[AusRace] Co-efficient of Uncertainty (5) - EXERTION RATINGS- a system

[Tony Moffat]

Author Lowell Harbison(Munro) NZ - Part 8 Maths for Games  (1968-1971)

Mr Harbison was keen on whole numbers, short half heads, necks, half lengths
don't exist in his racing world - all of those are 1(One) and anything more
than 1 is two, more than two is 3 etc. etc.

There is no reference to behind the scenes study to allow him to use the
values as he did - it seems it was convenience, that's all, and who doesn't
want to get rid of decimals, I know I do.

His insistence of rounding up applied to race weights too. 51.5 kilograms
became 52kgs, 57.5 became 58 kind of thing.

But, and however, I have used the existing values in any explanation or
demonstration of his methods. That's convenience for you.

Another thing is this. I bet nobody else is doing it this way, now or in the
future!

EXERTION RATINGS

The form race calculations are based on the handicapped weight allocation
less apprentice allowance
Todays race calculation uses the handicapped weight allocation (disregarding
the apprentice allowance)

The form race is a prior race when the runner started from a numbered
barrier, carried the designated weight over the distance and finished in the
declared position. 

The author used the handicap weight of the horse as a base, then deducted
the barrier value from that base, then deducted the value derived from the
barrier number minus the finish position of the runner in the form race.

Update
Saturday 25/03 Rosehill
Race 1
Astero has 62kg from barrier 2 - 62-2=60 (anticipated rating)
Its form has several runs at the distance although its recent form is over
1200
58.5-9 -Minus 7 = 56.5 (exertion rating)
When 4 of its runs within 100 days are examined it is averaging 53+
However when matched with its anticipated rating it has 60 less 56.5 = 3.5
and over its recent runs it scores an average of 6.85 the best in this race.
Other commendable scores are TwoUp 1.85 12th, Miss Einstein 1.6 2nd although
all the rest, other than Astero, had negative scores in their summaries -
the anticipated value less exertion value sum

Race 2 selection was Amur 3.25 won - nil other contenders

Race 3-Stroke of Luck 1.833 unplaced (broke down?) and had negative values
in its summary

Race 4 No selection -Benaud was on 0 but had negatives in its summary

Race 5 Hard Empire unplaced 4.7

Race 6 Promise of Success loss 3.9

Race 7 Pierosa loss 2.12 Whisky something loss

Race 8 Arapaho won 3.6 Saracen Knight 6.6 loss (but will win soon!)

Race 9 Diamil 3.8 3rd

Race 10 Tamerlane won 1.6, Ita 3rd 1.5

Summary: The ANTICIPATED RATINGS are formed from the handicap weight less
the barrier number 59- 6 = 53 type of thing
The EXERTION RATINGS are formed from the handicap weight in the form race
less the barrier in that race PLUS the sum resulting from the barrier number
relevant to the finish in the race. Say, barrier 6, finished 3 - 6-3 =3 but
this is a minus figure so convert it to -3. The EXERTION RATING is handicap
weight 59, minus barrier 6, minus 3 less 6 (=-3) so 59 less 6 less -3 = 50.

The examples are disappointing and connected to how the runners ran in their
form races quite apart from an endeavour to seem scientific by involving
race weights and barriers.

Flemington went better - in the Australian Cup it went 2nd and 4th (which is
not better)

There is an Uncertainty (4) but perhaps later - it focuses on prizemoney

Another way - may be

Cheers

Tony



-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com