THIS WEEKS ALL WEATHER FIXTURES - 26th March KEMPTON PARK- 27th March WOLVERHAMPTON- 29th March WOLVERHAMPTON - 30th March LINGFIELD PARK, KEMPTON PARK & SOUTHWELL - 31st March WOLVERHAMPTON & CHELMSFORD CITY - 1ST aPRIL LINGFIELD PARK & WOLVERHAMPTON - 2nd April KEMPTON PARK -

When the going gets tough, the winner gets going!

Having had a deluge of e-mail’s resulting from my post ‘Taking things to the next level’, some offering advice, which I thank you for and please don’t be offended if I take a different direction. Others asking me to post my ‘sectional times’ on the blog, along with a whole host of other questions. I hope this post will answer most questions (even those I didn't fully understand) and lay out my intentions.

“The obvious criticism is that the statistician's belief is subjective, and may vary from statistician to statistician. Moreover, it affects the results. Frequentists maintain that their results are based solely on the data, and therefore frequentist inference is more objective than Bayesian inference.”

Firstly my intention is not to record a sectional time for each individual horse at each furlong pole. As admirable as I find the work of those that carry out such a task, it would be meaningless to fulfil my objectives. I also believe this level of data in Horse Racing on our shores where horses are intentionally held up behind a front runner and in most cases look to do no more than follow the pace, whatever that pace may be, for the vast majority of the trip to be largely irrelevant (sorry if I offend anyone).

My intention is record the time of the last 2 furlongs and deduct that from the overall winning race time. This will result in two sets of figures: One giving me the earlier pace: One giving the finish speed. For horses beaten, time is added in accordance to the BHA LPS

At the present time there would be no mileage in publishing the figures on the blog. Until I arrive at standards for trip and track (which will be when I have enough data for the figures to remain static as each meeting is added) so we are able to correlate data between tracks using past races from 2008 to the present (with the exception of Wolverhampton'S NEW Tapeta surface).

As straight forward as the task may seem on face value, having spent the time outside of recording times for the last 2 furlong of races, reading on ‘Prior Probabilities’ and Pierre-Simon Laplace (Father of the Field of Probability) thought process expended to another consideration!

If we except (as I do) that there is a going allowance to be factored in to times on artificial surfaces, is it possible that the allowance should be applied ONLY to the finishing furlongs of a race given that most horses react negatively or favourably to the conditions only once pressure is applied?

As you can appreciate this will be a very time consuming undertaking so you will understand the infrequency of posts over the coming weeks beyond posting the daily figs. BUT if anyone has thoughts on the question posed above I look forward hearing from you ;)


Horse Racing Tips: 14-1 or 13-2?

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

When the going gets tough, the winner gets going!

Having had a deluge of e-mail’s resulting from my post ‘Taking things to the next level’, some offering advice, which I thank you for and please don’t be offended if I take a different direction. Others asking me to post my ‘sectional times’ on the blog, along with a whole host of other questions. I hope this post will answer most questions (even those I didn't fully understand) and lay out my intentions.

“The obvious criticism is that the statistician's belief is subjective, and may vary from statistician to statistician. Moreover, it affects the results. Frequentists maintain that their results are based solely on the data, and therefore frequentist inference is more objective than Bayesian inference.”

Firstly my intention is not to record a sectional time for each individual horse at each furlong pole. As admirable as I find the work of those that carry out such a task, it would be meaningless to fulfil my objectives. I also believe this level of data in Horse Racing on our shores where horses are intentionally held up behind a front runner and in most cases look to do no more than follow the pace, whatever that pace may be, for the vast majority of the trip to be largely irrelevant (sorry if I offend anyone).

My intention is record the time of the last 2 furlongs and deduct that from the overall winning race time. This will result in two sets of figures: One giving me the earlier pace: One giving the finish speed. For horses beaten, time is added in accordance to the BHA LPS

At the present time there would be no mileage in publishing the figures on the blog. Until I arrive at standards for trip and track (which will be when I have enough data for the figures to remain static as each meeting is added) so we are able to correlate data between tracks using past races from 2008 to the present (with the exception of Wolverhampton'S NEW Tapeta surface).

As straight forward as the task may seem on face value, having spent the time outside of recording times for the last 2 furlong of races, reading on ‘Prior Probabilities’ and Pierre-Simon Laplace (Father of the Field of Probability) thought process expended to another consideration!

If we except (as I do) that there is a going allowance to be factored in to times on artificial surfaces, is it possible that the allowance should be applied ONLY to the finishing furlongs of a race given that most horses react negatively or favourably to the conditions only once pressure is applied?

As you can appreciate this will be a very time consuming undertaking so you will understand the infrequency of posts over the coming weeks beyond posting the daily figs. BUT if anyone has thoughts on the question posed above I look forward hearing from you ;)