Sectional Analysis

2.00 5f £772 Speedy Turn 4 9-0 by nk 55.51s 11ran

2.35 6f £2427 My Swallow 2 9-0 by 0.5l 1m9.14s 7ran

3.35 12f £62311 Nijinsky 3 9-0 by 2.5l 2m34.68s 11ran

4.10 10f £4298 Tudor Harmony 4 7-11 by hd 2m4.94s 11ran

4.45 8.5f £3373 Saintly Song 3 8-10 by 2.5l 1m43.13s 4ran

5.20 7f £1551 Frisky Paul 4 7-8 by 0.5l 1m20.81s 10ran

The first, fourth and sixth were handicaps with no ratings bands in those days. The Woodcote was the second and the fifth was a level weights conditions event for three-year-old colts.
 
It's interesting, EC1, but where is it leading?
If you have the time for the last 3 furlongs (Tat. corner onwards?), that's likely to be a true pace -- isn't the rest just tactical (or accidental!) pace?

As you see, I lack understanding ..... please enlighten! :)
 
Last edited:
the point is exactly what you say Mr R..the last 3f is the horse running at its optimum..that is the key to the whole thing....the time that a horse can run that last 3.5f depends on the early exertions...so what I want to do is calculate how early pace affects later pace...once that is calculated..should be able to graph that with enough data..it should be possible to use that balance between early and late pace to put pretty accurate ratings to any horse that runs over this C/D in future.

A few years ago I did this for the craven stakes..when they produced the sectional data for Newmarket...using that data you could tell if a horse was a guineas contender or not...no matter how steady the early pace was

the beauty of this over final time speed figures is that even in a slow run race you can measure a horses ability...like with Sea The Stars where we were lucky that Ask had run similar splits..obviously we need to model the relationship between early and late so we don't need to rely on rating off one horse who might have raced to similar splits.
 
Gus

Again that was a really easy card to rate..ignoring the sprint which is normally stand side on slightly different ground..the other races fitted great and the going according to those times was (GOOD - gf in places)

The Derby does not look a fast run race..Nijinsky recorded just a 105 speed figure...so the split times will be interesting.

My Swallow was placed in the guineas in 71 behind the Brigadier if my memory serves

I love these old races


Its coming along MR..and making sense..up to press...will post later in the week

if anyone has dabbled with sectionals feel free to comment ..comment even if you haven't..

Thanks again
 
Last edited:
I think you're probably right to ignore the sprint, EC, although my - admittedly distant - recollection is that there was a time in the seventies when horses tended to go to the far side in 5f sprints at Epsom. The 1970 Form Book is silent on this point.

If there are any other years that interest you, please let me know and I'll post the details. One which might be of interest would be Troy's Derby in 1979. I'm pretty sure that on my time ratings it produced the highest figure I've ever given a Derby winner and it was virtually off the scale on Timeform's calculations on 145, the fastest time performance they ever published.
 
I'll take you up on the Troy offer Gus if thats ok..sounds an interesting one..I'm sure its on youtube as well

I remember that Derby so well..Troy was visually so impressive..whoosh ...certainly fitted his win.

thanks again...these are fascinating glimpses of days gone.
 
thats a shame...just timed the Nijinsky Derby on youtube..same as Shahrastani..its way to quick..times at 2 minutes 10 seconds...now I know he were good..but :lol:

it seems all these old clips have serious timing issues
 
I have just watched the Troy clip..I have to say..visually..he is the best Derby winner I've seen...he looks like he is going twice as fast as the others when he takes off
 
need another opinion here

can you guys watch these races..in Troys Derby there is a cut in the footage I believe when they are dropping into tattenham corner...is there one in Nijinskys as well?

If it is just that there is a clip missing then I can still time back to the path 3.5f out and get one sectional

they certainly don't look speeded up..i'm sure there must be a break in Nijinskys..not spotted it yet though

Troy starts about the 1m30 seconds slot here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2dGnK9E6qoA

Nijinsky
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBgnJR2D_dU
 
2.00 5f £3220 Charles Street 2 8-11 by 1.5l 58.67s 11ran

2.35 10f £7048 Philodantes 4 8-6 by 4l 2m6.78s 13ran

3.35 12f £153980 Troy 3 9-0 by 7l 2m36.59s 23ran

4.25 6f £4032 Why Not 2 9-0 by 1.5l 1m11.78s 9ran

4.55 8.5f £11692 Spring In Deepsea 4 9-4 by hd 1m44.40s 11ran

5.25 7f £4584 Red Johnnie 5 9-1 by 0.75l 1m23.87s 11ran

The first was the Great Surrey Stakes and the fourth the Woodcote. The fifth was the Diomed. The second was a "40 plus" handicap and the last a "35 plus" handicap.
 
I'd say so.

Troy was impressive but Nijinsky really only needed shaking up to sprint clear of a very good field.
 
many thanks Gus :cool:

I know what you mean DO..never broke sweat..I do like to see a horse really run to the line though..Troy literally blew them away...he must have been as far back as Dancing Brave was at tattenham corner as well
 
we will definately stick Shergar in at some point

been working on the chart tonight..the trendline between early pace and late pace is impressive in predicting the rating of each horse..no matter whether it was strong or steady pace early...I've got realistic measures for horses that you just can't see with final time speed analysis.

this might seem a bit anorakish to some people... but given the time...and access to videos ...you could construct a chart for each distance at whatever track you wanted and put pretty accurate ratings to each horse...it would also highlight horses that have achieved more than the winner in a race..that aren't obvious just looking at a race at face value.

so..yes its interesting to see just how good these older horses compare..and I have got side tracked a bit with the old uns...but it is a tool for future use

mind you..it is often said you can't compare horses from different eras..I think you can with this method
 
This stuff is keeping me up late

just done New Approach's Derby..his energy use is very comparable to STS's..without me needing to use a graph

Ive split each of teh 3 sectionals into feet per second figures..

the times are going equalised..a level playing field

NEW APPROACH
1st split = 46.75 fps
2nd split = 51.82 fps
3rd split = 57.55 fps

SEA THE STARS
1st split = 44.92 fps
2nd split = 53.66 fps
3rd split = 58.47 fps

The first two splits are averaged to show total energy used over the first two sections...both horse average at 49.29 fps..both had used the same energy by the 3.5f marker...but Sea The Stars ran the final 3.5 fur faster.

Those figures suggest that purely at the Derby stage ..STS is a 3 lengths better horse than New Approach was.
 
Something about Epsom Derby etc here from last year:

http://betting.betfair.com/horse-ra...ctional-times-are-your-friend-but-020608.html

My sectionals for the race since 1969 and for Coronation Cup/Oaks etc are on another computer and are possibly lost forever :-(

Sectional %s of times work very well on fairly uniform ground but go skew-whiff on extremes, especially on ground softer than good, when optimum energy expenditure alters. That is why I have generally concentrated on all-weather sectionals, or turf ones on good/good to firm going.
 
i have found that as well, High Chaparrals Derby is a classic example

I have been thinking exactly the same re the AW

which course though?

are you the original Pru..Simon?
 
Yes, that is me. I did all the all-weather tracks when they were provided by TurfTrax and for a while when they were not. I got a group together on TRF for taking/sharing handheld sectionals but it did not last for long. I am likely to return to sectionals when things quieten down in September, other commitments allowing.
 
Back
Top