From tonymoffat at bigpond.com Thu Aug 1 00:52:49 2019 From: tonymoffat at bigpond.com (Tony Moffat) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2019 22:52:49 +0800 Subject: [AusRace] Barrier Blast - a system Message-ID: <000d01d547af$a000bef0$e0023cd0$@bigpond.com> Barrier Blast 2 (II) This one was sold by a magazine not related to racing, but tools! The first version selected the barrier position differently, and used a different dividend call($5) but version 2 (II) divides the maximum barrier position by 2, then takes the whole number bigger- so 13 divided by two = 6.5 scaled up to 7. So barrier 7 is your starting point and $7 is the minimum dividend call. (i)First, come inwards from 7 towards the rail and pick the runner(s) paying less than $7. (ii)Next, go wide from 7, including 7 and pick the runner(s) paying less than $7. That's it, the selection rules in their entirety. The authors advise that runners in the mid field are less pressured to find their place in the running thus tend to reserve their energy. There is a discussion regarding centrifugal force causing runners to rub (run?) into each other on a turn, causing impedance. There is also a discussion about the 'crowding' which occurs, always from the right, the outside in both directions. There is a table that modifies the selection a little when racing on clockwise turns and another that deducts a value when the running is anti-clockwise, it is +1 and -1 for the scientific bent amongst us. The (II) version modifies the rules a little, also again, when the middle barrier number decision becomes the minimum dividend call. We had been using $5, then $7.00, and now it is the barrier number converted to $dividend. An 18 runner field would have 9 as the middle barrier and $9 as the minimum dividend call. This is the method I used in the results. Selection ties are decided by (a) choosing the runner closest to the middle barrier, or (b) boxing all selections in a quinella. Today: 31/07/2019 Sale R2 9 runners -4.5 ($5) -(i) 1st, (ii) 2nd Sale R3 13 runners - ($7)- (i) 1st SA R1 7 runners -($4)- (i) 1st and 2nd Sr1 8 runners - ($4) - (i) 1st Sale R4 13 runners - ($7) - (i) Fail (ii) 1st BR2 9 runners - ($5) - (i)DNQ (ii) 1st SA R2 7 runners - ($4)- (i)DNQ (ii) 1st SR2 8 runners - ($4) - (i) DNQ (ii) 1st Sale R5 14 runners - ($7) - (i) Fail (ii) 1st SR 3 11 runners - ($6) -(i) 1st 10 from 10 there Q1: is it the barrier? cheers Tony --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com From tonymoffat at bigpond.com Thu Aug 8 17:06:24 2019 From: tonymoffat at bigpond.com (Tony Moffat) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 15:06:24 +0800 Subject: [AusRace] Moderating influences in the running of racehorses - pt 4 Message-ID: <000a01d54db7$cb0b3180$61219480$@bigpond.com> All the words and numbers are here https://www.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00560.2011 If you knew, or had an oversight of the topography of todays course, this would be important. The 'stitch' at Randwick (old) for instance was often cited as a cruelling climb for tiring horses. It is (was) obvious, a view downslope almost but horses overcame it to win running away, or Bernboroughlike. DISCUSSION: The aim of this study was to explore whether a constant metabolic power limit accounts for the speed of racehorses during racing. If predominantly limited by power, racehorse maximum speed would be lower on an incline and greater on a decline. Results show that highest speeds were in fact achieved on a level gradient and horses were slower on both incline and decline slopes. Incline data were consistent with a simple metabolic power limit. As gradient is increased, there is an increased power requirement to raise the COM against gravity, increasing the COM potential energy. This can be demonstrated as an energy constraint as work of forward locomotion is offset against potential energy work, as reflected in data by Eaton et al. (4). This, in turn, reflects the metabolic capacity of the animal through its ability to maintain speed on an incline. This can be utilized in the racing industry, in that, if horse speed decreases on an incline, those with the metabolic capacity to cope with the additional cost and maintain speed will take advantage over hilly races. Comparison of the cost of horizontal movement with vertical work in humans and horses can give insight into power constraints on running. Snyder and Carello (26) combined data from a number of studies to examine the additional metabolic cost of incline running in a range of bipeds and quadrupeds of different sizes. They concluded that, although there is a substantial difference between small and large animals in the size range we are discussing here, the efficiency of generating potential energy work from metabolic work (over and above horizontal running) is approximately constant. This means that differences in body mass do not confound conclusions about the effect of incline, for these animals. From the data in Fig. 4, horses gallop 0.5 m/s slower for each 1% increment in uphill gradient. From these data a horse ascending at 1 m/s vertically will gallop 3 m/s slower than on the flat (18 m/s on the flat vs. 15 m/s on a 6% slope). This equates to a trade-off of 1 vertical meter to 3 horizontal meters. Davies (2) gives a slowing of 3.3% for each 1% increase in gradient for elite human runners, a figure that is often quoted in the athletics performance literature with some anecdotal validation. At a workload equivalent to 4-min mile pace (6.7 m/s) a runner on a 6% slope will slow by 19.8%, i.e., by 0.198?6.7 = 1.33 m/s and have a vertical velocity of 0.06?(6.7?1.33) = 0.32 m/s. So for each 1 m of vertical ascent they will travel 1.33/0.32 = 4.2 m less horizontal distance. This relationship is predicted from limited data for human running, which may affect accuracy. This is interesting because published data indicate that COT (energy to move 1 kg 1 m) is almost speed independent. Furthermore the COT is about twice as high in humans [5 J?kg?1?m?1(30), 4.25 J?kg?1?m?1 (6)] than horses [2.4 J?kg?1?m?1 (14), 2.44?2.48 J?kg?1?m?1 (31)]. If the cost of doing potential energy work is similar in both then the horse should slow by twice as much as the human, because this additional cost is a much larger fraction of the total cost of transport. To the contrary, we find that the horse actually slows slightly less than the human. There are a number of potential explanations for this, including the gradients used, the accuracy of the various datasets (particularly the effect of gradient on human running speed), and differences between overground and treadmill locomotion. If horses are more efficient at performing potential energy work this may reflect an effect of the greater aerodynamic drag losses at their higher speeds, an inherent difference in their muscle efficiency or a locomotor mechanics effect. There are more paragraphs, sorry - follow link for the whole article. The topography of the course, essentially the slopes and declines of the run, would seem to be important. Conclusion During moderate duration races, horses show a speed detriment on inclines that corresponds to trading off the metabolic cost of height gain with the metabolic cost of horizontal galloping. This is consistent with existing data for human runners. From the literature, humans run faster on a decline, explained by the energy gained by the COM from height loss, but this study has shown that horses go slower, which may be attributable to the anatomical simplicity of their front legs, limiting weight support and stability. Humans appear to be power limited with an optimum gradient of 0.1?0.2 decline for maximum speed running (15, 16). During racing, horse maximum speed is less on both inclines and declines, with top speeds being achieved during level running. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com From kernow.fords at ntlworld.com Thu Aug 8 21:33:36 2019 From: kernow.fords at ntlworld.com (Robert Ford) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 12:33:36 +0100 Subject: [AusRace] Moderating influences in the running of racehorses - pt 4 In-Reply-To: <000a01d54db7$cb0b3180$61219480$@bigpond.com> References: <000a01d54db7$cb0b3180$61219480$@bigpond.com> Message-ID: <005701d54ddd$1ec51000$5c4f3000$@ntlworld.com> Hi Tony, The effect of inclines and bends is more apparent in UK due to the huge variations in track layouts as the less useful land topographies were used as race tracks. The Epsom Derby is a classic example: 3 furlongs uphill, 4 furlongs downhill to hit a bend into the straight., 5 furlong uphill on a camber to the finishing line. Are the horse going slower in the first 3 furlongs just because of the incline or are they easing off tactically for position? The downhill 4 furlongs - are they running slower as the horse is preserving its life from a fall if it loses its action, so reduces its stride length? Large galloper horse builds often really struggle here against their close coupled, sharper actioned rivals. Which might explain why Newmarket 2000g winners have such poor records. Does the lower energy input downhill mean less lactic acid build up so that it is more able to produce a faster finish when it is on the straight? The running horse produced energy cannot be stored - which is a myth arising from treating it the same as petrol stored in a vehicle tank. Does the uphill finish allow the horse to handle the camber better if they drift towards the guidance of the far rail? Every question leads to more questions which is what makes the sport interesting. Best wishes, Robert -----Original Message----- From: Racing [mailto:racing-bounces at ausrace.com] On Behalf Of Tony Moffat Sent: 08 August 2019 08:06 To: 'AusRace Racing Discussion List' Subject: [AusRace] Moderating influences in the running of racehorses - pt 4 All the words and numbers are here https://www.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00560.2011 If you knew, or had an oversight of the topography of todays course, this would be important. The 'stitch' at Randwick (old) for instance was often cited as a cruelling climb for tiring horses. It is (was) obvious, a view downslope almost but horses overcame it to win running away, or Bernboroughlike. DISCUSSION: The aim of this study was to explore whether a constant metabolic power limit accounts for the speed of racehorses during racing. If predominantly limited by power, racehorse maximum speed would be lower on an incline and greater on a decline. Results show that highest speeds were in fact achieved on a level gradient and horses were slower on both incline and decline slopes. Incline data were consistent with a simple metabolic power limit. As gradient is increased, there is an increased power requirement to raise the COM against gravity, increasing the COM potential energy. This can be demonstrated as an energy constraint as work of forward locomotion is offset against potential energy work, as reflected in data by Eaton et al. (4). This, in turn, reflects the metabolic capacity of the animal through its ability to maintain speed on an incline. This can be utilized in the racing industry, in that, if horse speed decreases on an incline, those with the metabolic capacity to cope with the additional cost and maintain speed will take advantage over hilly races. Comparison of the cost of horizontal movement with vertical work in humans and horses can give insight into power constraints on running. Snyder and Carello (26) combined data from a number of studies to examine the additional metabolic cost of incline running in a range of bipeds and quadrupeds of different sizes. They concluded that, although there is a substantial difference between small and large animals in the size range we are discussing here, the efficiency of generating potential energy work from metabolic work (over and above horizontal running) is approximately constant. This means that differences in body mass do not confound conclusions about the effect of incline, for these animals. From the data in Fig. 4, horses gallop 0.5 m/s slower for each 1% increment in uphill gradient. From these data a horse ascending at 1 m/s vertically will gallop 3 m/s slower than on the flat (18 m/s on the flat vs. 15 m/s on a 6% slope). This equates to a trade-off of 1 vertical meter to 3 horizontal meters. Davies (2) gives a slowing of 3.3% for each 1% increase in gradient for elite human runners, a figure that is often quoted in the athletics performance literature with some anecdotal validation. At a workload equivalent to 4-min mile pace (6.7 m/s) a runner on a 6% slope will slow by 19.8%, i.e., by 0.198?6.7 = 1.33 m/s and have a vertical velocity of 0.06?(6.7?1.33) = 0.32 m/s. So for each 1 m of vertical ascent they will travel 1.33/0.32 = 4.2 m less horizontal distance. This relationship is predicted from limited data for human running, which may affect accuracy. This is interesting because published data indicate that COT (energy to move 1 kg 1 m) is almost speed independent. Furthermore the COT is about twice as high in humans [5 J?kg?1?m?1(30), 4.25 J?kg?1?m?1 (6)] than horses [2.4 J?kg?1?m?1 (14), 2.44?2.48 J?kg?1?m?1 (31)]. If the cost of doing potential energy work is similar in both then the horse should slow by twice as much as the human, because this additional cost is a much larger fraction of the total cost of transport. To the contrary, we find that the horse actually slows slightly less than the human. There are a number of potential explanations for this, including the gradients used, the accuracy of the various datasets (particularly the effect of gradient on human running speed), and differences between overground and treadmill locomotion. If horses are more efficient at performing potential energy work this may reflect an effect of the greater aerodynamic drag losses at their higher speeds, an inherent difference in their muscle efficiency or a locomotor mechanics effect. There are more paragraphs, sorry - follow link for the whole article. The topography of the course, essentially the slopes and declines of the run, would seem to be important. Conclusion During moderate duration races, horses show a speed detriment on inclines that corresponds to trading off the metabolic cost of height gain with the metabolic cost of horizontal galloping. This is consistent with existing data for human runners. From the literature, humans run faster on a decline, explained by the energy gained by the COM from height loss, but this study has shown that horses go slower, which may be attributable to the anatomical simplicity of their front legs, limiting weight support and stability. Humans appear to be power limited with an optimum gradient of 0.1?0.2 decline for maximum speed running (15, 16). During racing, horse maximum speed is less on both inclines and declines, with top speeds being achieved during level running. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Racing mailing list Racing at ausrace.com http://ausrace.com/mailman/listinfo/racing_ausrace.com From tonymoffat at bigpond.com Thu Aug 8 23:40:43 2019 From: tonymoffat at bigpond.com (Tony Moffat) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 21:40:43 +0800 Subject: [AusRace] FW: Moderating influences in the running of racehorses - pt 4 In-Reply-To: <005701d54ddd$1ec51000$5c4f3000$@ntlworld.com> References: <000a01d54db7$cb0b3180$61219480$@bigpond.com> <005701d54ddd$1ec51000$5c4f3000$@ntlworld.com> Message-ID: <000a01d54dee$e17b5850$a47208f0$@bigpond.com> Robert, thanks - the description of the Goodwood track looked daunting also What I have been doing/trying is reducing the effort expenditure to a number, without decimals, hampered ultimately by not knowing Hkg (weight of horse) but using in an equation the handicap weight*100 in order to get it ticking over. Other racing jurisdictions (Asian) publish the horse weight. Greyhounds also. Vhttps://jeb.biologists.org/content/211/6/945 is a further expose (with a pleasing title - High Speed Locomotion in the Racehorse - got me straight away) cheers Tony -----Original Message----- From: Racing [mailto:racing-bounces at ausrace.com] On Behalf Of Robert Ford Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 7:34 PM To: 'AusRace Racing Discussion List' Subject: Re: [AusRace] Moderating influences in the running of racehorses - pt 4 Hi Tony, The effect of inclines and bends is more apparent in UK due to the huge variations in track layouts as the less useful land topographies were used as race tracks. The Epsom Derby is a classic example: 3 furlongs uphill, 4 furlongs downhill to hit a bend into the straight., 5 furlong uphill on a camber to the finishing line. Are the horse going slower in the first 3 furlongs just because of the incline or are they easing off tactically for position? The downhill 4 furlongs - are they running slower as the horse is preserving its life from a fall if it loses its action, so reduces its stride length? Large galloper horse builds often really struggle here against their close coupled, sharper actioned rivals. Which might explain why Newmarket 2000g winners have such poor records. Does the lower energy input downhill mean less lactic acid build up so that it is more able to produce a faster finish when it is on the straight? The running horse produced energy cannot be stored - which is a myth arising from treating it the same as petrol stored in a vehicle tank. Does the uphill finish allow the horse to handle the camber better if they drift towards the guidance of the far rail? Every question leads to more questions which is what makes the sport interesting. Best wishes, Robert -----Original Message----- From: Racing [mailto:racing-bounces at ausrace.com] On Behalf Of Tony Moffat Sent: 08 August 2019 08:06 To: 'AusRace Racing Discussion List' Subject: [AusRace] Moderating influences in the running of racehorses - pt 4 All the words and numbers are here https://www.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00560.2011 If you knew, or had an oversight of the topography of todays course, this would be important. The 'stitch' at Randwick (old) for instance was often cited as a cruelling climb for tiring horses. It is (was) obvious, a view downslope almost but horses overcame it to win running away, or Bernboroughlike. DISCUSSION: The aim of this study was to explore whether a constant metabolic power limit accounts for the speed of racehorses during racing. If predominantly limited by power, racehorse maximum speed would be lower on an incline and greater on a decline. Results show that highest speeds were in fact achieved on a level gradient and horses were slower on both incline and decline slopes. Incline data were consistent with a simple metabolic power limit. As gradient is increased, there is an increased power requirement to raise the COM against gravity, increasing the COM potential energy. This can be demonstrated as an energy constraint as work of forward locomotion is offset against potential energy work, as reflected in data by Eaton et al. (4). This, in turn, reflects the metabolic capacity of the animal through its ability to maintain speed on an incline. This can be utilized in the racing industry, in that, if horse speed decreases on an incline, those with the metabolic capacity to cope with the additional cost and maintain speed will take advantage over hilly races. Comparison of the cost of horizontal movement with vertical work in humans and horses can give insight into power constraints on running. Snyder and Carello (26) combined data from a number of studies to examine the additional metabolic cost of incline running in a range of bipeds and quadrupeds of different sizes. They concluded that, although there is a substantial difference between small and large animals in the size range we are discussing here, the efficiency of generating potential energy work from metabolic work (over and above horizontal running) is approximately constant. This means that differences in body mass do not confound conclusions about the effect of incline, for these animals. From the data in Fig. 4, horses gallop 0.5 m/s slower for each 1% increment in uphill gradient. From these data a horse ascending at 1 m/s vertically will gallop 3 m/s slower than on the flat (18 m/s on the flat vs. 15 m/s on a 6% slope). This equates to a trade-off of 1 vertical meter to 3 horizontal meters. Davies (2) gives a slowing of 3.3% for each 1% increase in gradient for elite human runners, a figure that is often quoted in the athletics performance literature with some anecdotal validation. At a workload equivalent to 4-min mile pace (6.7 m/s) a runner on a 6% slope will slow by 19.8%, i.e., by 0.198?6.7 = 1.33 m/s and have a vertical velocity of 0.06?(6.7?1.33) = 0.32 m/s. So for each 1 m of vertical ascent they will travel 1.33/0.32 = 4.2 m less horizontal distance. This relationship is predicted from limited data for human running, which may affect accuracy. This is interesting because published data indicate that COT (energy to move 1 kg 1 m) is almost speed independent. Furthermore the COT is about twice as high in humans [5 J?kg?1?m?1(30), 4.25 J?kg?1?m?1 (6)] than horses [2.4 J?kg?1?m?1 (14), 2.44?2.48 J?kg?1?m?1 (31)]. If the cost of doing potential energy work is similar in both then the horse should slow by twice as much as the human, because this additional cost is a much larger fraction of the total cost of transport. To the contrary, we find that the horse actually slows slightly less than the human. There are a number of potential explanations for this, including the gradients used, the accuracy of the various datasets (particularly the effect of gradient on human running speed), and differences between overground and treadmill locomotion. If horses are more efficient at performing potential energy work this may reflect an effect of the greater aerodynamic drag losses at their higher speeds, an inherent difference in their muscle efficiency or a locomotor mechanics effect. There are more paragraphs, sorry - follow link for the whole article. The topography of the course, essentially the slopes and declines of the run, would seem to be important. Conclusion During moderate duration races, horses show a speed detriment on inclines that corresponds to trading off the metabolic cost of height gain with the metabolic cost of horizontal galloping. This is consistent with existing data for human runners. From the literature, humans run faster on a decline, explained by the energy gained by the COM from height loss, but this study has shown that horses go slower, which may be attributable to the anatomical simplicity of their front legs, limiting weight support and stability. Humans appear to be power limited with an optimum gradient of 0.1?0.2 decline for maximum speed running (15, 16). During racing, horse maximum speed is less on both inclines and declines, with top speeds being achieved during level running. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Racing mailing list Racing at ausrace.com http://ausrace.com/mailman/listinfo/racing_ausrace.com _______________________________________________ Racing mailing list Racing at ausrace.com http://ausrace.com/mailman/listinfo/racing_ausrace.com From kernow.fords at ntlworld.com Fri Aug 9 01:13:02 2019 From: kernow.fords at ntlworld.com (Robert Ford) Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 16:13:02 +0100 Subject: [AusRace] FW: Moderating influences in the running of racehorses - pt 4 In-Reply-To: <000a01d54dee$e17b5850$a47208f0$@bigpond.com> References: <000a01d54db7$cb0b3180$61219480$@bigpond.com> <005701d54ddd$1ec51000$5c4f3000$@ntlworld.com> <000a01d54dee$e17b5850$a47208f0$@bigpond.com> Message-ID: <008f01d54dfb$c598e780$50cab680$@ntlworld.com> Hi Tony, Thanks. You cannot beat the Little Eva version. One possibility is to base your horse body weights on a standard horse concept. The average weight for 3-5 year olds is about 1043 pounds from my figures. If you wish to apply your research to UK's Goodwood, here is a link to the latest Glorious Goodwood meeting sectionals. https://www.racingtv.com/racingdata You can get all the gradients etc from Google Earth Pro. KML location mark up data below: Goodwood Racecourse
Selhurstpark Rd, Chichester PO18 0PS
01243 755022 Selhurstpark Rd, Chichester PO18 0PS ]]> #listing_C https://www.google.com/earth/rpc/entity?lat=51.21132975&lng=-0.05781160000000009&fid=0x48744cd307dbd011:0xdd353cb00c4e7f5b&hl=en&gl=gb&client=earth-client&cv=7.3.2.5776&useragent=GoogleEarth/7.3.2.5776(Windows;Microsoft Windows (6.2.9200.0);en;kml:2.2;client:Pro;type:default) -0.743486,50.891614,0
Best wishes, Robert -----Original Message----- From: Racing [mailto:racing-bounces at ausrace.com] On Behalf Of Tony Moffat Sent: 08 August 2019 14:41 To: 'AusRace Racing Discussion List' Subject: [AusRace] FW: Moderating influences in the running of racehorses - pt 4 Robert, thanks - the description of the Goodwood track looked daunting also What I have been doing/trying is reducing the effort expenditure to a number, without decimals, hampered ultimately by not knowing Hkg (weight of horse) but using in an equation the handicap weight*100 in order to get it ticking over. Other racing jurisdictions (Asian) publish the horse weight. Greyhounds also. Vhttps://jeb.biologists.org/content/211/6/945 is a further expose (with a pleasing title - High Speed Locomotion in the Racehorse - got me straight away) cheers Tony -----Original Message----- From: Racing [mailto:racing-bounces at ausrace.com] On Behalf Of Robert Ford Sent: Thursday, August 8, 2019 7:34 PM To: 'AusRace Racing Discussion List' Subject: Re: [AusRace] Moderating influences in the running of racehorses - pt 4 Hi Tony, The effect of inclines and bends is more apparent in UK due to the huge variations in track layouts as the less useful land topographies were used as race tracks. The Epsom Derby is a classic example: 3 furlongs uphill, 4 furlongs downhill to hit a bend into the straight., 5 furlong uphill on a camber to the finishing line. Are the horse going slower in the first 3 furlongs just because of the incline or are they easing off tactically for position? The downhill 4 furlongs - are they running slower as the horse is preserving its life from a fall if it loses its action, so reduces its stride length? Large galloper horse builds often really struggle here against their close coupled, sharper actioned rivals. Which might explain why Newmarket 2000g winners have such poor records. Does the lower energy input downhill mean less lactic acid build up so that it is more able to produce a faster finish when it is on the straight? The running horse produced energy cannot be stored - which is a myth arising from treating it the same as petrol stored in a vehicle tank. Does the uphill finish allow the horse to handle the camber better if they drift towards the guidance of the far rail? Every question leads to more questions which is what makes the sport interesting. Best wishes, Robert -----Original Message----- From: Racing [mailto:racing-bounces at ausrace.com] On Behalf Of Tony Moffat Sent: 08 August 2019 08:06 To: 'AusRace Racing Discussion List' Subject: [AusRace] Moderating influences in the running of racehorses - pt 4 All the words and numbers are here https://www.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/japplphysiol.00560.2011 If you knew, or had an oversight of the topography of todays course, this would be important. The 'stitch' at Randwick (old) for instance was often cited as a cruelling climb for tiring horses. It is (was) obvious, a view downslope almost but horses overcame it to win running away, or Bernboroughlike. DISCUSSION: The aim of this study was to explore whether a constant metabolic power limit accounts for the speed of racehorses during racing. If predominantly limited by power, racehorse maximum speed would be lower on an incline and greater on a decline. Results show that highest speeds were in fact achieved on a level gradient and horses were slower on both incline and decline slopes. Incline data were consistent with a simple metabolic power limit. As gradient is increased, there is an increased power requirement to raise the COM against gravity, increasing the COM potential energy. This can be demonstrated as an energy constraint as work of forward locomotion is offset against potential energy work, as reflected in data by Eaton et al. (4). This, in turn, reflects the metabolic capacity of the animal through its ability to maintain speed on an incline. This can be utilized in the racing industry, in that, if horse speed decreases on an incline, those with the metabolic capacity to cope with the additional cost and maintain speed will take advantage over hilly races. Comparison of the cost of horizontal movement with vertical work in humans and horses can give insight into power constraints on running. Snyder and Carello (26) combined data from a number of studies to examine the additional metabolic cost of incline running in a range of bipeds and quadrupeds of different sizes. They concluded that, although there is a substantial difference between small and large animals in the size range we are discussing here, the efficiency of generating potential energy work from metabolic work (over and above horizontal running) is approximately constant. This means that differences in body mass do not confound conclusions about the effect of incline, for these animals. From the data in Fig. 4, horses gallop 0.5 m/s slower for each 1% increment in uphill gradient. From these data a horse ascending at 1 m/s vertically will gallop 3 m/s slower than on the flat (18 m/s on the flat vs. 15 m/s on a 6% slope). This equates to a trade-off of 1 vertical meter to 3 horizontal meters. Davies (2) gives a slowing of 3.3% for each 1% increase in gradient for elite human runners, a figure that is often quoted in the athletics performance literature with some anecdotal validation. At a workload equivalent to 4-min mile pace (6.7 m/s) a runner on a 6% slope will slow by 19.8%, i.e., by 0.198?6.7 = 1.33 m/s and have a vertical velocity of 0.06?(6.7?1.33) = 0.32 m/s. So for each 1 m of vertical ascent they will travel 1.33/0.32 = 4.2 m less horizontal distance. This relationship is predicted from limited data for human running, which may affect accuracy. This is interesting because published data indicate that COT (energy to move 1 kg 1 m) is almost speed independent. Furthermore the COT is about twice as high in humans [5 J?kg?1?m?1(30), 4.25 J?kg?1?m?1 (6)] than horses [2.4 J?kg?1?m?1 (14), 2.44?2.48 J?kg?1?m?1 (31)]. If the cost of doing potential energy work is similar in both then the horse should slow by twice as much as the human, because this additional cost is a much larger fraction of the total cost of transport. To the contrary, we find that the horse actually slows slightly less than the human. There are a number of potential explanations for this, including the gradients used, the accuracy of the various datasets (particularly the effect of gradient on human running speed), and differences between overground and treadmill locomotion. If horses are more efficient at performing potential energy work this may reflect an effect of the greater aerodynamic drag losses at their higher speeds, an inherent difference in their muscle efficiency or a locomotor mechanics effect. There are more paragraphs, sorry - follow link for the whole article. The topography of the course, essentially the slopes and declines of the run, would seem to be important. Conclusion During moderate duration races, horses show a speed detriment on inclines that corresponds to trading off the metabolic cost of height gain with the metabolic cost of horizontal galloping. This is consistent with existing data for human runners. From the literature, humans run faster on a decline, explained by the energy gained by the COM from height loss, but this study has shown that horses go slower, which may be attributable to the anatomical simplicity of their front legs, limiting weight support and stability. Humans appear to be power limited with an optimum gradient of 0.1?0.2 decline for maximum speed running (15, 16). During racing, horse maximum speed is less on both inclines and declines, with top speeds being achieved during level running. --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com _______________________________________________ Racing mailing list Racing at ausrace.com http://ausrace.com/mailman/listinfo/racing_ausrace.com _______________________________________________ Racing mailing list Racing at ausrace.com http://ausrace.com/mailman/listinfo/racing_ausrace.com _______________________________________________ Racing mailing list Racing at ausrace.com http://ausrace.com/mailman/listinfo/racing_ausrace.com From tonymoffat at bigpond.com Sun Aug 18 13:37:47 2019 From: tonymoffat at bigpond.com (Tony Moffat) Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2019 11:37:47 +0800 Subject: [AusRace] Jockey Plan - a system Message-ID: <000c01d55576$4e353770$ea9fa650$@bigpond.com> This one was never for sale - it is/was the private plan of a man who tipped me the winner of the Adelaide Cup, this was in the 60's (Rainlover). What happened was this man was reading The Sportsman in the hotel on Friday -and that is amazing. Getting a newspaper on the day of publication in that town was impossible, rare, difficult. The Sportsman is published on Friday and it gets taken to the train for distribution across the state (NSW). There is a mail train that leaves at 2.00pm from Central for Albury and your paper might be on that, otherwise, it will be on one of three expresses leaving later in the day and evening. Everything, trainwise, pauses at Coota for the regulatory 2 minutes before the whistle goes and so does the train. Trouble is now it is evening, after closing of the shops, and most everything, and the papers sit there, bundles or rolled up and they are not collected until the following morning when they become available for sale. Most Saturdays I rode the 41 miles from home to Cootamundra for The Sportsman, Fridays SMH, and anything else newsworthy and did the business at the rear door of the shop. I was home by 8.00am mostly. I worked in the hotel on Friday evenings, with the town SP as it happened, and this was as a volunteer for the football club. The man with the paper had stopped here on his way to Adelaide for the Cup I told you about before. I noticed the paper and the horse racing conversation went from there. His paper came from Parramatta, he drove the intervening hours to where we were, and he left the paper with me. His plan, there may have been several, was to use the stats in The Sportsman to choose the hot jockeys although his stats were from the previous 12 months. There is/was a table in the paper which shows the money earned for the last 100 rides, the win and place stats for those, plus other information that he used. His plan is not centred around the win or place record of the riders although it is from the riders last 100 rides, so it transcends the racing year which seems to reset itself in August. He uses either the win and place record of the riders last 100 rides, or, the money earned off the jockeys last 100 rides. The money clause was then only available for metro Melbourne and Sydney racing whereas the win/place record is available for most centres. The first 4 riders calculated off one set of data are often the same when using the other data, only the ranking between the sets differs. The money clause seemed to be stronger although he said it was a personal preference, it seemed to involve something others may not have been using (although the stats were provided exactly for that) After the best 4 riders were chosen, their rides were tested also on an average prizemoney (now API) and place ranking. From this he selected his bets, one of the best 4 riders, riding one of the best horses (off their API and place ranking) Summary: Riders - List the first 4 riders using their money earned off their last 100 rides Horses- List the first 4 runners with the highest API and the biggest place strike rate per centage. Choose your bets from any rider (from their earnings) on any of the best horses (from their stats). How to avoid a blockage is your problem, occasionally the best two riders are on horses 3 and 4 in the stats Or some other combination of first and second or otherwise from the three data sets. It appears (seems) that the best of both are often the race favourite - read on The system picked the winners of Caulfield R1, R2,R3, R5, and R9 Caulfield R9 17/08/19 - 5 Grey Shadow, 12 Victory Kingdom (this was Allen/Kah on 1/2nd choice off horse stats) 9.00/5.00 This shows the conundrum, the blockage mentioned, decided by horse stats and not by rider ability solely - good luck with this. Caulfield R8 17/08/19 - 1 Hartnell perhaps and Kenedna but in effect there were others, including the winner who could be counted in Caulfield R7 17/08/19 - The winner was missed, rider choice 1 and 2 ignored, and choice 3 and 4 on horse 1 and 2 ran into the places. Caulfield R6 17/08/19 - 4 Exhilarates won and it was 2nd on rider score and second on horse score. 7.00 Caulfield R5 17/08/19 - 6 Age of Chivalry won - this was the system working as planned. 2.40 Caulfield R4 17/08/19 - The winner was missed, poor horse stats, nothing joyful happened when combining any of the data - stay out Caulfield R2 17/08/19 - 1st and 2nd chosen - this was the system working as planned Caulfield R1 17/08/19 - 1st and 2nd chosen - this was the system working as planned Who bets every race? anyway. Race 3 was ignored 6 runners (and no joy either) - I wouldn't evaluate this one off one days racing. Other meetings were similarly successful. I have sometimes regarded the jockey as a necessary requirement, there to wear a colorful shirt, carry the correct weight, steer, and pull faces at the end, and blame the barrier when finishing further back than 4th. The top few jockeys made a difference here. The mans working on form in races is interesting. Next time. Cheers Tony --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com From tonymoffat at bigpond.com Tue Aug 20 23:52:06 2019 From: tonymoffat at bigpond.com (Tony Moffat) Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2019 21:52:06 +0800 Subject: [AusRace] Straight Six - a system Message-ID: <001901d5575e$754d24f0$5fe76ed0$@bigpond.com> This one was glued to the wall of a pub within sound and sight of the Straight at Flemington. In an ante room, a closed off area for darts, and on the right wall as you aimed at one of three boards was a message board and this system was there. There were several, more, 7 or so, systems pasted up there. You took your life in your hands reading it, anything, what with darts in flight, drunks aiming them, and the general lack of bonhomie in the place, and the ads - 'ring Helen for an hour of soft love' and no I didn't, ring, and even na?ve me could see a problem with the 'soft love' assertion. What they did have was the best chicken parmi and it was pre cooked and didn't seem to sit around long and nobody I know died from eating it. The man who assembled it, the chicken in a bun, used his fingers, and spoke in single word questions, like 'salad', 'salt', 'sauce' and you got your pot for half price and there were baskets of chips everywhere anyway. A question of cleanliness, germiness, best practice or the use of gloves or some concurrence with the Service of Food Act somehow would be met with a surly 'do you want the thing or doncha'. He made some, 5, then went away to the other side of the semi-circular bar to dispense drinks, and you waited and when he returned you got yours. You could get fed without speaking, just standing in line was judicial notice it was the chicken parmi you wanted. So efficient. That dart room got painted over and the message board went. I did write down the rules of the plans on the wall before this though. Nobody there knew the history of those, the why or what fors, there was no TAB, I am unsure about a SP, you would have to say yes, and I hope that Helen is happily retired. (1)The only races to consider are those run over the straight course at Flemington, 6 furlongs (this was then) (2) Disregard the favorite except in rule (5) (3) The runners to be considered are those who have raced over a mile on the course, or have raced over a similar distance - (T) or (d)* (4) Selections must not be favorite, ridden by apprentices, be back from a let up. (5) Selections must have form, and if previous rules fail to produce a selection, and the favorite has the required attributes, and is the only selection, it can be backed. (6) Ignored - male runners only (7) Ignored - can be female if the runner has the required attributes, and it is the only selection (and it is favorite, somebody wrote that in later but) (8) Up to (-) runners can be supported if odds allowed - the number (a 3 it may have been) was erased, or had a dart point hole through it right at that location. There is a long paragraph outlining the layout of the straight course, which I foolishly did not copy entirely. From the barrier to the corner, the course proper comes in from the left some distance out, there is a definite down slope. After that there is a rise, then a plateau to the post. There is a 7 foot height differential between the start line and the finish line, although it dips to 18 feet at its deepest point (so says the paper). There is no mention of the 5 furlong races there, these start in front of the 6 furlong races (obviously) It is not highlighted, but perhaps should have been, that the straight six is a test because of the ground undulation, in addition to the speed aspect. So, that would go some of the way to explaining the mile requirement. A strong miler is a beast of beauty, anywhere, and more so here at this course. Old timers, which is another way of saying those in the game, do consider the straight six a hard on the horse race, there is the weather, the wind is not ameliorated by cover so much, all runners seem to advance similarly, there is that run down hill then a requirement to sprint up hill to the finish, there are occasionally 'divisions', inside,outside and middle and each of those is a race in itself, Sydney (and Qld) runners do well here, and running is often on the crown of the track unaffected by previous four legged tractors. Rule (3) has an obscure meaning -(a) over a mile here, or over a mile elsewhere, or over a similar distance (6 furlongs then, 6 furlongs today). The correct amount of finesse, to get a bet, would be a run over a mile sometime, as a first choice runner. Otherwise, to get a bet, a form run over a similar distance (then/now). Cheers Tony . --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com From tonymoffat at bigpond.com Fri Aug 23 01:09:29 2019 From: tonymoffat at bigpond.com (Tony Moffat) Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 23:09:29 +0800 Subject: [AusRace] Partner - a horse tale Message-ID: <000501d558fb$9928ef50$cb7acdf0$@bigpond.com> They sold him for 130 and bought him back for 180 "Whenever they think how they stranded, They squeal just like guinea-pigs squeal; They bit their own hook, and were landed With fifty pounds loss on the deal." I had this poem as an elective in Poetry and Prose in first year high school, by choice. Others went for Dorethea Mckellar, Rupert Somebody, Elizabeth Somebodyelse and a couple of others who were suspect as to intention in the extreme. The Banjo was good enough for me - and I thank him for it. OUR NEW HORSE (AB Paterson) THE boys had come back from the races All silent and down on their luck; They'd backed 'em, straight out and for places, But never a winner they struck. They lost their good money on Slogan, And fell, most uncommonly flat, When Partner, the pride of the Bogan, Was beaten by Aristocrat. And one said, 'I move that instanter 'We sell out our horses and quit, 'The brutes ought to win in a canter, 'Such trials they do when they're fit. 'The last one they ran was a snorter - 'A gallop to gladden one's heart - 'Two-twelve for a mile and a quarter, 'And finished as straight as a dart. 'And then when I think that they're ready 'To win me a nice little swag, 'They are licked like the veriest neddy - 'They're licked from the fall of the flag. 'The mare held her own to the stable, 'She died out to nothing at that, 'And Partner he never seemed able 'To pace it with Aristocrat. 'And times have been bad, and the seasons 'Don't promise to be of the best; 'In short, boys, there's plenty of reasons 'For giving the racing a rest. The mare can be kept on the station - 'Her breeding is good as can be - 'But Partner, his next destination 'Is rather a trouble to me. 'We can't sell him here, for they know him 'As well as the clerk of the course; 'He's raced and won races till, blow him, 'He's done as a handicap horse. 'A jady, uncertain performer, 'They weight him right out of the hunt, 'And clap it on warmer and warmer 'Whenever he gets near the front. 'It's no use to paint him or dot him 'Or put any 'fake' on his brand, 'For bushmen are smart, and they'd spot him 'In any sale-yard in the land. 'The folk about here could all tell him, 'Could swear to each separate hair; 'Let us send him to Sydney and sell him, 'There's plenty of Jugginses there. 'We'll call him a maiden, and treat 'em 'To trials will open their eyes, 'We'll run their best horses and beat 'em, 'And then won't they think him a prize. 'I pity the fellow that buys him, 'He'll find in a very short space, 'No matter how highly he tries him, 'The beggar won't race in a race.' * * * * * Next week, under 'Seller and Buyer', Appeared in the Daily Gazette: 'A racehorse for sale, and a flyer; 'Has never been started as yet; 'A trial will show what his pace is; 'The buyer can get him in light, 'And win all the handicap races. 'Apply here before Wednesday night.' He sold for a hundred and thirty, Because of a gallop he had One morning with Bluefish and Bertie, And donkey-licked both of 'em bad. And when the old horse had departed, The life on the station grew tame; The race-track was dull and deserted, The boys had gone back on the game. * * * * * The winter rolled by, and the station Was green with the garland of spring A spirit of glad exultation Awoke in each animate thing. And all the old love, the old longing, Broke out in the breasts of the boys, The visions of racing came thronging With all its delirious joys. The rushing of floods in their courses, The rattle of rain on the roofs Recalled the fierce rush of the horses, The thunder of galloping hoofs. And soon one broke out: 'I can suffer 'No longer the life of a slug, 'The man that don't race is a duffer, 'Let's have one more run for the mug.' 'Why, everything races, no matter Whatever its method may be: The waterfowl hold a regatta; The 'possums run heats up a tree; The emus are constantly sprinting A handicap out on the plain; It seems like all nature was hinting, 'Tis time to be at it again. 'The cockatoo parrots are talking Of races to far away lands; The native companions are walking A go-as-you-please on the sands; The little foals gallop for pastime; The wallabies race down the gap; Let's try it once more for the last time, Bring out the old jacket and cap. 'And now for a horse; we might try one Of those that are bred on the place, But I think it better to buy one, A horse that has proved he can race. Let us send down to Sydney to Skinner, A thorough good judge who can ride, And ask him to buy us a spinner To clean out the whole countryside.' They wrote him a letter as follows: 'We want you to buy us a horse; 'He must have the speed to catch swallows, 'And stamina with it of course. 'The price ain't a thing that'll grieve us, 'It's getting a bad 'un annoys 'The undersigned blokes, and believe us, 'We're yours to a cinder, 'the boys'.' He answered: 'I've bought you a hummer, 'A horse that has never been raced; 'I saw him run over the Drummer, 'He held him outclassed and outpaced. 'His breeding's not known, but they state he 'Is born of a thoroughbred strain, 'I paid them a hundred and eighty, 'And started the horse in the train.' They met him - alas, that these verses Aren't up to the subject's demands - Can't set forth their eloquent curses, For Partner was back on their hands. They went in to meet him in gladness, They opened his box with delight - A silent procession of sadness They crept to the station at night. And life has grown dull on the station, The boys are all silent and slow; Their work is a daily vexation, And sport is unknown to them now. Whenever they think how they stranded, They squeal just like guinea-pigs squeal; They bit their own hook, and were landed With fifty pounds loss on the deal. Cheers Tony --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com From norsaintpublishing at gmail.com Sun Aug 25 14:37:35 2019 From: norsaintpublishing at gmail.com (norsaintpublishing at gmail.com) Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 14:37:35 +1000 Subject: [AusRace] Jockey Plan - a system In-Reply-To: <000c01d55576$4e353770$ea9fa650$@bigpond.com> References: <000c01d55576$4e353770$ea9fa650$@bigpond.com> Message-ID: Speaking of formguides and their arrival dates, Best Bets is now available in a lot of places in Victoria at least, on Thursday morning. However for some reason, it doesn't make Mornington (an hour from Melbourne - where it's printed) until Friday. I used to have to drive to Frankston (10 minutes away) to pick it up on the Thursday. And yet the same publication is available in Brisbane on Thursday mornings apparently. At Cairns, it turns up on a Friday, the same as Mornington. As the man says, go figure. On Sun, 18 Aug 2019 at 13:38, Tony Moffat wrote: > This one was never for sale - it is/was the private plan of a man who > tipped > me the winner of the Adelaide Cup, this was in the 60's (Rainlover). > > What happened was this man was reading The Sportsman in the hotel on Friday > -and that is amazing. Getting a newspaper on the day of publication in that > town was impossible, rare, difficult. > > The Sportsman is published on Friday and it gets taken to the train for > distribution across the state (NSW). There is a mail train that leaves at > 2.00pm from Central for Albury and your paper might be on that, otherwise, > it will be on one of three expresses leaving later in the day and evening. > Everything, trainwise, pauses at Coota for the regulatory 2 minutes before > the whistle goes and so does the train. Trouble is now it is evening, after > closing of the shops, and most everything, and the papers sit there, > bundles > or rolled up and they are not collected until the following morning when > they become available for sale. > > Most Saturdays I rode the 41 miles from home to Cootamundra for The > Sportsman, Fridays SMH, and anything else newsworthy and did the business > at > the rear door of the shop. I was home by 8.00am mostly. I worked in the > hotel on Friday evenings, with the town SP as it happened, and this was as > a > volunteer for the football club. The man with the paper had stopped here on > his way to Adelaide for the Cup I told you about before. I noticed the > paper > and the horse racing conversation went from there. His paper came from > Parramatta, he drove the intervening hours to where we were, and he left > the > paper with me. > > His plan, there may have been several, was to use the stats in The > Sportsman > to choose the hot jockeys although his stats were from the previous 12 > months. There is/was a table in the paper which shows the money earned for > the last 100 rides, the win and place stats for those, plus other > information that he used. His plan is not centred around the win or place > record of the riders although it is from the riders last 100 rides, so it > transcends the racing year which seems to reset itself in August. He uses > either the win and place record of the riders last 100 rides, or, the money > earned off the jockeys last 100 rides. The money clause was then only > available for metro Melbourne and Sydney racing whereas the win/place > record > is available for most centres. The first 4 riders calculated off one set of > data are often the same when using the other data, only the ranking between > the sets differs. The money clause seemed to be stronger although he said > it > was a personal preference, it seemed to involve something others may not > have been using (although the stats were provided exactly for that) After > the best 4 riders were chosen, their rides were tested also on an average > prizemoney (now API) and place ranking. From this he selected his bets, one > of the best 4 riders, riding one of the best horses (off their API and > place > ranking) > > Summary: > Riders - List the first 4 riders using their money earned off their last > 100 > rides > Horses- List the first 4 runners with the highest API and the biggest place > strike rate per centage. > > Choose your bets from any rider (from their earnings) on any of the best > horses (from their stats). > How to avoid a blockage is your problem, occasionally the best two riders > are on horses 3 and 4 in the stats > Or some other combination of first and second or otherwise from the three > data sets. > > It appears (seems) that the best of both are often the race favourite - > read > on > > The system picked the winners of > Caulfield R1, R2,R3, R5, and R9 > > Caulfield R9 17/08/19 - 5 Grey Shadow, 12 Victory Kingdom (this was > Allen/Kah on 1/2nd choice off horse stats) 9.00/5.00 > This shows the conundrum, the blockage mentioned, decided by horse stats > and > not by rider ability solely - good luck with this. > Caulfield R8 17/08/19 - 1 Hartnell perhaps and Kenedna but in effect there > were others, including the winner who could be counted in > Caulfield R7 17/08/19 - The winner was missed, rider choice 1 and 2 > ignored, > and choice 3 and 4 on horse 1 and 2 ran into the places. > Caulfield R6 17/08/19 - 4 Exhilarates won and it was 2nd on rider score and > second on horse score. 7.00 > Caulfield R5 17/08/19 - 6 Age of Chivalry won - this was the system > working > as planned. 2.40 > Caulfield R4 17/08/19 - The winner was missed, poor horse stats, nothing > joyful happened when combining any of the data - stay out > Caulfield R2 17/08/19 - 1st and 2nd chosen - this was the system working > as > planned > Caulfield R1 17/08/19 - 1st and 2nd chosen - this was the system working > as > planned > > Who bets every race? anyway. Race 3 was ignored 6 runners (and no joy > either) - I wouldn't evaluate this one off one days racing. > Other meetings were similarly successful. > > I have sometimes regarded the jockey as a necessary requirement, there to > wear a colorful shirt, carry the correct weight, > steer, and pull faces at the end, and blame the barrier when finishing > further back than 4th. The top few jockeys made a difference here. > > The mans working on form in races is interesting. Next time. > > Cheers > > Tony > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > https://www.avg.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Racing mailing list > Racing at ausrace.com > http://ausrace.com/mailman/listinfo/racing_ausrace.com > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tonymoffat at bigpond.com Wed Aug 28 00:14:25 2019 From: tonymoffat at bigpond.com (Tony Moffat) Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2019 22:14:25 +0800 Subject: [AusRace] Front Page System - a system Message-ID: <000001d55ce1$bba9ebd0$32fdc370$@bigpond.com> And variation on a theme. Allen Windross wrote a thesis about gambling. It is available online, see: Betting by the Book - a study of systems adopted by bettors University of Western Sydney published March 2002. Mr Windross was CEO of TAB NSW and was an advocate of education for the punting masses. The Front Page system was developed, and written about, in the thesis, as were other plans (systems) but the Front Page was the only one developed, and offered for use. Without divulging anything much, your selection comes from the runner with a good jockey, a good trainer, a good last start finish, a good barrier, and a morning line price assessment under $21. It selected a runner in each race, you eliminated others using the rules until a single pick arrived. It worked, very well, assisted by a few long(er) priced winners early in the piece under review. The morning line price assessment clause is puzzling, a little, when surely the price is composed of elements like last start finish position, barrier, jockey, trainer so are we not doubling down on them? Anyways, there is a thesis on this, and we didn't write it so what do we know? BethelHall Publishing have a system similar to the Front Page System, except it pre-dates it by 30 years, more. In a hand assembled booklet, with oversized stapling, there are 3 pages of magic words, and 7 pages of ready to be used work sheets, one race to a page. Consider barriers out to 9 only. Ignore runners wider than 9 - so 10,11 etc. Consider last start finish positions out to ninth last start- 0 finish can be considered a ninth, it is plain the horse hasn't fired at all last start Rank the jockeys this race from their PLACE record. Rank runners this race from their PLACE record. Rank runners this race from their pre post price. The rankings were ADDED together and the runner with the least points total is the selection. There is no information about how to remove ties. Again, there is the price aspect as the final scoreline. Barriers figure loudly in systems, wide barriers are destructive to the chances of runners apparently. The author(s) write that all of the requested information is available in the fields pages of 'good' papers of the day. The place record of runners is one aspect which would not be readily available I am thinking. Scone R1 1st 1.4 Mornington R1 1st 2.10 MacKay R1 Trifecta in 1st 3 Mornington R2 1st 2.20 Mackay R2 1st 1.40 Mornington R5 1st 2.50 Scone R7 1st 2.10 Mackay R6 1st 1.80 The last races for Mackay Scone and Mornington failed to score a winner. Every other race seemed to have the winner in the first 2/3 Those listed here are 1st picks. Cheers Tony --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com From tonymoffat at bigpond.com Fri Aug 30 22:43:28 2019 From: tonymoffat at bigpond.com (Tony Moffat) Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2019 20:43:28 +0800 Subject: [AusRace] html Table of Deductions - follow up on equation sent earlier - still weird and illogical Message-ID: <001101d55f30$8677ba40$93672ec0$@bigpond.com> Odds Win Deduction Paying 3 Places Paying 2 Places 1.05 0.75 0.3 0.44 1.06 0.75 0.3 0.44 1.07 0.75 0.3 0.44 1.08 0.75 0.3 0.44 1.09 0.75 0.3 0.44 1.1 0.75 0.3 0.44 1.12 0.75 0.3 0.44 1.14 0.75 0.3 0.44 1.16 0.75 0.3 0.44 1.18 0.74 0.3 0.44 1.2 0.73 0.3 0.43 1.22 0.72 0.3 0.43 1.24 0.71 0.30 0.43 1.26 0.70 0.30 0.42 1.28 0.68 0.29 0.42 1.3 0.66 0.29 0.41 1.35 0.64 0.29 0.41 1.4 0.62 0.28 0.41 1.45 0.60 0.28 0.40 1.5 0.58 0.28 0.4 1.55 0.56 0.28 0.39 1.6 0.54 0.27 0.39 1.65 0.52 0.27 0.38 1.7 0.50 0.27 0.38 1.75 0.48 0.26 0.37 1.8 0.46 0.26 0.37 1.85 0.45 0.26 0.36 1.9 0.44 0.25 0.36 1.95 0.43 0.25 0.35 2 0.42 0.25 0.35 2.05 0.41 0.23 0.33 2.1 0.41 0.23 0.33 2.15 0.39 0.23 0.32 2.2 0.38 0.22 0.32 2.25 0.38 0.22 0.32 2.3 0.37 0.22 0.31 2.35 0.36 0.21 0.31 2.4 0.35 0.21 0.30 2.45 0.34 0.21 0.30 2.5 0.33 0.20 0.29 2.6 0.32 0.20 0.29 2.7 0.31 0.20 0.29 2.8 0.30 0.18 0.28 2.9 0.29 0.18 0.26 3 0.28 0.18 0.26 3.1 0.27 0.18 0.26 3.2 0.26 0.17 0.25 3.3 0.25 0.17 0.24 3.4 0.24 0.17 0.24 3.5 0.23 0.16 0.23 3.6 0.22 0.16 0.23 3.7 0.21 0.16 0.22 3.8 0.20 0.15 0.22 3.9 0.19 0.15 0.21 4 0.19 0.15 0.21 4.2 0.18 0.14 0.20 4.4 0.17 0.14 0.19 4.6 0.16 0.13 0.18 4.8 0.15 0.13 0.17 5 0.14 0.13 0.16 5.5 0.13 0.12 0.16 6 0.12 0.11 0.14 6.5 0.11 0.10 0.13 7 0.10 0.09 0.12 7.5 0.09 0.08 0.11 8 0.08 0.07 0.10 8.5 0.08 0.07 0.09 9 0.07 0.06 0.08 9.5 0.07 0.06 0.07 10 0.06 0.05 0.06 11 0.06 0.05 0.06 12 0.05 0.04 0.05 13 0.05 0.04 0.05 14 0.05 0.04 0.05 15 0.04 0.04 0.05 16 0.04 0.04 0.05 17 0.03 0.03 0.04 18 0.03 0.03 0.04 19 0.02 0.02 0.03 20 0.02 0.02 0.03 21 0.02 0.02 0.03 26 0.02 0.02 0.03 31 0.00 0.00 0.00 41 0.00 0.00 0.00 51 0.00 0.00 0.00 --- This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. https://www.avg.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: