1999m 16% SR
2000-2399m 21% SR
>=2400m 20% SR

One of the greatest challengers losing punters face is letting go of so called universal truths about racing. i.e. the effect of weight up / down, lower class races are bad betting propositions, don't bet on wet track etc. etc. Most of them are simply untrue.

osulldj,

Would you care to eliminate all 2YO, 3YO set weight and WFA races from your analysis?

It stands to reason that weight as a factor in analysing a race field come to the forefront in handicap events primarly.

Beg to differ?


Cheers,
Luckyboy

G'Day Luckyboy,

Yes, I do beg to differ.

I have run the TAB number 1 analysis, restricting only to HCP races.

800-1199m 21% SR (1,229 races)
1200-1599m 17% SR (2,729 races)
1600-1999m 17% SR (1,078 races)
2000-2399m 21% SR (417 races)
>=2400m 21% SR (89 races)


There is absolutely nothing to suggest that top weighted runners have less success over longer distances. In fact, if you take it at face value they have a higher strike rate at distances >=2000m.

As a matter of interest, since the start of the year, if you had backed every TAB #1 in races 2000m or greater you would have had a 21.5% SR (109 wins from 506 bets) and a profit of 5.7%).

Stats are stats and I would never suggest something so simple has a sustainable advantage. The point is though that there is no factual evidence to support the point you made.

Cheeers :smile:

Very interesting slant Daniel, thanks for sharing :wink:


_________________
May the luck of the Irish be with you!

[ This Message was edited by: Paddy on 2004-07-21 08:37 ]

I think the main problem is that it is not the weight issue it is how it is used....if you try to use weight alone as your form then you will loose...just like if you try to use any one bit of form study......you need to combine a few different things when you are trying to find the winner...and even that does not always work....the truth is if there was an easy solution then we would all be winningand backing the 1.30 fav

Daniel,

Thanks for the information. It's interesting to note as I have a set of statistics dating back to 1995 that show a diminishing percentage over longer distances.

So you have got me doing some segmentation!

The pure percentage does have relativity, but in a pure numbers sense (being the number of races at certain distances) the lower distance percentages hold significantly more credence. Would you agree?

Thanks for making me think...


Cheers,
Luckyboy


[ This Message was edited by: Luckyboy on 2004-07-21 16:58 ]

if that is correct that a profit is showing on the top weight @ 2000m & above doesnt that suggest there were more than a few roughies getting up?

while weight may seem not to be the 'handicap' it is in these distance races, i would suggest it can play a bit more havoc with a horses form than in shorter distance races.