2016 Gold Cuppin

7a39f22670351808ef856a89b832a841.jpg
this is my better half we are now at the world famous Cheap Charlies in bkk where they fancy Vautour for the ahold cup

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 
More sense than that sunshine.


Do me a favour bear and i will take you for a night on the rown next time you are here.....knock the **** out of Ec lol

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 
All joking aside EC you have made a critical error in transferring time to lengths.

Don't do that because the ground factor and other things can give you a false result. To be precise run 2 videos together and look at where Cue Card is when Long Run finishes...Are you going to tell me that is 20 lengths?.......If you are not prepared to do that then don't darken my doorstep again with your figures.....It's all in the eye mate not on the clock. So go use your eyes and come back like a man and admit you are wrong........This exercise is open to anyone who wants to prove me wrong and say I am a wanker a dick whatever.I am happy to stand up and be counted

Try to understand we appreciate whgat you are doing but it is not the Gospel or the word of God although you might disagree with that
 
Last edited:
Calling EC1...

All your findings on the sectionals are predicated on the ground being the same across the different years but the RP analysis of winning times has a GA for this year's KG at 0.6spf, while for last year it is 0.4spf. That's a fair old difference. What changes to you findings would that make?

(For Long Run's year it was 0.95spf)
 
Desert Orchid said:
Calling EC1...

All your findings on the sectionals are predicated on the ground being the same across the different years but the RP analysis of winning times has a GA for this year's KG at 0.6spf, while for last year it is 0.4spf. That's a fair old difference. What changes to you findings would that make?

(For Long Run's year it was 0.95spf)
Click to expand...

the RP going allowance and most of their NH standard times are way out DO..totally inaccurate..you'd be better of guessing...they have 3 mile standards at some courses where they say a horse can run it in 15.00 sec per furlong..on the same course they have a 2 mile standard where they say the per fulong time is 15.15. So in their opinion you can run 3 miles quicker per furlong than 2 miles..worthless imo. The Irish ones look like Mickey Mouse put em together. If you want to go by them i'll leave it with you..but they aren't for me with their built in accuracies.

When standard times are out..then automatically any going allowance they churn out also won't make sense.

The real beaut they had was the 3 mile one at Leopardstown where it generated a speed figure about 100 less than earned for every Lexus winner due to the fact the standard was about 15/20 seconds wrong. You check out their lexus speed figures..then do a per furlong check with comparing 3 mile one and the rest of the distances.

Topspeed is very poor imo..but many swear by their figures..its all down to opinion
 
Tanlic said:
All joking aside EC you have made a critical error in transferring time to lengths.
Click to expand...

no i haven't..the times are there to see..all i have done is treat a length as 0.2seconds to make the time descriptive for people to put into a viual perspective. there is no false result..anyone can check those timings.

to be honest..your posts are getting a little tedious with the constant need to try and make me look a dick and you look smart..it don't really wash with me..i know your game..and to be fair about it..you aren't very good at it.

unless i read something constructive that actually makes sense from you..rather than ..you are a dick and i'm so smart stuff you do.... i'll just let your posts go in future..i'm wasting no more time with silliness..people will either take notice of my posts or ignore them. Either way..it makes no difference to me.
 
Last edited:
My posts are tedious?..mate no one can question your figures? Is that the name of the game here?

Either do I ask which is a fair request as you are posting in our faces. So stop posting your shyte if you don't want it disputed when someone disagrees

You are behaving like a fooking bible thumper

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
you can question what you want me old..i've passed my view..just the same as anyone else does..if you disagree with the figures then i have no problem..I disagree with lots i read here..its a forum

you disagree with them..i'm fine with that

i wish you do it without insults though luv:)
 
Last edited:
EC1 said:
the RP going allowance and most of their NH standard times are way out DO..totally inaccurate..you'd be better of guessing...they have 3 mile standards at some courses where they say a horse can run it in 15.00 sec per furlong..on the same course they have a 2 mile standard where they say the per fulong time is 15.15. So in their opinion you can run 3 miles quicker per furlong than 2 miles..worthless imo. The Irish ones look like Mickey Mouse put em together. If you want to go by them i'll leave it with you..but they aren't for me with their built in accuracies.

When standard times are out..then automatically any going allowance they churn out also won't make sense.

The real beaut they had was the 3 mile one at Leopardstown where it generated a speed figure about 100 less than earned for every Lexus winner due to the fact the standard was about 15/20 seconds wrong. You check out their lexus speed figures..then do a per furlong check with comparing 3 mile one and the rest of the distances.

Topspeed is very poor imo..but many swear by their figures..its all down to opinion
Click to expand...

I agree about Topspeed. I can never make sense of his figures. I could with his predecessor Ken Hussey but Dave Edwards appeared to come in with a Mordinesque approach and it has never worked for me.

I might spend some time this week checking out what time ratings I can come up with for the years in question.

I did have an item published in the Handicap Book many years ago following an experimental period comparing how my betting fortunes compared backing horses that I liked on form and those that had the best time figures. The form won hands down but maybe I was just shite at time figures.
 
Tanlic said:
My posts are tedious?..mate no one can question your figures? Is that the name of the game here?

Either do I ask which is a fair request as you are posting in our faces. So stop posting your shyte if you don't want it disputed when someone disagrees

You are behaving like a fooking bible thumper

Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You aren't 'questioning' his figures, you're rubbishing them. This is supposed to be a place for constructive discussion, not a place for mouthing off when you've had too many Singhas.
 
How am I rubbishing them. I ask a simple request......Run two videos together and tell me does that look like 20 lengths?

I did it did you?

I don't see you posting on this thread in the last fortnight so why suddenly do you feel the urge?......can't fooking wait to have a go at me can you? fooking pussy
 
Problem on here is you are all too willing to sook up people asses...not one of you have went to the trouble I have to find out if the guy is right or wrong you just accept it like a bunch of fannies

Well that is not my style I will investigate and debate a post if it interests me not just accept it.
 
Behave yourself, Tanlic.

What you know about times in races, can be written on the back of an atom with a thick marker pen. I might not agree with EC1 in terms of how important the clock is, when it comes to Jumps races, and I might find some of his conclusions odd, but I respect the depth of the research he conducts. You are a complete guesser in comparison.

Stick to boosting Henderson's horses - at least you will sometimes be right. ;)
 
Last edited:
Tanlic said:
How am I rubbishing them. I ask a simple request......Run two videos together and tell me does that look like 20 lengths?

I did it did you?

I don't see you posting on this thread in the last fortnight so why suddenly do you feel the urge?......can't fooking wait to have a go at me can you? fooking pussy
Click to expand...

I've no history of having a go at you. People like EC and DO put unbelievable amounts of work into their figures and are good enough to post them sometimes. There are a great many people who find them interesting. If you want to question them then that's absolutely fair enough, but do yourself a favour and question them in a respectful manner. That way you might get a respectful considered reply, and we'd be having what's commonly known as an adult discussion.
 
Tanlic said:
Problem on here is you are all too willing to sook up people asses...not one of you have went to the trouble I have to find out if the guy is right or wrong you just accept it like a bunch of fannies

Well that is not my style I will investigate and debate a post if it interests me not just accept it.
Click to expand...

i don't think people are willing to accept anything Tanlic..i haven't actually passed an opinion here bar for my conclusion..i've timed some races..thats not an opinion..its just some figures.

If you think they wrong then you you can time those races yourself.

You have already described my stuff as shyte..so i don't really know why you get so wrapped up in whether its right or wrong... its shyte isn't it?
 
Last edited:
Desert Orchid said:
I might spend some time this week checking out what time ratings I can come up with for the years in question.
Click to expand...

My time figure for Cue Card in the King George is just 155. Last year Silviniaco Conti's figure was 162. This tells me that for whatever reasons neither race was run in such a way as to produce a time commensurate with the principals' ability.

As an aside, Faugheen last year was 26lbs faster than the novice hurdle winner Jollyalan. This year he was only 11lbs faster than Altior.

I should also point out that the race starts at Kempton have been moved since last year to accommodate the new computerised method of calculating the race distances. I would imagine that would render any time comparison with previous years flawed to an unknown extent.
 
Desert Orchid said:
My time figure for Cue Card in the King George is just 155. Last year Silviniaco Conti's figure was 162. This tells me that for whatever reasons neither race was run in such a way as to produce a time commensurate with the principals' ability.

As an aside, Faugheen last year was 26lbs faster than the novice hurdle winner Jollyalan. This year he was only 11lbs faster than Altior.

I should also point out that the race starts at Kempton have been moved since last year to accommodate the new computerised method of calculating the race distances. I would imagine that would render any time comparison with previous years flawed to an unknown extent.
Click to expand...

Thats a fair point DO..but at courses where i time from the first fence..and have historical records like Kempton,,, I adjust the standards to suit that distance..therefore my going allowances are then not affected by the changes to the starts..its always the same distance. Its another advantage of timing from the first fence..rather than the start
 
cheers H

DO..even if they went further in the past..at every trip..i know its +60 yards in the KG..about 4 seconds....its pretty easy to find one truly run race in each year..so i've used the 2m4.5f one.,,.if you want to question if they true run DO i suggest you do the split % for each year..they would confirm it..don't take long tbh.....so we have 3 editions of same race.....the time a true reflection of ability..the only thing affecting the times..is the ground speed

2m4.5f chase

2015 = 309.6
2014 = 312.1
2010 = 315.9

all 3 of those races were solidly run. do you know how much they moved the 2m4.5ch forward by?..i don't know it..i doubt its as much as the 3 mile one. But timing from the first fence each year tells me the ground was a little softer the year Long Run ran..and near on the same last year.

If you assume they weren't as far out as they were with the 3 mile start one..lets say the 2m4.5 one is 3 seconds further before this year..then knock 3 seconds off the two older times above and you can see just on that one example..it was very similar in 2015+2014..but a little slower in 2010

the above example backs up what i have found without having to be bothered where they did actually start the race from..but its just an example to illustrate it.

ok..i'm not spending any more time on this..i think i've done me stint..its up to people to either believe the figures or not..i'm not trying to trick anyone and i don't particularly want to be constantly backing up my figures from now until the GC:)..i back up my views more than anyone on this board..it gets tiring after a bit..so i can't just keep going with this..its boring

people will make their own minds up at end of day..all i do is try and look from another angle..it will bore the arse of most folk

i'm happy with the conclusion i've drawn..i've posted to share..i gain nothing from posting it
 
Last edited:
Back
Top