Hi all,

I love reading all the ideas that get tossed about in this forum. It really gets your racing brain ticking over. But I think I might have said this once before in here, that the only way I can continually win is following sectional times.

Over nearly 3 years I've gradually improved the way I analyse them, with the help of a spreadsheet of course, with my last slight change of thought pattern being in mid december 2008. Since then I have had 216 bets in 172 races for a bet strike rate of 29.17% and a race strike rate of 36.63%. For an overall POT of 26.55%. Average divie being $4.34 (IAS Top Fluc).

I guess thats about an average of around 43 bets a month, basically saturday only, and of course pretty much only on sydney and melbourne as they are the only places sectional times are available for.

I spend about two hours on a sunday or monday going through these whilst watching the replays on tv, enter what I like into my BB and thats it. Along comes friday my BB arrives, I check to see if my horses contained in such have raced within 21 days and make sure they havent gone up in weight 3kgs or more, and then back them. At the same time I clean out my BB with horses that have gone over the 21 day period. If my selection wins or goes close or has excuses they stay, otherwise they are gone. I cant remember the last time I bought a newspaper, all done on the net.

Yesterday was a rather good day as I had only 3 bets and they all won. News Alert $4.60 (got diddled there a bit $6.10 on the nswtab), Driffield Gold $2.10 and Shocking $2.80. Previous saturday 12 bets in 10 races for 5 winners totalling $18.50. My BB should start to take a fresher look as horses head out for spells or head up north.

I've fiddled around with that many different plans and ideas but this is the only way I can make a continued profit.

Regards, Paul

How do you make use of sectionals in slowly run races [that's most races nowadays]?

Yes you are right, most races these days seem to be run to a slow tempo. In my ideal world I would be looking for a horse that races very handy to the lead, in a fast run race and either wins or goes very close. Unfortunately there isnt many real worlds about. So I've just got to make the most of slow tempos. I have a few formulas, one of which tells me the tempo of the race and another which tells me how many lengths each horse either gained/or lost to the winner over the final 600/400/200. The same of course applies to the winner, how many lengths did it put on the rest of the field/or lost over the final 3 furlongs.

By watching the race at the same time, if the winner has held off all challenges pretty well, he's added. I cant just sit around and wait for what I consider a perfect run, as mentioned above, otherwise I would have hardly any horses in my BB. It all comes down to one's personal opinion, and hope that you get it right enought times.

This probably doesnt really answer your question, not an easy one to answer.

Paul

No, it doesn't really answer my question. A good sectional in a slowly run race [more than 2 sec. or 12 length outside the record for that distance on that track] is achievable by any horse and is mostly meaningless in my experience and the winner has had a soft win [what does that say about the horses behind it?]. Next start [if] in a truly run race the sectional mostly won't be there. However, it's just my personal opinion.

I'd also be counting how many times a horse is hit with the whip, especially if it has a senior Jock on board [hits a lot harder than an apprentice]. Can flatten a horse for it's next start. And in a fast run race as you mentioned, I'd certainly be looking out for the backmarkers!
For good sectionals I'd be looking at the replays of truly run races [only] and balancing up times from final turn lucky corner cutters and deceptively slower times from horses stuck out 3 or 4 wide [often faster than the corner cutters] who next race might be getting a better run.

If your stats are correct however, keep doing what your doing!

Good points you have there, although I dont do any comparisons with course records etc. Thought about similar, but dismissed the idea, I just treat each race on its day by its merits. Maybe it was a leader bias track, then I'd view the run of the leader/winner a bit more harsher when I check the times.

With backmarkers which you mentioned, that was my change in thoughts last december, when I used to see a backmarker gain x amount of lengths on the winner from the 600 to run 4th. Back it and it does the same thing again next start. So I made it my new years resolution not to back any more backmarkers. I've now become just a small bit lenient on that rule when I see times like Shocking's.

I dont necessarily have to blackbook a horse from every race, some meetings I might just find 3 or 4. It comes down to viewing a race, using the tools that you have in front of you, and asking yourself the question, was this run good enough for this horse to win next start. There is no system to this, just your own skills and hope you can get it right enough times.

Paul

I have noticed that most winners seem to come from horses who where in the first half of the field at the 400m mark at their last start.

Cheers.

__________________
Cheers.

But does that just mean that on pacers win most races anyway? And whats left is front runners for most of the sprints and, and the dregs for the back markers.

In the Shocking race (I hated the odds they gave it, but..) I was pretty sure that now matter what tactics they pulled - like a very slow pace - Shocking would still eat them up in the straight because he was too good.

I must confess that most of my blackbook entries are horses that won that day. Some are horses that run second, and on the odd occasion, maybe a 3rd or a 4th. For the record, does anyone have the stats on winners who won their last start..?

From memory that run of Shocking's on 16th may, I think it was around 9 lengths he gained on the rest of the field from the 600, apart from the second placing Lakonian. I've actually also included Lakonian in my bb, as that day if not for Shocking, he would have won by panels, I think he gained 7 lengths on the others in the final 600. My tempo formula told me that race was 109%. Meaning to me that the average time of each of the first 5 sectionals (1600 race) was 109% of the average time of each of the last 3 sectionals (furlongs). This to me is a rather slow tempo which makes Shockings run even more brilliant, as he was still 8th at the 400.

As I said before these days I very rarely enter a backmarker into my bb. I really only concentrate on horses that are running in around the first 4 at the 400. With a very rare couple of exceptions, as above.

Paul

Ironically, most of my best winners at good odd are all backmarkers.

The fact that a heck of a lot of races are won by leaders or on-pacers in blanket finish races [jog and sprint] is because most races are not truly run. Find a race with 2 or more leaders in it [good pace] and backmarkers come into their own.

Problem is for most punters is working out what the pace of a race is going to be [especially non-Sat. when there is no form guide telling us]. If a truly run race is hard to spot and becomes a bit of a guess, there is no point in backing a backmarker.