NH sectional times

EC1

EC1

On a break
Joined
May 7, 2007
Messages
17,679
Location
late 1960's early 70's
I'm starting this thread to see if in real time its possible to use sectional times to spot future winners when two races are run on the same day over the trip.

Sorry Slim..this will be long:)

Basically what i will do is try and spot races where i think one race is better than another and hopefully spot us some horses to follow..it might prove nothing at all..and i'm not going to make any claims it will.

What i do is look at previous day results and try and spot final times that might put me onto a sectional analysis that might tell me more about what happened to create that final time.

I'm going to describe what i am doing so that someone who may be ignorant of time analysis may understand it..so don't think i'm trying to patronise anyone if how i explain it seems like i'm stating the obvious.

The first thing to realise is if two races are run under the same conditions then you may have one race where they have gone slower early than the other which then can cloud actually putting some sense to the sectionals. What you will usually see in two races of similar abilities is a see saw effect...if a race is is slow early..then the later sectionals will be faster than the other race that has been run faster early. Faster early time costs later by affecting latter splits..and vice versa.

What we really want is a race that is better than the other throughout.

I think i've found such a race yesterday.

The first observation

Leicester 12/2/15

Diamond Tammy - overall time 240.60
Henri De Boistron - 244.90

Although Henri De Boistron's race was a novice race..Diamond Tammy's race also had horses that had not run a deal over the big obstacles. Novice handicap races should though be run in similar times to non novice handicap races IF the grade of race is similar. If a novice is rated the same as an older horse they will carry the same weight if meeting each other..so inexperience will be measured automatically by the handicapper..a 91 novice is the same horse as a 91 experienced horse..and should run similar times..the novice may turn out to be a 120 horse when its jumping is quicker but for the purposes here we can use those races as comparison tools.

Diamond Tammy rated 96 carried 10-8
Henri De Boistron rated 91 carried 10-10

So Henri De Boistron should have run slower than Diamond Tammy by about 7lb..approx 1 second. Its 7lb because HDB is 5lb inferior plus he carries
2lb more. At this trip 1 second is approx worth 7lb.

So on overall time DT has run 3.3 seconds faster (4.3 minus the 1 sec that should be the difference) than a horse of his ability should have. This is usually caused by pace differences between races and can be misleading and can only be confirmed by splitting the race up into sections to see if that was the case.

The following sectionals are measured from the first obstacle to avoid dawdle at the start point ...and actually working out where the start point is etc.

The first thing to check is how fast each race is now that we have times measured from a known start point..from first obstacle

DT = 228.5
HDB = 232.3

So not quite the same...but its still nearly 4 seconds

These are the sectionals between each obstacle for each horse

DT17.743.014.5
HDB18.144.814.516.113.411.311.642.911.110.618.019.9

<tbody>
[TD="width: 86"] 15.9 [/TD]
[TD="width: 86"] 13.0 [/TD]
[TD="width: 86"] 11.1 [/TD]
[TD="width: 86"] 11.0 [/TD]
[TD="width: 86"] 43.0 [/TD]
[TD="width: 86"] 11.3 [/TD]
[TD="width: 86"] 10.8 [/TD]
[TD="width: 86"] 18.0 [/TD]
[TD="width: 86"] 19.2 [/TD]

</tbody>

The first thing to notice is that HDB did run slower early on, this can be seen more clearly if we look at the cumulative times. Normally that would be the end of the exercise..it explains why DT has run faster overall by more than he should have done.

But if you check the later splits its clear that DT still ran faster than HDB in most of the those splits too..and when he didn't it was by the odd length.

To try and make more sense of it split the race into larger chunks

Diamond Tammy Fence 1 to Fence 8 = 126.2
Henri De Boistron Fence 1 to Fence 8 = 129.8

Diamond Tammy Fence 8 to finish= 102.3
Henri De Boistron Fence 8 to finish= 102.5

Going back to the see saw effect where if you go faster early you should slow down later..this clearly hasn't happened in line with the ability levels. DT has run 3.6 seconds faster to fence 8..so would be approx 18/20 lengths clear of HDB at that point..but then still runs 0.2 faster than HDB to the finish.

Its this lack of see saw effect that makes this comparison of value to us..hopefully. Without it we would then be having to weigh up how much early has affected late etc..that is still part of this but we have been handed a double beating in both sections of the race...which hopefully tells us for sure that DT is a lot better than most punters will assume.

Diamond Tammy can be confirmed as really being superior to HDB by at least what the overall time [F1 to finish] has suggested..it could be argued he's even better than that as he has exerted more energy early but still had more than HDB late as well.

So being conservative and ignoring that..because we can't really measure it in lbs...we can surely say that DT is at least 3 seconds faster than his OHR at the time. We can also say that any horse finishing near him is also above his OHR.

Convert the 3 seconds to lbs = 21lbs

Diamond Tammy new OHR is 96+21 = 117

Yabadabado was 2nd beaten 8 lengths...or 1.14 sec slower...so he is also approx 1.86 seconds ...or 13lbs better than his OHR..new OHR is 113+13 = 126

Until Winning was a further 12 lengths away so has run near on to his mark..he doesn't get a mark up as he has run exactly where you would expect him to on the clock. We have basically worked from that horse in effect.. the clock says he ran to his level..a normal handicapper would only be guessing here actually which horse to rate the race off. Hopefully we have that answer and the two in front are above their marks by some way.

Hopefully the above two horses can show this to be useful analysis in the coming weeks

The only problem with knowing a horse is above its mark..is that others are above their marks too..so even if knowing it doesn't guarantee anything..but its nice to have a few on your side

I'll keep an eye open for others.

Happy to answer anything on this...some of you might see a lot more than i can here..i'm no more an expert than anyone elase..and am happy to explore any ways in which to break this stuff down in a better way than i have.

so fire away with suggestions or questions.

Summary - for Grass:)

To Follow horses

Diamond Tammy if OHR if less than 117
Yabadabado if OHR less than 126
 
Last edited:
Best of luck with it EC - the P2P formbook does a "last lap" time, not strictly speaking a sectional but can be a good indicator as to which horses have performed well on a card.

Martin
 
EC1, this is something i am very in to. Sadly being a Sales Director i feel much more comfortable when i have numbers to assess and analyse. I do believe you will spot some real improvers with this method. I actually hand timed last years Arkle and Queen Mother, was surprised to find Sire De Grugy had a stronger pace to run at than that set by Champagne Fever in the Arkle. Interestingly hand timed they would have both hit the line together, but SDG had a lovely tow into the race. Might be useless, however it's a key part of my decision making.
 
Good luck with this thread, EC1.

Edit: Small suggestion, EC. It would be real handy if you did a Conclusion at the end of the post, which summarises your thoughts. This is for largely selfish reasons - as you know, I get number blindness, but I'm genuinely interested in how your thread goes. :cool:
 
Last edited:
I'll also look forward to this Alan.

My tuppeneth would be to specialise rather than generalise. You'll certainly get far more accurate figures for two mile hurdles than you will for staying chases for example.

I reckon you may get some intermediate or staying chasers you get excited about but the figures will flatter them.

Juveniles and novices on a progression curve is where you'll probably find your figures most useful.
 
Thank you as ever, EC. These articles will prove informative and so, so useful in time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
EC, what happens if you compare the overall meeting SF's. Taking the winners overall time from the first fence to winning post in each race, adjusting overall standards to compensate for starting from the first obstacle?

I have no interest in NH racing, but see what you're doing. I just feel with overall SF confirmation as well, that would certainly nail it down. I use sections on the flat to either confirm overall SF's, or to theoretically add a potential amount to overall SF, or with certainty when dropping in trip for example. Quantum Dot springs to mind when dropping back to the minimum at Kempton recently, having took off over Lings 6 the time before.

I do see what you're doing and it is logical, I'm just curious if the overalls from the meeting back you up as well.
 
CPGagie said:
EC, what happens if you compare the overall meeting SF's. Taking the winners overall time from the first fence to winning post in each race, adjusting overall standards to compensate for starting from the first obstacle?

I have no interest in NH racing, but see what you're doing. I just feel with overall SF confirmation as well, that would certainly nail it down. I use sections on the flat to either confirm overall SF's, or to theoretically add a potential amount to overall SF, or with certainty when dropping in trip for example. Quantum Dot springs to mind when dropping back to the minimum at Kempton recently, having took off over Lings 6 the time before.

I do see what you're doing and it is logical, I'm just curious if the overalls from the meeting back you up as well.
Click to expand...

I'm just trying to keep it simple to be honest..as long as the target race is fastest on the card per furlongthen you know its a reasonably fair effort. I don't do speed figures generally over the sticks so just wanted to pluck something out that is pretty easy to spot..obviously time will be wasted if the races involved are see saw slpit jobs which many will be..in this case they weren't so it should be informative.

I spend a good section of time now doing the AW times and sectionals so this is just something that might be worthwhile over the twigs..it might come to nothing.

I'm not sure about just sticking to 2 miles yet Maruco..might go up to 2.5..could always do a 3 miler if one pops up just to see if its productive...the whole thing might be rubbish.

Two i did spot a while ago over longer trips were productive..but i haven't followed up which is why i'd like to to try it in real time as and when races come up..it now makes me check every day having the thread up..which is a good discipline.
 
"as long as the target race is fastest on the card per furlong then you know its a reasonably fair effort"

I see, so you're most of the way there anyway. If you're not doing the whole card overall, then I understand it's a whole new workload. I personally think it'll come to something on balance. It's a pity some decent NH SF compiler couldn't team up with you and factor that class in, as there's nothing better than knowing with certainty.

Good luck with the project. It's form cycles with NH racing that halted my interest, and in a similar vein why I rarely step above 1M2F on the flat.

Also, good luck taking sections at Southwell. I found it far too frustrating as I couldn't find solid enough reference points, and that was without the cameras zooming in and out. Nightmare of a course for that sort of thing (or have you found something?). The paths at Chelmsford don't run at 90's from the track, though I've yet to try so maybe it's not too bad there, dunno.
 
Cheers Chris

I've been trawling back a over the last few weeks and have run into a comparison that had me rubbing my eyes. I also checked how fast they went from start to first fence but from what you can see on the video..they went about the same pace..after both races did actually get to speed that is...again overall time isn't really reflecting the true difference between these races...the starts are a complete nightmare to make sense of.

January 24 Cheltenham

Annacotty carried 11-8 rated 144
Generous Ransom 10-11 rated 128

Overall time from first fence
Annacotty 319.1
Generous Ransom 314.0

First thoughts are that the early pace is less in Annacotty's race..and that late on Annacotty would run faster than Generous Ransom.

These are the split times as in difference between them in each section...a minus figure means GR ran faster in that section

-0.5
-0.1
0.3
-0.5
-0.8
0
0.1
-0.5
-0.1
0.2
-0.2
-0.5
-0.7
-0.5
-0.4
-0.8
-0.1

<tbody>
</tbody>

In fact GR has run faster in nearly every section apart from the odd one where its same or odd length.

To see it in bigger chunks is interesting

Up to fence 10
Annacotty = 176.1
Generous Ransom = 174.0

Fence 10 to finish
Anacotty = 143
Generous Ransom = 140

GR has run faster 2 seconds faster early..and then has run 3 seconds faster later..making the 5 seconds total

You would expect Annacotty to have run faster than GR later because he saved time earlier and also he is a better horse even allowing for the weight difference.

Another chunk

Up to the 2nd last
Annacotty = 287.7
Generous Ransom = 283.5

At that 2nd last Anacotty has run 4 seconds slower..so surely from there to the finish he should run faster than GR..but he didn't..from the 2nd last the times were 30.5 for GR and 31.4 for Annacotty. Pretty unbelievable.

Was the grade 3 not a good one?..the prominent horses didn't really come into the race in great form thats true..but the overall time comes out reasonably well compared with the rest of the card. If taken literally then GR is 20 odd lb better than his mark...seems too much.

Its an odd one for sure..but i do think GR has run above what is expected here for 128 horse..by how much could be a bit guessy but its fair to say this race is very much one to watch.

Up to press of the front end horses to come out and run again..Carole's Destrier has won by 8 lengths in the Ascot Listed race..thats a positive sign..if he is 8lb better than his mark here then maybe we aren't far off what the times suggest..he was beaten 7 lengths here which could point to GR being a stone better than his mark.

Potential ratings for the race are,,err on side of caution..+14 for GR..then work back to 8 for Caroles

Generous Ransom 142
Astigos 131
Irish Cavalier 146

Whatever their exact ratings are it looks pretty clear this a race worth following

To Follow horses

Diamond Tammy 117
Yabadabado 126
Generous Ransom 142
Astigos 131
Irish Cavalier 146
 
Last edited:
Good thread EC. For the lazy/busy amongst us will you be flagging up when these are due to run?

I was at Cheltenham when GR won - the wife backed it and I didn't. Thought it was very impressive and resolved to back it at the festival in whichever race it happens to turn up.
 
I remember saying to you (email) I was going high for that race too [Generous Ransom's] but I might go back and up it again after the way Carole's Destrier won on Saturday.

Looks like we should keep an eye out for the others too.
 
Desert Orchid said:
I remember saying to you (email) I was going high for that race too [Generous Ransom's] but I might go back and up it again after the way Carole's Destrier won on Saturday.

Looks like we should keep an eye out for the others too.
Click to expand...

what did you make of Annacotty's race DO?..it looked like he was beat then came again..i'm wondering if its not just a default winner and rest didn't run to thier ability marks

either way GR's race is impressive to beat Anacotty in virtually all sections and take time off him so well late on

should be interesting to see how it pans out..the 2nd is particularly interesting
 
" If taken literally then GR is 20 odd lb better than his mark...seems too much."

There was only 70 minutes between races, but had it rained between races? That could trim it down a bit, especially if it was constant and more than drizzle.
 
it was a sunny afternoon Chris..no rain as far as i know..in fact i seem to remember it was a decent day

even if we can't put exact marks on its an interesting one isn't it?..made more interesting by CD winning..one at the back of the field has won too since
 
It is interesting. Why was CD 14/1 on the 24th, and only 5/4 in a higher grade on Saturday?

Were the overall SF compilers onto it also?
 
Generous Ransom's OR went up to 136 for that win.

I had him on 140+p for it and reckoned I was being conservative so CD's win has me thinking I was 'way too conservative.

I wouldn't read too much into Keel Haul's win on Saturday as he was back at 2m after being beaten a long way in the race although as with one or two of the well-beaten ones in SOAV's race in November it's hardly a negative.
 
CPGagie said:
It is interesting. Why was CD 14/1 on the 24th, and only 5/4 in a higher grade on Saturday?

Were the overall SF compilers onto it also?
Click to expand...

As you know Chris, I reckoned CD was the percentage call in Saturday's race but couldn't bring myself to back it at the morning 2/1. I'm not sure I'd have got involved at 3/1 as it was a rise in class, a huge prize and a competitive-looking field. I was quite taken aback at how it contracted so much in the market. Sometimes I think it's just the bookies suckering punters into backing a false favourite. Maybe it was, and maybe it just backfired on them. Maybe word was out (the Mulholland-Geraghty combo has to be taken seriously) that it was much improved. I can't help thinking, based on how impressive the horse was on Saturday, that it would have been a good thing for the even more valuable race this weekend at Kempton. Or does Mulholland have something better in the race??
 
Back
Top