[AusRace] Racing Digest, Vol 18, Issue 3

[Steve]

Lindsay,
I did a reply but it has never made it on to the list.
It is in the archives though.
Maybe I should have trimmed it.
Steve

On 20/06/2018 12:27 PM, Race Stats wrote:
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> I know you’re the time guru, but your post has me scratching my head.
>
> How will your standards tell you the going, when it might be a number 
> of Group 1 and Maiden races?
>
> Or in Melbourne most Group 1 races are run in Spring when the tracks 
> are better going, and Open races are run all year round.
>
> Then there’s 3200m hurdles and steeples etc, obviously the time is 
> going to be quite different to all flat races over 3200m, so the 
> hurdles and steeples will seem Heavy 10 and the flat races will seem 
> Firm 2…..just putting it out there, as that’s just an example of how 
> deriving track condition from time is error prone.
>
> Lindsay.
>
> *From:*Racing [mailto:racing-bounces at ausrace.com] *On Behalf Of *Steve
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 20 June 2018 9:20 AM
> *To:* racing at ausrace.com
> *Subject:* Re: [AusRace] Racing Digest, Vol 18, Issue 3
>
> No you don't need a time for each going.
> If you dissected the times that Tony put up as an example, you would 
> see that they are all over the place relatively.
> Most people that do it that way get, the same inconsistencies,
> And remember that word....relatively.....as it's the most important 
> thing to consider when doing time
> One time for each distance at each track is all you need.
> That way your standards will tell you the going, probably more 
> accurately than the official which is after all just an opinion of 
> whoever is doing whichever track.
>
> Good luck though as there is so many inaccurate times, wrong 
> distances, and three zillion ways of giving the section times.
>
> SteveB
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ausrace.com/pipermail/racing_ausrace.com/attachments/20180620/1ff8c022/attachment.html>