Race Result Analysis

[barjon]

Just as a matter of interest I wonder what people use for race report/analysis (oh, how I miss the old Raceform Notebook). The basic result (raced wide, held up, headway 10th etc, etc - type thing) is pretty much standardised across all reporters nowadays. Racing Post does a race analysis for each race which goes into more detail for some of the runners, but they are pretty much alone in that and it's pretty sparse.

We do have the advantage nowadays that we can watch for ourselves and do our own, I suppose, but what else is there that you use?

 

[Desert Orchid]

What you get in the RP is what used to be in the Notebook, plus the Form Book, plus you get it for all the Irish form as well.

A couple of months back I binned all my old books, including a stack of Notebooks. I had a quick look through them and remember thinking they were pretty sparse in their comments beyond the first few finishers, especially the NH version.

I use the paper version and back it up with a video check if comment suggests there is more to a performance than the bare result. I calculate my own ratings and time ratings.

 

[barjon]

What you get in the RP is what used to be in the Notebook, plus the Form Book, plus you get it for all the Irish form as well.

A couple of months back I binned all my old books, including a stack of Notebooks. I had a quick look through them and remember thinking they were pretty sparse in their comments beyond the first few finishers, especially the NH version.

I use the paper version and back it up with a video check if comment suggests there is more to a performance than the bare result. I calculate my own ratings and time ratings.

I must have a rosy recollection of the Notebook, desert, perhaps it's because there was nothing like it. Mind you, the Timeform Black Book was great albeit too expensive at the time. When I worked in Halifax for six months or so I filled my boots, everyone had one tucked in their back pocket and Phil Bull didn't seem to mind!

 

[Grasshopper]

Race commentary is generally best backed-up with a viewing of the race, which allows you to test the accuracy of the comments.

Worth stating that 80%+ give a close enough interpretation to be useful.

 

[barjon]

Interesting that you say that, grassy. Unless I’m watching for a particular horse I tend to watch without commentary since it often distracts me from what’s going on elsewhere than the comments - if that makes sense. Silent play keeps the good lady happy, too .

 

[Grasshopper]

‘Commentary’ in this case means ‘Race comments’ rather than ‘Listen to whatever Cattermole has to say, as he’ll only make a cu*nt of it’.

The recommendation is very much a visual one - as you already appear to have covered.

 

[Desert Orchid]

‘Commentary’ in this case means ‘Race comments’ rather than ‘Listen to whatever Cattermole has to say, as he’ll only make a cu*nt of it’.

The recommendation is very much a visual one - as you already appear to have covered.

Same goes for football commentaries for me. I much prefer to watch with the volume off as that blocks out the fans' noise as well as biased and/or inane commentators.

 

[Tanlic]

Haven't been punting half as heavily as late as I used to, as I don't have the patience to go though every horse in the race like I used to.

If occasionaly I am having a large bet I certainly like Barjon don't listen to commentators during replays
I'll spend 30 to 90 minutes watching each horse and that pretty much does it for me

I use alerts to let me know when a horse that caught my eye is due to run again.

Of course some bets look so obvious like Honeysuckle the only studying needed is what time is she running.

 

[reet hard]

Used to use raceform notebook assiduously, until it went awry when they changed their speed figure formulation under the editorship of Graham Wheldon (thanks for nowt, bozo) Tried various Timeform publications afterwards, but nothing came close by comparison.
RP analyses are useful & often pick up detail I've overlooked when reading the form. Still believe strongly in the evidence of my own eyes, but try to be aware of the pace nuances. Sectionals can be a guide, but tbh they're mostly rigid and presented in the same format, and I've found the on-screen m.p.h. figures more useful recently.

 

[barjon]

‘Commentary’ in this case means ‘Race comments’ rather than ‘Listen to whatever Cattermole has to say, as he’ll only make a cu*nt of it’.

The recommendation is very much a visual one - as you already appear to have covered.

Oh, ok, me daft or what

 

[redundant pal]

Barjon,
I find the Rp post-race analysis cursory at best and it’s pretty sparse as you say relative to the spotlights pre-race. But then again they’re facing time constraints.

Justin O’Hanlon and Stefan Edwards two of the better ones.

 

[redundant pal]

The in-running comments are more of a concern and I find are regularly inaccurate.
That is why watching or re-watching is imperative, as Grashopper mentions above. It is almost a full-time pursuit nowadays.