Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe 2012
- Thread starter Euronymous
- Start date
EC1
On a break
Age
Three-year-olds have provided the majority of Arc winners (75% this century, 63% in the race's near-100-year history), but they have also been the most represented age-group in recent times. More to the point, their percentage of rivals beaten this century is at 52.7%, or only just above par. This is equivalent to about 0.5 lengths advantage. There is little between four-year-olds and horses older than four.
the flaw in "% of rivals beaten" is that it doesn't allow for the actual chance a horse has got reflected by its starting price. For instance 2/1 shots beat a greater % of their rivals than 8/1 shots... i doubt anyone would be surprised to realise that.
In the 2000 to 2011 period that Simon has looked at .....the median price for all 3yo's was 12/1 whereas the median price of older horses was 25/1
so 3yo's should beat the older horses a fair bit more than 52.7%...which wipes out any 0.5 length perceived advantage that this method appears to suggest..in fact with the actual chances the horses had i'd say that 4yo+ have done better than 3yo seeing as they are on average twice the price of 3yo's
so maybe the wfa needs increasing
Three-year-olds have provided the majority of Arc winners (75% this century, 63% in the race's near-100-year history), but they have also been the most represented age-group in recent times. More to the point, their percentage of rivals beaten this century is at 52.7%, or only just above par. This is equivalent to about 0.5 lengths advantage. There is little between four-year-olds and horses older than four.
the flaw in "% of rivals beaten" is that it doesn't allow for the actual chance a horse has got reflected by its starting price. For instance 2/1 shots beat a greater % of their rivals than 8/1 shots... i doubt anyone would be surprised to realise that.
In the 2000 to 2011 period that Simon has looked at .....the median price for all 3yo's was 12/1 whereas the median price of older horses was 25/1
so 3yo's should beat the older horses a fair bit more than 52.7%...which wipes out any 0.5 length perceived advantage that this method appears to suggest..in fact with the actual chances the horses had i'd say that 4yo+ have done better than 3yo seeing as they are on average twice the price of 3yo's
so maybe the wfa needs increasing
Last edited:
Gamla Stan
At the Start
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2005
- Messages
- 4,337
Age
Three-year-olds have provided the majority of Arc winners (75% this century, 63% in the race's near-100-year history), but they have also been the most represented age-group in recent times. More to the point, their percentage of rivals beaten this century is at 52.7%, or only just above par. This is equivalent to about 0.5 lengths advantage. There is little between four-year-olds and horses older than four.
the flaw in "% of rivals beaten" is that it doesn't allow for the actual chance a horse has got reflected by its starting price. For instance 2/1 shots beat a greater % of their rivals than 8/1 shots... i doubt anyone would be surprised to realise that.
In the 2000 to 2011 period that Simon has looked at .....the median price for all 3yo's was 12/1 whereas the median price of older horses was 25/1
so 3yo's should beat the older horses a fair bit more than 52.7%...which wipes out any 0.5 length perceived advantage that this method appears to suggest..in fact with the actual chances the horses had i'd say that 4yo+ have done better than 3yo seeing as they are on average twice the price of 3yo's
so maybe the wfa needs increasing
Very interesting analysis EC.
so maybe the wfa needs increasing
Why not... 3yos have won over 82% of Arcs since the allowance was raised in 1995 (from an even split beforehand). Let’s increase it further and go for a figure nearer 100%. A getting on for two decade cycle will do for me (I don't expect to live much longer at this rate for a much bigger sample).
...I’m willing to drop this now unless you want to persist with it. You are fecking exhausting.
Last edited:
The Group 2 races on Sat look quite weak too .
The Boussac and Grand Criterium look OK - the Boussac looks a sight more competitive than the Fillies Mile .
This is a terrible Foret though . Where is Strong Suit ? has he been retired and Moonlight Cloud ? The Foret used to be on Prix Royal Oak day of course and a very competitive big chance to win a 7f G1 - it has been strong though with Paco Boy, Goldikova and Dream Ahead in three of the last four years.
The Boussac and Grand Criterium look OK - the Boussac looks a sight more competitive than the Fillies Mile .
This is a terrible Foret though . Where is Strong Suit ? has he been retired and Moonlight Cloud ? The Foret used to be on Prix Royal Oak day of course and a very competitive big chance to win a 7f G1 - it has been strong though with Paco Boy, Goldikova and Dream Ahead in three of the last four years.
Bar the Bull
At the Start
You are looking at one stat in isolation. Here is another one.
Now let's take the last 7 Arc runnings.
3yo's...43 runners....average position 8.3
4yo's...36 runners....average positoin 8.1
5yo+...25 runners....average position 8.7
Took all the 7/2 I could yesterday on Camelot. seems to be about 11/4 second or joint favourite today.
Toying with the idea of backing Great Heavens, but have the suspicion she is a bit slow. Anyone want to talk me out or in to backing her?
Toying with the idea of backing Great Heavens, but have the suspicion she is a bit slow. Anyone want to talk me out or in to backing her?
Okay thanks. I agree this is another way of looking at it. But I'd rather look at those that are actually able to win than strength in depth. I would expect the averages of those who run down the field and not up to potential to be similar.
EC1
On a break
Steve..when you read Simon's analysis you were happy to agree with it ...good analysis you said..because it apparently gave the 3yo's a 0.5 length advantage which you think they have. He also said that just using winners is a hopeless way of looking at the race
but when its pointed out that 3yo should actually beat more than 52.7% of the oppo as they are on average half the price of older horses you don't want to discuss it
personally i'm not bothered either way ..but i will look at whatever you put up and try to put a backed up argument forward..just ignoring the bits that prove you might be wrong isn't really debating imo
i like having banter Steve..and i also like analysing stuff..so don't take owt personal because its the issue i'm argueing against and not your good self
If you can show that 3yo's are favoured...but not just saying they won so many in such a time..then i will take on board any argument..but just saying they have won a lot of recent renewals isn't showing anything..they won lots between 59 & 72..we don't know why. Maybe they were just above average 3yo's and not so decent older horses then..maybe thats what is happening now.....certainly international racing has changed how older horses main targets have changed..i don't think the Arc is the el supremo that it was in the minds of owners and trainers..there are far bigger prizes abroad for the older crew.
but on the actual performance by 3yo's in the last 11 years in the race it doesn't look like they are that favoured or they would have a higher oppo beaten % in their favour...just for one way of looking at it anyway
Last edited:
Colin Phillips
At the Start
The race is going to be such a let-down after this.
EC1
On a break
after the thread you mean?..they usually are:lol:
Bar the Bull
At the Start
Is there a race?
EC1
On a break
:lol::lol::lol:
On The Bridle
At the Start
:lol::lol: I'd imagine there will some post race excuses...I mean comments post race!
Don't feel left out EC I rate your analysis as highly as anyone's. I just feel you you are drawing the wrong conclusions. Theoretical physics can prove black is white. I feel the obvious is staring us in the face.
Last edited:
Thanks suny you've told me what I suspected deep down. I think I'll leave her alone. I do quite like the idea of improving 3yo fillies in this, but would agree she probably has a bit too much to find.
On The Bridle
At the Start
I am very tempted to have a saver on her.... I like her a lot and was hoping she wouldn't be supplemented. I don't know about her being all that slow although she does need to improve a few pounds. Four places with sleazy Victor might tempt me though.
In my head I have a hopeful scenario for her but in reality I'm swayed by suny. I don't have a firm grasp on this one, but like her as I do she would have to leave everything behind her to figure, wouldn't she?
Last edited:
edgt
Senior Jockey
Course director states" ground good to soft presently and will be soft at least by sat and sun with a possibility of soft to heavy Sunday." This came by text from my best racing buddy whom I first met at a bus stop.(long story)
Fresh ground for all Group 1s post Abbaye Sunday from Mile pole allowed Goldikova to clock 1m 23. change 2010 on supposedly heavy ground.
That said Great Heavens should not be dismissed so easily imo.
Fresh ground for all Group 1s post Abbaye Sunday from Mile pole allowed Goldikova to clock 1m 23. change 2010 on supposedly heavy ground.
That said Great Heavens should not be dismissed so easily imo.
Also, in my head I'm thinking that Orfevre should have a near favorite's chance and be thereabouts, but the Japanese keep telling me he's not as good as Deep Impact, who I wasn't that wild about. The short price is putting me off big style on this one. Am I right?
edgt
Senior Jockey
Saonois would be half the price if trained by any name trainer. A horse with great tactical speed and great heart. To come from behind off a slow pace in Niel and win by day light ( in French terms!); he could be the real deal. Difficult to see Bayrir reverse placings but you never know....