Sectional Timing

[Tanlic]

Irish racing introducing sectional timing at all tracks in 2017.

Bookies will be happy...The more you confuse the punter the more he is likely to lose.

I'm not a great believer in sectionals as such but I have found them extremely useful over the last few/hurdles fences.

I don't know how many times I went off in a rant about how fast Sprinter Sacre and Douvan were in their respective Arkles and how slow UDS was in his.
It certainly encouraged me to have more on SS than perhaps I should have but it ended well so no complaints.

What I don't like about sectionals is the after the fact rants that are so like after timing it becomes annoying and boring to say the least.

So and so lost because there was no pace in the race or they went too quick. Your head would be so full off rubbish after a week you'd be working 24/7 keeping up and have no time for betting.

Horse A runs in a race with horse Y cutting out a slow pace and horse A loses.

In his previous race horse B cut out a fast pace and horse A won easily.

It is therefor reasonable to assume if horse A gets a strong pace again he will win but what happens if D who usually sets a strong pace has an off day or his trainer decides to tell the jockewy to hold him up and you get stuffed again.

You simply can't control what others will do so from that point of view sectionals have their limits.

If a horse covers the first part of a race in a very fast pace then the mid section faster and quickens up like a rocket and the sectional tell you all that, then you know he's a superstar in the making.......You could of course also work that out from the overall time or the jockey telling Thommo he's the best I've ever ridden lol

I reckon sectionals are to be used occasionally. For example if Gus wants to find out how Apples compares to Annie over the last 3.....It tell you a lot in big races IMO but doing it every day and every race is for fanatics with nothing else to do with their time

 

[gus]

"The more you confuse the punter the more he is likely to lose..."

Punters, as a group, will always lose but there will certainly be individual punters who will not be "confused" by sectional timing and will profit from it.

I don't think I've ever had a bet based on sectionals - I still concentrate on the overall time of a race, an approach which has slightly gone out of fashion - but I'm all for there being as much information available as possible on the basis people can make of it what they will.

 

[redhead]

Is this any help (if you have not discovered it already)?

www.online-stopwatch.com

 

[redhead]

Hope this is useful too, though it was published three years ago.

Nick Mordin Racing Post Weekender 20 03 13:

AT LONG LAST, SECTIONALS ARE APPLIED TO JUMPERS

The English language is replete with derogatory terms that denote a person of low intelligence who displays Onanistic tendencies. Last week I confess I felt like just such a person after berating the lack of new information, particularly section times and especially at meetings like the Cheltenham Festival.

If I’d taken the trouble to check I would have discovered that TurfTrax was supplying sectional times at Cheltenham. I think this is the first time they’ve ever been taken at a jumps meeting.

Sectional times are extremely useful in flat racing but they’re absolutely essential for jump racing because they can tell you so much more.

One reason for this is that on the flat all races start from an easily identifiable fixed point. This is where the starting stalls are placed.

Over jumps there are no starting stalls, so the runners can line up and start running 25 yards or more ahead of, or behind, the position they adopt in another race over the same course or distance. It then becomes a matter of guess work for the person hand-timing the race of just when they should press the button on their stopwatch.

You can see the effect of this by comparing the formbook times with those taken by TurfTrax for various races at Cheltenham.

For example, the formbook times suggest that the Coral Cup winner Medinas clocked a time 5.5. seconds faster than The New One managed in the Neptune. But the TurfTrax times, measured by radio transponders from an identical starting point, show The New One actually ran just 0.22 sec slower.

I download and time the videos of all the best jumps races run in Britain and Ireland every week and I’m sorry to report that errors of this magnitude are so common I’m now convinced it’s pointless trying to rate horses off formbook times.

If we could have TurfTrax sectional times for every jumps race we’d have a much more accurate basis for comparison.

Sectional times, whether they’re provided by TurfTrax or no, also make it possible to accurately compare the times of races run at different distances.

This sort of comparison is not possible with formbook times in Britain or Ireland, however accurately they are recorded. The reason is that unreported and misreported rail movements alter the distances of races from one meeting to the next in a way that’s impossible to quantify.

However, with sectional times you can simply find a common starting point in races over two different distances and compare the times from those points.

For example, the common starting point in the Champion and RSA Chases last week was the third fence. The field in both races were running on exactly the same course from that point.

All you have to do is adjust the sectional times to account for the different distances of the two races and you can then compare them directly.

To do this I use an expanded version of the chart at the end of this article. I divide the sectional time for the shorter race by the seconds per mile that’s the norm for that distance and then multiply the result by the norm for the longer distance.

In this case I would divide the 196.66 seconds taken from the third fence to the finish in the Champion Chase by 112.5 seconds, the norm per mile for 2m chases, and multiply the result by 115.1 seconds, the norm for chases over 3m110y.

This produces an adjusted sectional time of 201.21 for the Champion Chase, which compares with the 203.39 seconds clocked from the same point in the RSA Chase. So for every 100 seconds taken by the Champion Chase winner Sprinter Sacre, the RSA Chase winner Lord Windermere would be 1.08 seconds slower.

If you want to get really fancy you can even adjust the time of a slowly run race to show what it would have been if they’d gone a good pace throughout.

You might think this is impossible to do accurately, and in reality it is. But I’ve come up with a decent method that produces what seems to be a logical result in all but very slowly run races.

What I do is find the section of a race which, when added to the final time, produces the most favourable comparison with another race where the final time and same section have been added together.

This is a fiddly calculation that can take some time with a calculator unless you have a better head for figures than me and can instantly see which section of a race produces the best result.

For example, in the Neptune NH the reason the final time was a bit slower than the Coral Cup is that the novices went slow early on.

However, from the fifth-last they took just 140.02 seconds to reach the finish, compared with 145.29 in he Coral Cup. Add these sectional times to the respective final times and you get a total of 449.97 seconds for the Neptune and 455.02 seconds for the Coral Cup.

In other words the novices ran 1.12 seconds faster for every 100 seconds run. That is much more in line with my past speed ratings for the runners in the respective races than the final times alone indicate.

If you want to try your hand at downloading videos of races and taking their sectional times you are going to need software that enables you to record streaming videos off the internet and other software that allows you to play it back frame by frame while showing the time taken at each point.

I recommend KRUT and AVI Demux. You can find Freeware versions of them by searching on Google.

Taking sectional times from videos is time-consuming.

My hope is that someone will be inspired to start up a sectional timing club on the internet where users can share the sectional times they have taken.

That’s the only realistic way I can see us getting sectional times for most British and Irish races in the foreseeable future. Then again I can always be wrong, as I was last week at Cheltenham. I certainly hope so.

Average Seconds Per Mile Over Different Distances

Hurdles Distance Average spm
2m 107.5
2m4f 108.5
3m 110.8
3m2f 111.1

Chases Distance Average spm
2m 112.5
2m4f 113.6
3m 114.9
3m4f 116.2
4m 117.0
4m4f 117.3

Flat Distance Average spm
5f 94.1
6f 96.1
7f 96.6
1m 98.0
1m2f 100.0
1m4f 101.4
1m6f 102.3
2m 103.0
2m4f 104.0

 

[gus]

One thing I do feel strongly about is the number of courses that seem to struggle with malfunctioning timing equipment. We are regularly told that overall times of certain races are "hand-timed" which, in my book, is another way of saying "virtually useless" and we're not always even told that. Out of five races on the straight course at Newbury yesterday, three have official times ending in a zero. Not impossible, of course, but I'll be treating them with caution. The BHA should start fining courses who don't properly maintain their timing systems.

 

[Irish Stamp]

Sectional timing is great but completely inaccurate race distances are likely to mess the whole thing up.

Sure they work great at the AW tracks where you can't move the rails out or in for every meeting.

Martin

 

[reet hard]

Hear what you're saying IS, (though rail movements are widely reported in UK racing now, anyway), but there'd be enough mileage in individual furlong-by-furlong figures to be a massive boon to many punters, without obsessing about absolute minutiea.

 

[Tanlic]

Without reading Martin's post that was my first thought..................but why if they move posts out and increas the distance of the race or vice versa can't they be trained to estimate and report the deficit......After all this is 1992 not 1892.

PS excuse the late reply:lol:

 

[Desert Orchid]

Is this any help (if you have not discovered it already)?

www.online-stopwatch.com

I'm anoyed that it never occurred to me to look for an online stopwatch (especially after using a countdowner in class for years!)

But what if your pc/laptop runs slow?

As with all these things, it's not so much about the bare info as how you use it. We've had talk in the last week or so about Alice Springs breaking the track record at Newmarket. But she wasn't much faster in relative terms than some inferior animals on the same track the same day. Without finding a context for the information it is largely meaningless.

But I'd rather have it than not have it.

 

[gus]

We've had talk in the last week or so about Alice Springs breaking the track record at Newmarket. But she wasn't much faster in relative terms than some inferior animals on the same track the same day.

Given that I have her time there rated 124, the best by a three-year-old filly this season, 2lbs ahead of Lumiere's figure the previous day and a pound ahead of Minding's Guineas run, I have to disagree. The next best figure on the Friday, on my calculations, was 106 (Roly Poly).

Track records in themselves aren't always significant but this one was, for me.

 

[Desert Orchid]

I presume we work on different standard times, then, gus.

I have Alice Springs on 102 before any WFA consideration (so maybe 111) but I have her only a raw 5lbs faster than the handicap winner Swift Approval who won off 92.

If you have her on 124, do you then have the fourth (OR106) and fifth (OR106) respectively on 116 and 114?

 

[gus]

I presume we work on different standard times, then, gus.

That'll be it, I would have thought.

I'd kill for an updated, reliable set of standard times in which I could have total confidence.

As it is, I make do with those I've used for donkeys' years.

My Newmarket standards - both courses - I regard as fairly accurate, however.

I'm at work today (and on call tonight) so I'll respond further later in the week.

 

[Desert Orchid]

Now and again when my time ratings are at odds with others' (eg EC1's) I'll check my calculations against the standards used in the Raceform results.

Using Swift Approval's race as the identifier of the going allowance brings Alice Springs's time rating up a bit, to 110 (+9 wfa), which coincidentally matches to the pound my form rating for her [119].

However, it also brings CD handicap winner Fawaareq up to an uncomfortably high 103 (after adjustments). I could have gone with this in the short term (as I sometimes do with 3yo handicappers as they might be ahead of the curve) but it would have put the seemingly exposed Ifwecan on a winnable mark on Saturday there but he could do no better than win a blanket finish for second place, no fewer than six lengths behind the winner. If we use Fawaareq to find the going allowance, it will bring Alice Springs's figure down by 5lbs. That's still fast in the big scheme of things but it's nowhere near worthy of hype.

(I'm in no rush for a reply, btw, just offering this as I happen to have the form on the desk.)

 

[EC1]

07-Jul-16
07-Jul-16	Newmarket J	110	MEHMAS
07-Jul-16	Newmarket J	74	BIG ORANGE
07-Jul-16	Newmarket J	104	DANCING STAR
07-Jul-16	Newmarket J	68	HAWANA
07-Jul-16	Newmarket J	84	EASY VICTORY
07-Jul-16	Newmarket J	110	LUMIERE
07-Jul-16	Newmarket J	91	SOIE D'LEAU
			Going: +20 lb per mile (Good/Firm)

<tbody>
[TD="width: 76"] Newmarket J [/TD]
[TD="width: 43"] 72 [/TD]
[TD="width: 392"] HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT [/TD]

</tbody>

08-Jul-16
08-Jul-16	Newmarket J	86	FAWAREEQ
08-Jul-16	Newmarket J	83	MISE EN ROSE
08-Jul-16	Newmarket J	100	ROLY POLY
08-Jul-16	Newmarket J	116	ALICE SPRINGS
08-Jul-16	Newmarket J	95	ODE TO EVENING
08-Jul-16	Newmarket J	90	SWIFT APPROVAL
			Going: +34 lb per mile (Good/Firm, Firm Places)

<tbody>
[TD="width: 76"] Newmarket J [/TD]
[TD="width: 43"] 80 [/TD]
[TD="width: 392"] DUBAI HERO [/TD]

</tbody>

09-Jul-16
09-Jul-16	Newmarket J	93	PLEASELETMEWIN
09-Jul-16	Newmarket J	85	VON BLUCHER
09-Jul-16	Newmarket J	102	BOYNTON
09-Jul-16	Newmarket J	122	LIMATO
09-Jul-16	Newmarket J	90	GOLDEN STEPS
09-Jul-16	Newmarket J	60	GOLD FAITH
			Going: +11 lb per mile (Good – GF Places)

<tbody>
[TD="width: 76"] Newmarket J [/TD]
[TD="width: 43"] 95 [/TD]
[TD="width: 392"] DABIYAH [/TD]

</tbody>

WFA Included

 

[Colin Phillips]

Great stuff, EC.

 

[EC1]

cheers

re standard times...there is a pretty straightforward way of creating standard times..bearing in mind that once you start compliling figures you can tweak them if one distance keeps getting too many fast or slow figures...but i have found this method works very well.

I have a spreadsheet with 3 years results...all i do is weed out the races with 2yo in..remove Group races and maidens...the sheet i have gives an winners OHR column so am assuming most of the races used are handicaps as most mdn race winners don't have OHR's set yet.

The first thing i did was work out what % of races over each distance are decently run..by looking at past lots of past crads you can put a % of races to use for each distance to calculate the standards. Sprints are more often run to suit a true reflection of ability than longer races..once you have a good idea of how many races to use for calculating a standard at each distance then its pretty easy to calculate a standard time.

As we are talking about Newmarket July course..may as well show those. Just to add..the average weight of handicap winners is 9-0 once you get a decent number of races..this eliminates any adjustment needing to be made for weight carried.

DISTANCE	OHR
5F	109	GF	56.00	0.94	56.94
5F	93	G	57.79	0.00	57.79
5F	75	G	58.18	0.00	58.18
5F	93	GF	57.43	0.94	58.37
5F	91	G	58.42	0.00	58.42
5F	106	G	58.55	0.00	58.55
5F	88	GF	57.64	0.94	58.58
5F	95	G	58.59	0.00	58.59
5F	105	G	58.67	0.00	58.67
5F	84	G	58.70	0.00	58.70
5F	70	G	58.71	0.00	58.71
5F	79	G	58.71	0.00	58.71
5F	87	G	58.82	0.00	58.82
5F	104	G	58.89	0.00	58.89
5F	80	GF	57.96	0.94	58.90
5F	82	GF	58.00	0.94	58.94
5F	91	GF	58.00	0.94	58.94
5F	75	G	58.99	0.00	58.99
5F	82	G	59.00	0.00	59.00
5F	92	G	59.11	0.00	59.11
5F	71	G	59.13	0.00	59.13
5F	98	G	59.25	0.00	59.25
5F	69	G	59.28	0.00	59.28
5F	75	G	59.60	0.00	59.60
5F	89	G	59.78	0.00	59.78
5F	84	G	59.82	0.00	59.82
5F	85	G	59.89	0.00	59.89
5F	75	G	59.96	0.00	59.96
5F	73	G	60.33	0.00	60.33
5F	78	G	60.40	0.00	60.40

<tbody>
[TD="width: 68"] GOING [/TD]
[TD="width: 78"] Bare Time [/TD]
[TD="width: 111"] ADJUTMENT [/TD]
[TD="width: 95"] “GOOD” TIME [/TD]
[TD="width: 62"][/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median Time using top 90% of times = 58.89 [/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median OHR using top 90% of times = 86 [/TD]

[TD="colspan: 7"]5f Standard time for an 85 (av weight carried 9.0) horse on GOOD ground =
58.89 + 0.04 (1 lb adjustment) = 58.93 [/TD]

</tbody>

What we have there is a list of bare times and the official going..and an adjustment...yes we know they can be wrong with the ground..but it evens out over a number of races and unless you use the going descriptions you won't really ever get a set of start off standards. The adjustment for GF to get it back to Good ...i use is 1.5 seconds per mile..so at 5f its 0.94 sec to add if its fast ground.

You could also use GS times and speed them up by about 2.5 seconds per mile but i find that GS is a broader spectrum than GF so prefer to stick to GF + Good times. Once the times are sorted out from fastest to slowest..then take a median of the top 90% of times..same median of teh OHR's..and you now have a standard time that has a class level you know and on a surface as close to Good that you are ever going to calculate without having many meetings already speed rated.

Once you have all the distances standard timed..you can always pick one distance out as a cross check if they are reflecting GOOD and look at the last 20 runnings of a big race there...i usd the Bunbury cup for this one..a race you know will usually be truly run and with 20 years to go at you can get a good number on GF or Good..you should find once you have class adjusted the big race times to whatever you set as the OHR you want your standards.... you shouldn't be far out. All my standards are for an 85 horse carrying 9-0..you can use what you want...i picked 85 as it reduced large changes when calculating.

If anyone is bothered i'll shove up all the Newmarket July distances later

 

[Maruco]

Good to see you back EC. Where have you been hiding?

 

[EC1]

here and there Maruco..only popped in to answer the standard time issue raised by Gus

here are the Newmarket July ones..have to split them as won't accept them in one go

DISTANCE
5F	109	GF	56.00	0.94	56.94
5F	93	G	57.79	0.00	57.79
5F	75	G	58.18	0.00	58.18
5F	93	GF	57.43	0.94	58.37
5F	91	G	58.42	0.00	58.42
5F	106	G	58.55	0.00	58.55
5F	88	GF	57.64	0.94	58.58
5F	95	G	58.59	0.00	58.59
5F	105	G	58.67	0.00	58.67
5F	84	G	58.70	0.00	58.70
5F	70	G	58.71	0.00	58.71
5F	79	G	58.71	0.00	58.71
5F	87	G	58.82	0.00	58.82
5F	104	G	58.89	0.00	58.89
5F	80	GF	57.96	0.94	58.90
5F	82	GF	58.00	0.94	58.94
5F	91	GF	58.00	0.94	58.94
5F	75	G	58.99	0.00	58.99
5F	82	G	59.00	0.00	59.00
5F	92	G	59.11	0.00	59.11
5F	71	G	59.13	0.00	59.13
5F	98	G	59.25	0.00	59.25
5F	69	G	59.28	0.00	59.28
5F	75	G	59.60	0.00	59.60
5F	89	G	59.78	0.00	59.78
5F	84	G	59.82	0.00	59.82
5F	85	G	59.89	0.00	59.89
5F	75	G	59.96	0.00	59.96
5F	73	G	60.33	0.00	60.33
5F	78	G	60.40	0.00	60.40
DISTANCE	OHR	GOING	Bare Time	ADJUTMENT	“GOOD” TIME
6F	103	G	70.67	0.00	70.67
6F	84	G	70.81	0.00	70.81
6F	75	G	70.84	0.00	70.84
6F	84	G	71.15	0.00	71.15
6F	88	G	71.30	0.00	71.30
6F	86	G	71.44	0.00	71.44
6F	90	G	71.56	0.00	71.56
6F	82	GF	70.51	1.13	71.64
6F	70	G	71.74	0.00	71.74
6F	79	G	71.78	0.00	71.78
6F	70	G	71.96	0.00	71.96
6F	78	G	72.00	0.00	72.00
6F	85	G	72.00	0.00	72.00
6F	76	GF	70.96	1.13	72.09
6F	78	G	72.10	0.00	72.10
6F	85	G	72.10	0.00	72.10
6F	74	G	72.12	0.00	72.12
6F	78	G	72.23	0.00	72.23
6F	105	G	72.26	0.00	72.26
6F	68	G	72.30	0.00	72.30
6F	70	G	72.31	0.00	72.31
6F	93	G	72.36	0.00	72.36
6F	88	G	72.38	0.00	72.38
6F	72	G	72.42	0.00	72.42
6F	77	G	72.45	0.00	72.45
6F	75	G	72.48	0.00	72.48
6F	90	GF	71.36	1.13	72.49
6F	90	G	72.52	0.00	72.52
6F	82	G	72.54	0.00	72.54
6F	90	G	72.55	0.00	72.55
6F	75	G	72.57	0.00	72.57
6F	85	G	72.80	0.00	72.80
6F	77	G	72.89	0.00	72.89
6F	93	G	73.00	0.00	73.00
6F	61	G	73.10	0.00	73.10
6F	84	G	73.37	0.00	73.37
6F	59	G	73.46	0.00	73.46
6F	89	G	73.59	0.00	73.59
6F	81	G	73.83	0.00	73.83
6F	69	G	73.89	0.00	73.89
DISTANCE	OHR	GOING	Bare Time	ADJUTMENT	“GOOD” TIME
7F	105	G	83.39	0.00	83.39
7F	87	G	83.57	0.00	83.57
7F	90	G	83.71	0.00	83.71
7F	96	G	83.75	0.00	83.75
7F	87	G	83.91	0.00	83.91
7F	93	G	83.91	0.00	83.91
7F	79	G	84.00	0.00	84.00
7F	89	G	84.00	0.00	84.00
7F	90	G	84.00	0.00	84.00
7F	98	G	84.16	0.00	84.16
7F	85	G	84.46	0.00	84.46
7F	88	G	84.48	0.00	84.48
7F	84	GF	83.39	1.31	84.70
7F	95	G	84.76	0.00	84.76
7F	84	G	84.81	0.00	84.81
7F	76	G	84.82	0.00	84.82
7F	83	G	84.82	0.00	84.82
7F	95	G	84.85	0.00	84.85
7F	88	G	84.92	0.00	84.92
7F	69	G	85.00	0.00	85.00
7F	70	G	85.00	0.00	85.00
7F	77	G	85.00	0.00	85.00
7F	70	G	85.26	0.00	85.26
7F	87	G	85.31	0.00	85.31
7F	84	G	85.35	0.00	85.35
7F	82	G	85.36	0.00	85.36
7F	81	G	85.38	0.00	85.38
7F	80	G	85.39	0.00	85.39
7F	87	G	85.43	0.00	85.43
7F	84	G	85.49	0.00	85.49
7F	68	G	85.50	0.00	85.50
7F	86	G	85.52	0.00	85.52
7F	79	G	85.57	0.00	85.57
7F	60	G	85.69	0.00	85.69
7F	92	GF	84.50	1.31	85.81
7F	86	G	85.85	0.00	85.85
7F	83	G	85.91	0.00	85.91
7F	86	G	85.97	0.00	85.97
7F	84	GF	84.76	1.31	86.07
7F	76	G	86.20	0.00	86.20
7F	86	G	86.20	0.00	86.20
7F	82	G	86.21	0.00	86.21
7F	79	GF	84.96	1.31	86.27
7F	74	G	86.35	0.00	86.35
7F	80	G	86.45	0.00	86.45
7F	83	G	86.55	0.00	86.55
7F	90	G	86.70	0.00	86.70
7F	82	G	86.79	0.00	86.79
7F	66	G	87.32	0.00	87.32
7F	75	G	87.32	0.00	87.32
7F	83	G	87.93	0.00	87.93

<tbody>
[TD="width: 49"] OHR [/TD]
[TD="width: 68"] GOING [/TD]
[TD="width: 78"] Bare Time [/TD]
[TD="width: 111"] ADJUTMENT [/TD]
[TD="width: 95"] “GOOD” TIME [/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median Time using top 90% of times = 58.89[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median OHR using top 90% of times = 86[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 7"]Standard time for an 85 (av weight carried 9.0) horse on GOOD ground =[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 2"]58.89 + 0.04 = 58.93 [/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median Time using top 85% of times = 72.18[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median OHR using top 85% of times = 82[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 7"]Standard time for an 85 (av weight carried 9.0) horse on GOOD ground =[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 2"]72.18 – 0.18 = 72.00 [/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median Time using top 75% of times = 84.86[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median OHR using top 75% of times = 84[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 7"]Standard time for an 85 (av weight carried 9.0) horse on GOOD ground =[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 2"]84.86 – 0.06 = 84.80 [/TD]

</tbody>

 

[EC1]

DISTANCE
1M	88	G	97.33	0.00	97.33
1M	75	G	97.46	0.00	97.46
1M	86	G	97.88	0.00	97.88
1M	83	G	97.96	0.00	97.96
1M	101	G	97.98	0.00	97.98
1M	105	G	98.16	0.00	98.16
1M	84	G	98.23	0.00	98.23
1M	86	G	98.24	0.00	98.24
1M	85	GF	96.75	1.50	98.25
1M	69	G	98.43	0.00	98.43
1M	90	G	98.44	0.00	98.44
1M	90	G	98.45	0.00	98.45
1M	102	G	98.52	0.00	98.52
1M	67	G	98.59	0.00	98.59
1M	75	G	98.66	0.00	98.66
1M	66	G	98.73	0.00	98.73
1M	77	G	98.75	0.00	98.75
1M	109	G	98.76	0.00	98.76
1M	110	G	98.79	0.00	98.79
1M	93	G	98.94	0.00	98.94
1M	100	G	98.96	0.00	98.96
1M	70	G	99.11	0.00	99.11
1M	69	G	99.16	0.00	99.16
1M	63	G	99.17	0.00	99.17
1M	78	G	99.23	0.00	99.23
1M	70	G	99.25	0.00	99.25
1M	65	G	99.31	0.00	99.31
1M	67	G	99.32	0.00	99.32
1M	81	G	99.40	0.00	99.40
1M	85	G	99.40	0.00	99.40
1M	100	G	99.44	0.00	99.44
1M	66	G	99.47	0.00	99.47
1M	75	G	99.50	0.00	99.50
1M	68	G	99.55	0.00	99.55
1M	84	G	99.57	0.00	99.57
1M	85	G	99.81	0.00	99.81
1M	72	G	99.82	0.00	99.82
1M	77	G	99.91	0.00	99.91
1M	67	G	99.96	0.00	99.96
1M	81	G	99.96	0.00	99.96
1M	65	G	100.00	0.00	100.00
1M	69	G	100.00	0.00	100.00
1M	67	G	100.14	0.00	100.14
1M	82	G	100.27	0.00	100.27
1M	84	GF	98.82	1.50	100.32
1M	55	G	100.35	0.00	100.35
1M	74	G	100.44	0.00	100.44
1M	67	G	100.45	0.00	100.45
1M	69	G	100.46	0.00	100.46
1M	83	G	100.58	0.00	100.58
1M	94	G	100.59	0.00	100.59
1M	75	G	100.60	0.00	100.60
1M	81	GF	99.12	1.50	100.62
1M	63	G	100.67	0.00	100.67
1M	70	G	100.71	0.00	100.71
1M	68	G	100.81	0.00	100.81
1M	100	G	101.00	0.00	101.00
1M	83	G	101.10	0.00	101.10
1M	70	G	101.13	0.00	101.13
1M	95	G	101.25	0.00	101.25
1M	72	G	101.56	0.00	101.56
1M	76	G	101.71	0.00	101.71
1M	67	G	102.20	0.00	102.20
1M	61	G	102.42	0.00	102.42
1M	86	G	102.59	0.00	102.59
1M	60	G	102.75	0.00	102.75
1M	82	G	103.40	0.00	103.40
1M	98	G	104.54	0.00	104.54
DISTANCE	OHR	GOING	Bare Time	ADJUTMENT	“GOOD” TIME
1M 2F	94	G	121.64	0.00	121.64
1M 2F	94	G	121.78	0.00	121.78
1M 2F	94	G	122.68	0.00	122.68
1M 2F	103	G	123.00	0.00	123.00
1M 2F	95	G	123.15	0.00	123.15
1M 2F	79	G	123.18	0.00	123.18
1M 2F	100	G	123.52	0.00	123.52
1M 2F	90	G	123.61	0.00	123.61
1M 2F	86	G	124.12	0.00	124.12
1M 2F	104	G	124.19	0.00	124.19
1M 2F	69	G	124.24	0.00	124.24
1M 2F	79	G	124.30	0.00	124.30
1M 2F	88	G	124.33	0.00	124.33
1M 2F	86	GF	122.53	1.88	124.41
1M 2F	89	G	124.42	0.00	124.42
1M 2F	103	G	124.65	0.00	124.65
1M 2F	79	G	124.73	0.00	124.73
1M 2F	69	G	124.86	0.00	124.86
1M 2F	85	G	124.88	0.00	124.88
1M 2F	94	G	124.98	0.00	124.98
1M 2F	82	G	125.00	0.00	125.00
1M 2F	94	G	125.13	0.00	125.13
1M 2F	57	G	125.17	0.00	125.17
1M 2F	86	G	125.22	0.00	125.22
1M 2F	96	G	125.25	0.00	125.25
1M 2F	108	G	125.36	0.00	125.36
1M 2F	82	G	125.64	0.00	125.64
1M 2F	96	G	125.70	0.00	125.70
1M 2F	88	G	125.77	0.00	125.77
1M 2F	71	G	125.80	0.00	125.80
1M 2F	88	G	125.81	0.00	125.81
1M 2F	68	G	125.90	0.00	125.90
1M 2F	85	G	126.16	0.00	126.16
1M 2F	84	G	126.19	0.00	126.19
1M 2F	89	G	126.26	0.00	126.26
1M 2F	67	G	126.41	0.00	126.41
1M 2F	77	G	126.43	0.00	126.43
1M 2F	62	G	126.50	0.00	126.50
1M 2F	88	G	126.58	0.00	126.58
1M 2F	110	G	126.74	0.00	126.74
1M 2F	75	G	127.10	0.00	127.10
1M 2F	83	G	127.10	0.00	127.10
1M 2F	65	G	127.21	0.00	127.21
1M 2F	65	G	127.29	0.00	127.29
1M 2F	60	G	127.35	0.00	127.35
1M 2F	92	G	127.88	0.00	127.88
1M 2F	90	G	127.96	0.00	127.96
1M 2F	64	G	128.13	0.00	128.13
1M 2F	62	G	128.29	0.00	128.29
1M 2F	72	G	128.98	0.00	128.98
1M 2F	57	G	129.76	0.00	129.76
1M 2F	60	G	130.00	0.00	130.00
1M 2F	79	G	131.00	0.00	131.00
DISTANCE	OHR	GOING	Bare Time	ADJUTMENT	“GOOD” TIME
1M 4F	81	G	148.31	0.00	148.31
1M 4F	90	G	149.40	0.00	149.40
1M 4F	85	G	150.30	0.00	150.30
1M 4F	82	GF	148.26	2.25	150.51
1M 4F	77	G	150.97	0.00	150.97
1M 4F	89	G	151.48	0.00	151.48
1M 4F	69	G	151.51	0.00	151.51
1M 4F	82	G	151.63	0.00	151.63
1M 4F	84	G	151.85	0.00	151.85
1M 4F	72	G	151.92	0.00	151.92
1M 4F	72	G	151.95	0.00	151.95
1M 4F	70	G	152.11	0.00	152.11
1M 4F	82	G	152.12	0.00	152.12
1M 4F	62	G	152.27	0.00	152.27
1M 4F	68	G	153.00	0.00	153.00
1M 4F	89	G	153.21	0.00	153.21
1M 4F	85	G	153.39	0.00	153.39
1M 4F	74	G	153.41	0.00	153.41
1M 4F	53	G	153.55	0.00	153.55
1M 4F	76	G	153.72	0.00	153.72
1M 4F	76	G	153.98	0.00	153.98
1M 4F	61	G	154.00	0.00	154.00
1M 4F	109	G	154.12	0.00	154.12
1M 4F	77	G	154.17	0.00	154.17
1M 4F	67	G	154.83	0.00	154.83
1M 4F	72	G	154.96	0.00	154.96
1M 4F	69	G	154.99	0.00	154.99
1M 4F	95	G	155.32	0.00	155.32
1M 4F	63	G	155.90	0.00	155.90
1M 4F	80	G	156.76	0.00	156.76
1M 4F	84	G	158.42	0.00	158.42
151.85 – 0.31 = 151.54

<tbody>
[TD="width: 49"] OHR [/TD]
[TD="width: 68"] GOING [/TD]
[TD="width: 78"] Bare Time [/TD]
[TD="width: 111"] ADJUTMENT [/TD]
[TD="width: 95"] “GOOD” TIME [/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median Time using top 66% of times = 99.16[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median OHR using top 66% of times = 81[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 7"]Standard time for an 85 (av weight carried 9.0) horse on GOOD ground =[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 2"]99.16 – 0.35 = 98.81
[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median Time using top 60% of times = 124.30[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median OHR using top 60% of times = 86[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 7"]Standard time for an 85 (av weight carried 9.0) horse on GOOD ground =[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 2"]124.30 + 0.09 = 124.39
[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median Time using top 55% of times = 151.85[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 8"]Median OHR using top 55% of times = 82[/TD]

[TD="colspan: 7"]Standard time for an 85 (av weight carried 9.0) horse on GOOD ground =[/TD]

</tbody>

 

[gus]

Thanks, EC.

Interesting stuff. I'll have a look at it and respond later in the week.

 

[Carl]

Great work there EC, welcome back,youve been a miss.

 

[clivex]

Opened this up and thought my iPad had gone on the blink.

Looks like my fcking credit card statement

 

[MoscowFlyerisMagnificent]

Thanks a lot for all this info EC1 - I've never used timings before but you've inspired me to give it a go

 

[gus]

My standard times for the Rowley Mile course - basically, the old Raceform ones from about thirty years ago - are 5f 58.5; 6f 71.7; 7f 84.0; 8f 97.7; 9f 110.6; 10f 123.7; 12f 151.0; 14f 177.0; 16f 205.0; 18f 230.6.

For the July course, they are 5f 58.3; 6f 71.5; 7f 84.7; 8f 98.0; 10f 123.5; 12f 149.0; 13f n/a; 14.8f 187.0; 16.1f 203.4


I'm struggling for time at the moment but I'll hopefully manage a full response to EC's very helpful contributions some time in the next few days.


As a matter of interest, though, EC, I've mentioned elsewhere tonight Blue Point and Fair Eva. What do you make of their times in their most recent runs?

 

[EC1]

I've not been doing figures during June Gus..only just started again..i have put Ascot figures on Gigilo's thread with Fair Eva's figure