Thread for "dumb/burning questions"

Question 2: How does a novice plate race compare with for example a MR 66 race. I am struggling to assess the strength for example of a 2nd place 2 lbh in a novice and the horse now runs in a MR 66 for example.

Stating the obvious, a Novice Plate is contested by 1-time winners - so not all Novice plates have the same 'class' of runner; usually one would rate the horse in your example by comparing it against the winner - so a horse running 2nd, 2 lbh a horse rated 80 (at level weights in a Novice Plate, unless a fillies' allowance come into play) would be rated 76 - assuming 1 length = 1 kg = 2 'pounds' / MR points (depending on the distance); so in its next handicap start it will be weighted according to his / her rating of 76.

There are however exceptions; there are certain limits set according to which the handicapper can 'rate' a horse and this may result in a 'wrong' rating for a particular horse - recognizing this is paramount to identify a horse 'well in' in a handicap; the other problem is that in some cases the winner of the Novice Plate is unexposed, so could be much better than rated - that is why I personally always take the ratings of the other runners in the race into account, when trying to 'rate' a specific runner's performance in a Novice Plate (or any other non-handicap race)

Frodo wrote: At the risk of exposing my limited knowledge, I'll have a go at some of these ....

1. How likely would you say is it that a maiden will follow up the next run with a win, and in the same veign, what is your criteria for that? I.e is there a certain MR race that guides you, perhaps in a MR 70 after a Maiden win he may struggle but in a Mr 66 perhaps not?

Adams tells you there is a 20% chance of a runner winning a maiden following up in it's next start ; Mac informs us that it depends on the 'class' of horse; i.e the highest probability (and maybe Mac can let us know what the probability is) is when the horse has had 3 runs or less.

I have no stats on this, my gut feel is that Adams' 20% might not be too far off; I'm wondering though how knowing this would help - should one (when trying to identify the winner) just blatantly ignore a horse that has won its maiden in its previous start, as on average one would be correct around 80% of the time? ; if one combines this with Mac's stats, maybe one will only ignore it if it has had more than 3 runs ?

I don't think anyone has stats that shows the % of winners split by the class (e.g. MR 70) of the 'next' race - would be interesting to know, but again I'm not sure how one would practically apply this knowledge ?

thanks Frodo, I guess my frustration/confusion comes in that when a horse has just come out of the maiden ranks, lets say within 5 runs, how to/if i should back it in a MR70/80 especially with regards to exotics. Naturally i suppose it depends on who its opposition is now and was beforehand etc. I just thought there is some sort of community gut feel/rule of thumb that the horse will struggle in anything higher than MR70 as an example. Thanks for your input sir!

Over the Air wrote: Zimmer it is said that there are no "dumb" questions in life. When it comes to horseracing I disagree. People spend their lives analysing form. They find to their detriment that the only consistency they find is contained in the first 4 letters of analyse.

Horse racing is not an exact science. There are no accurate algorithms that can be inserted into equations to determine winners. 99.9% of the time the reason for this is human interference/involvement. To perfectly illustrate my point, following the money when the formbook disagrees, is far more "accurate" than any analysis can be. Ask Ziets, its the key to Kimberley form.

Thanks OTA, i fully agree and acknowledge that there are not algorythms that can counter all the other human involvement and variables, so i am definately not looking for anything of the sort. I guess my questions are aimed at understanding the (if there are any) unwritten laws/trends of form studying which i am not aware of.

I guess an example would be, if a completely new punter studies form form the first time, and sees that a horse has won 4 wins on the trot at flamingo MR70-80 and now runs in MR 80 at turfontein, he would think that the horse is a sure thing, due to not understanding the difference in class at the 2 tracks etc. So i guess my questions are in the same veign, just not that entry level.

I am not part of a racing community (except this forum ) and what i learnt over the last 20 or so years was what my dad taught me which is a fair bit but certainly there are some things as i mentioned earlier, that i felt i needed to brush up my knowledge on. Sure at the end of the day it still may not help 100% of the time, but i would hate to make the same mistakes due to missing basic knowledge (basic for the seasoned for studiers that is). Thanks for your input!

Frodo wrote: Question 2: How does a novice plate race compare with for example a MR 66 race. I am struggling to assess the strength for example of a 2nd place 2 lbh in a novice and the horse now runs in a MR 66 for example.

Stating the obvious, a Novice Plate is contested by 1-time winners - so not all Novice plates have the same 'class' of runner; usually one would rate the horse in your example by comparing it against the winner - so a horse running 2nd, 2 lbh a horse rated 80 (at level weights in a Novice Plate, unless a fillies' allowance come into play) would be rated 76 - assuming 1 length = 1 kg = 2 'pounds' / MR points (depending on the distance); so in its next handicap start it will be weighted according to his / her rating of 76.

There are however exceptions; there are certain limits set according to which the handicapper can 'rate' a horse and this may result in a 'wrong' rating for a particular horse - recognizing this is paramount to identify a horse 'well in' in a handicap; the other problem is that in some cases the winner of the Novice Plate is unexposed, so could be much better than rated - that is why I personally always take the ratings of the other runners in the race into account, when trying to 'rate' a specific runner's performance in a Novice Plate (or any other non-handicap race)

thanks Frodo, that makes sense, i realise now that i pay some, but not enough attention to the horses in question's previous opposition. I will definately work on this. Thanks again sir!

[/quote]
Lets see today at the Vaal...

Race 3
ALWAHSH first time winner stepping right up into a MR 84....

Race 5
CHAPATI 8 runs to win his Mdn...
BTAXTON took only 2 runs to win....

Who will follow on?

[/quote]

.....apart from the form....the genetics on how well a horse is able to perform is not so easy to access with simple statistics....the 3 examples here are tough enough and not to the norm. imo Alwahsh appears to be above average as he is well put together and from a family that has earned in features yet he is in the deep end in MR84 company and not a stand out bet but has the ability to feature and would not exclude.....
....Chapati is one that many may want to brass as it won a workrider maiden and took more runs than most to get to this win....but the form is not bad and she only ran out of the places when stepped up beyond a mile...the Azzman has always had an interest in the family as this is from the Bridal Paths line which have not performed as expected....could surprise...

.....Braxton.....have a bias against Curved Ball's....however this filly is well related and has a very strong dam line....2nd Dam a full sister to In The Wings....and she could be going places...
so would not brass either.... :blush:

This is what I learnt over my years of punting but remember nothing is 100%
maiden plates run to form , more often than not
horses run poorly 2nd run after rest more often than they run well
horses run poorly first run after gelding more often than they run well
If a trainer enters 2 horses put both in your play , horses make fools of them as well
Hope it helps

Craig Pienaar wrote: This is what I learnt over my years of punting but remember nothing is 100%
maiden plates run to form , more often than not
horses run poorly 2nd run after rest more often than they run well
horses run poorly first run after gelding more often than they run well
If a trainer enters 2 horses put both in your play , horses make fools of them as well
Hope it helps

Hi Craig! thanks! that is exactly the type of info i was looking for! nothing statistical or full proof or any of the sort, just some general trends/rules of thumb that might help me when deciding on which of the 2-3 horses i will be leaning towards. Thank you very much sir.

I am a failed punter so can't help sorry

Craig Pienaar wrote: This is what I learnt over my years of punting but remember nothing is 100%
maiden plates run to form , more often than not
horses run poorly 2nd run after rest more often than they run well
horses run poorly first run after gelding more often than they run well
If a trainer enters 2 horses put both in your play , horses make fools of them as well
Hope it helps

interesting to see in race 3 today at the vaal number 2.

his 1st run after a rest in june he won, then as per you suggestion, the second race he came 8th, and then 3rd run he won again.

Craig, would you go further to say that 3rd run after a rest the horse generally runs a more solid race, not neccessarily winning but merely true to its ability (barring any incidents on health issues during the race ofcourse)? or is this merely coincidence.

100% , 3rd run after rest it will run its most solid race imo

Muhtiman wrote:

Lets see today at the Vaal...

Race 3
ALWAHSH first time winner stepping right up into a MR 84....

Race 5
CHAPATI 8 runs to win his Mdn...
BTAXTON took only 2 runs to win....

Who will follow on?

[/quote]

.....apart from the form....the genetics on how well a horse is able to perform is not so easy to access with simple statistics....the 3 examples here are tough enough and not to the norm.


imo Alwahsh appears to be above average as he is well put together and from a family that has earned in features yet he is in the deep end in MR84 company and not a stand out bet but has the ability to feature and would not exclude.....

WINNER

....Chapati is one that many may want to brass as it won a workrider maiden and took more runs than most to get to this win....but the form is not bad and she only ran out of the places when stepped up beyond a mile...the Azzman has always had an interest in the family as this is from the Bridal Paths line which have not performed as expected....could surprise...

RUNNER UP....


.....Braxton.....have a bias against Curved Ball's....however this filly is well related and has a very strong dam line....2nd Dam a full sister to In The Wings....and she could be going places...
so would not brass either.... :blush:[/quote]

STILL RUNNING....



Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

.....Braxton.....have a bias against Curved Ball's....however this filly is well related and has a very strong dam line....2nd Dam a full sister to In The Wings....and she could be going places...
so would not brass either.... :blush:[/quote]

STILL RUNNING....

.....hence my bias against Curved Balls.....this dam is wasted at Klawervlei....don't have a sire to make her fire..... :whistle:


Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk[/quote]