What are you backing Today?

Status
Not open for further replies.
its definately dried out through the afternoon DO..that was a decentish time...but the earlier ones come out at about 22lbs slower than Good on my calcs..

maybe mine are wrong

RP have the big race as 1.75 seconds slow though..which again points to easy ground
 
Last edited:
If the 5f sprint was true run it generates a going allowance of -0.03spf (fast ground).

Applied to the big race, it gives GLB a time rating of 118.

Right now I simply can't have it that the ground beat Lethal Force.
 
Last edited:
0-105 standard over 14f is 180.33

186.51 is 6.18s slow / .14 * 1.3 = 57lb slow

Gr.1 standard over 6f is 71.06

72.25 is 1.19s slow / .14 * 3.2 = 27 lb slow

Confessional 27
Top Notch Tonto 37
Platinum 57
Gordon Lord Byron 27

So far ground average is 36lb slow

Average OR is 98

Confessional run to 103
Top Notch Tonto run to 97
Platinum run to 69
Gordon Lord Byron run to 123
 
They were running on virtually two different tracks today, Frog. I think it would very dangerous to link the times on the round course with those on the straight one.
 
Desert Orchid said:
If the 5f sprint was true run it generates a going allowance of -0.03spf (fast ground).

Applied to the big race, it gives GLB a time rating of 118.

Right now I simply can't have it that the ground beat Lethal Force.
Click to expand...

I think the difference between us here is that i know how my standards are calculated..the RP know how theirs are calculated..and Froggy will also have made his own standards...and all 3 of us have the ground as proper G/S..

I can't really trust something if i don't know how it was calculated
 
Desert Orchid said:
They were running on virtually two different tracks today, Frog. I think it would very dangerous to link the times on the round course with those on the straight one.
Click to expand...

the straight ones point to G/S though..on 3 different ratings just quoted on here

maybe Gus would like to add his view
 
EC1 said:
I think the difference between us here is that i know how my standards are calculated..the RP know how theirs are calculated..and Froggy will also have made his own standards...and all 3 of us have the ground as proper G/S..

I can't really trust something if i don't know how it was calculated
Click to expand...

You're quite right to trust your own over anyone else's. I feel exactly the same.
 
Last edited:
G/S reading was 7.6 at 8.00am. That, and the smattering of rain since, suggests ground was borderline g/s.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Like EC1, I'm much more comfortable relying on race times to tell us what the ground is like.

Unfortunately, you need to wait until after the event to find that out so we really need CsoC to tell it accurately.

Clive Cox himself said he was surprised how good it felt to walk before letting LF take its chance.
 
Any news on the analysis from you guys?

I uses a method from CJs insights on pace advantage, they work better on AW tho
 
Hey I was wondering if u guys want to build sectional data over the winter on AW? I put the spreadsheet together and would take about 2 hours on ur own to complet which ain't feasible so more the merrier.

So far Tender Emotion has run to 105, out of the card I done 14th August as a trial an Strawberry Jam 83!
 
Desert Orchid said:
Like EC1, I'm much more comfortable relying on race times to tell us what the ground is like.

Unfortunately, you need to wait until after the event to find that out so we really need CsoC to tell it accurately.

Clive Cox himself said he was surprised how good it felt to walk before letting LF take its chance.
Click to expand...

You just don't get it, do you DO.
CoC's are human, and put on as positive a slant as possible. The g/s is just a reading, and as such, a more reliable guide to what ground is likely.
York today, for instance:
GOOD (Good to soft in places) (GoingStick 6.4 - Home straight: Stands' Side 5.9, Centre 5.9, Far side 5.8)
Click to expand...
The official ground is Good, the going stick says g/s - and I'd bet diamonds the latter is much nearer to the actual.
 
p..s.
The forecast ground is similar to that which Lancelot Du Lac (4.40) won on lto, and a repeat performance looks entirely possible. Ladbrokes 7/1 won't be around forever.
 
Bit of info if any good.

Donald McCain has a 39% win ratio at Fontwell Park. His only runner at the course today is Ovilia in the 5.50 Mares Open Flat Race.
 
reet hard said:
You just don't get it, do you DO.
CoC's are human, and put on as positive a slant as possible. The g/s is just a reading, and as such, a more reliable guide to what ground is likely.
York today, for instance:

The official ground is Good, the going stick says g/s - and I'd bet diamonds the latter is much nearer to the actual.
Click to expand...

Exactly what am I not getting, Reet?

If Tellwright was going to put as positive a slant on it he'd have called it good and insist the rain was no more than they'd planned to put on artificially. He ignored the going stick readings, which pointed to good ground (imo) and told everyone the rain had got in. It may have done so elsewhere on the track. I'm pretty sure O'Meara wouldn't have withdrawn Tropical Beat without satisfying himself the ground was too soft but the times on the straight course are clearly indicative - regardless of what EC1 says - of ground no worse than good. In more than 40 years of compiling time ratings I don't ever recall a minus going allowance on soft ground.

At Cheltenham a few years ago we had 'good' ground both in terms of the going stick and the opinion of all those who'd walked the course in the morning yet track records were smashed right left and centre. I think it might have been James Willoughby who eventually theorised that the rain-freshened ground had created a spring in the turf that was propelling horses forward rather than slowing them up. It's possible a similar situation arose yesterday.

According to RPRs, Hoof It had never run within 7lbs on g-s (and 17lbs in soft) of his good ground top rating and 21lbs of his g-f rating. I don't imagine he could have run as well as he did if it was genuinely softer than good.

The only defence I can come up with for Tellwright is that he wanted to avoid likely criticism if he'd played down the effect of the rain and his get-out-of-jail card was the going in the back straight.

On the other hand, I'd been watching the weather forecast all week and it was pretty certain the area was going to get a right good dousing before Saturday so why on earth did he opt to water earlier in the week. Am I right in believing he admitted to watering on Wednesday?
 
am a bit interested in the 5-20 at Fontwell as the fav looks very beatable as does the 2nd fav

Chestnut Ben is racing off 95 now..which looks high...and McCoy wouldn't give extra confidence as he has ridden this one 7 times winning only once even though the horse has been short in the betting each time. I also think that the last couple of furlongs here is too far for him..has tired on the running at Fontwell on all 3 runs there.

Safe Investment looks to need fast ground and the going now has give in at Fontwell after rain earlier..has been beaten many times when soft appears in the going description.

Novikov looks like may struggle over the trip on easy ground

Wak A Turtle is a possible winner but poor jumping a big concern

Osmosia is running bad and again the easy ground a problem

the others are out of form and again don't jump well.
==============================================

nothing concrete which is a shame as the first two are vulnerable..

hoping the jumping holds up on Wak A Turtle is allowed for in a decent price so I've backed him at 9.8 and had half that stake on Novikov at 5.5 in case WAT jumps like sh1t
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top