I will be in Georgetown, Guyana until Thursday.

I've been asked to translate for a biofuel corporation who are looking to set up an operation with the Guyanese.

Supposedly we're going to be in a 'good' hotel so I hope to be able to have a look at the C2 on Tuesday at Southwell. If I don't chip in it will be because I will be scratching away in some flea-pit!

Pace and Time

We've had a crack at suitable courses recently, which personally, I found extremely useful. I've already weaved it into my assessments, although I probably will have some further thoughts on it!!

Has anyone got any useful thoughts on pace and/or times?
How can we tell how a race was run?
What importance does it have to selection?

I looked at a race on Tuesday 8th: 3:00 Southwell - Wodhill Schnaps

My note said: Time of last run was slow - can it quicken off a fast pace?

The time of its last race was about 6 seconds slower than standard. It won the race, which was also about 6 seconds slower than standard.
So, perhaps in this case, the pace wasn't fast, and it got away with it. Or was the early pace fast, and the others faded. So how do you tell?

That throws up another point. The standard time is, I think, irrespective of the class of race. So a class 6 should be slower than a class 2 anyway. So how do you tell if it is slow by the class of race you're assessing? (if you follow my awkward train of thought).

So much still to learn. Ho hum.

BC

Some interesting and difficult questions there, BC.
I think if we crack these problems, we'll have understood the very essence of racing, and the spoils will be ours for the taking!

Now back to reality: I don't know how to best measure pace. For years, I've wished for one of those scanners the speed cops have. That, with a fully detailed recording of , say, the first four home ( provided they're all in the picture) showing m.p.h. etc would be the complete answer.
And that's probably why we'll never get it!

Failing that, I suppose we are at the mercy of race reports and timings.
I have met people who claim to be able to work all this out from videos and such things as "stride-counting", but, I have to admit I remain rather dubious about how good they are in actual fact.

Finally, I think a guy on ATR website ( Lawrence?) was into this pace for class stuff. If you haven't looked there before, it may pay to check it out.
Myself, I still use Topspeed - something old Swish used to be keen on.

What happened to Swish Sean?.

BC

VDW understood pace, and its effect on form, without sectional timings, video recordings, and many other modern aids.
That he was able to do so just with the aid of a racing daily should indicate, like most things VDW, it isn't really something to get tied in knots about.
Important it most certainly is, complicated it ain't.

BC,

Although I don't agree with everything he writes Nick Mordin's book Mordin on Time will at least give you some ideas on how to answer some of your questions. He also has a website http://www.nickmordin.com/uk.htm that at times can give some very interesting/ different views on races, and the horses that run in them. As with everything else these views/ideas are just one persons, so form your own!

VDW said ...........What the clock says at the end of a race may not appear to tell the whole story, but it gives enough when interpreted and used to best advantage to provide one of the most useful means of evaluation.

Be Lucky

BC ask yorself.
Which is the hardest, to quicken of a slow pace or to quicken of a fast pace.

How do you no when a horse has quickened in a race.

Why does the fastest horse over the distance hardly ever just go for it from the begining to the end of the race.

This might help you to get a feel for the pace of a race, if you divide number of furlongs into time of the race you will get a average time it takes to cover a furlong

Thanks for the replies. That nasty "W" word has stopped me having time for anything more than a brief read. So I'll return to this tomorrow or Saturday.

Re Swish:

I think he may have been banned

and/or

gone bust.

Certainly, seemed to drop out. Sent me a message to say his computer was broken. Never heard from him again!

BC

Next Wednesday's Raceform Update will give you the sectional times for Wodhill Schnaps' race. From this you will be able to calculate, accurately, the speed of Preskani at the 2f, 4f and 6f pole. It will also give you the time at the 7f pole and the finish (8f). From this you can calculate the speed of Wodhill Schnaps in the final furlong, but this will only be an average as the horse may have been accelerating (ran on well). You may even find that Wodhill Schnaps' speed in the final furlong was slower than Preskani's speed in the first 6f.

quote:

Originally posted by garstonf:
BC

Next Wednesday's Raceform Update will give you the sectional times for Wodhill Schnaps' race. From this you will be able to calculate, accurately, the speed of Preskani at the 2f, 4f and 6f pole. It will also give you the time at the 7f pole and the finish (8f). From this you can calculate the speed of Wodhill Schnaps in the final furlong, but this will only be an average as the horse may have been accelerating (ran on well). You may even find that Wodhill Schnaps' speed in the final furlong was slower than Preskani's speed in the first 6f.

Garstonf

But do you really think that VDW would have had the same information, or aren't you making a meal of what he would have considered basic?

Johnd

My post was for Black Cat's interest but as you say sectional timing did not exist in the 70's neither did AW racing, which began in 1989.
The only information available to VDW, in relation to pace, were race times and speed figures. I would suggest he ignored both these factors when assessing last time out performances in N.H races but probably used them when assessing Flat races.
Pace is the speed that the field is being taken along at. To make a calculation for this you need the form book. It could not be done from information in the form section of the old Sporting Chronicle or Life. I very much doubt if VDW calculated an actual figure to determine pace.
VDW made reference to a race being slow but this was determined from the slower/faster than standard time figure. One needs to consider why the race was slow, was it the going or was it the size of the field for instance.
Pace can be a complex subject so, as you were probably indicating in your post, where VDW is concerned simplicity is the key.

I shall be away in Manaus until Thursday (Mother is on a cruise and will be docking in Manaus for three days) so once again an interrupted service.

Of the horses I am currently interested in only Northern Fling 305D will run today. It is a pity that there are no other future entries for him as his profile has two distinct possibilities and a future entry would go a long way to seeing which is the most likely.

The first, and the reason why he is a bet, is that if the stable are planning to use him to have a go at 100+ rated non-hcp sprints this season then he is almost certainly here to mop up a quick prize before moving up in grade. I don't regard this idea as unduly outrageous as he's only had 14 races which for a sprinter means that he has hardly been used and could well be hiding considerable future improvement.

On the otherhand, if Northern Fling was being prepared for a heritage type hcp, then his profile would be perfect if he was to have one or two more non-winning prep races. That would mean that todays contest would only be a pipe-opener, with the added attraction of massaging his mark.

As he's going to be a big price, something which has never been an impediment to the ever enigmatic Mr Nicholls, I am sticking my $50 on him at what I hope will be about 50/1.

quote:

Originally posted by BlackCat:
Pace and Time

We've had a crack at suitable courses recently, which personally, I found extremely useful. I've already weaved it into my assessments, although I probably will have some further thoughts on it!!

Has anyone got any useful thoughts on pace and/or times?
How can we tell how a race was run?
What importance does it have to selection?

I looked at a race on Tuesday 8th: 3:00 Southwell - Wodhill Schnaps

My note said: Time of last run was slow - can it quicken off a fast pace?

The time of its last race was about 6 seconds slower than standard. It won the race, which was also about 6 seconds slower than standard.
So, perhaps in this case, the pace wasn't fast, and it got away with it. Or was the early pace fast, and the others faded. So how do you tell?

That throws up another point. The standard time is, I think, irrespective of the class of race. So a class 6 should be slower than a class 2 anyway. So how do you tell if it is slow by the class of race you're assessing? (if you follow my awkward train of thought).

So much still to learn. Ho hum.

BC

BC

If all you need to know is how quickly a race was run (Which it should be, in most cases), then there are worse thumbnail guides than Racing Post speed figures.
These figures are weight adjusted and already take account of standard times, going, etc, so to establish the pace of the race the s/f of the winner has to be converted back (to 12.0 jumps, 9.0 flat).
As an example take Don't Panic from today's Doncaster Mile:
For his lto run his s/f was 106 and he carried 9.08. Adjusted to 9 stone that becomes a 98 s/f which suggests the race was run slightly faster than a truly run race for this class (0 - 94).
For an NH example, Denman, in his Gold Cup win, ran a s/f of 178 carrying 11.10, which equates to an actual pace of 182, which tells us that the race was run at a top class pace.
Do remember though, only to use the winner to judge the pace.


ps Small point from Les H's earlier post:
VDW asked which was better a s/f from Epsom or Redcar (not Ripon).
Imo, he was indicating that a s/f from a gd1 course was better than a similar one from a gd4. Some would argue that there is parity between these s/f's. VDW didn't think so, nor do I.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: johnd,

johnd i like to say that a racing post speed figure 5pts less than its bhb handicap rating franks the form speed wise would you agree

Some interesting stuff to try and digest!

Sean - I did try to follow Swishes advice on the TS figures for a while. He advocated using the Best Figures (on the right) rather than the current, adjusted figure. If I do a full analysis, (which isn't often), then I do factor these in still. But on the whole, I have personally found the RPR to be generally more reliable. I'll have a look at the ATR website too, later on. Thanks for that.

Johnd (1) – "it isn't really something to get tied in knots about. Important it most certainly is, complicated it ain't": I am sure that is right.

Mtoto – "Mordin on Time" Thanks for the recommendation. I will obtain a copy. " when interpreted" – ahh, that's what we're interested in!!

Paul – I'd say quickening off a fast pace would be harder (although more can quicken off a slow pace, perhaps making a slow run race more competitive). Headway and stamina (holding something back for the finish) probably answer the other two points. I understand the maths of the average furlong, but how would that help determine pace? For instance, a slow run race with a real all out sprint might produce the same time as an average run race where no super-sprinter was on hand. It is a complex area for sure!

GarstonF – I haven't ever bought that paper, so I didn't know it held that sort of data. I'll get a copy next Wednesday and have a look. Thanks.

Johnd(2) – you're a mine of information! I tried the adjustment and came up with a S/F of 99 (or 100, depending on how it is rounded). Would you mind re-checking in case I'm doing it wrong please. Thanks. My workings are:
9st8lbs = (9 x 14lbs + 8lbs) = 134
(SF 106 / 134lbs) x 126(9st) = 99.67 (Rating 99 or 100?)
So the fact that it is 98 (or 99/100) and the race top OR is 94 is where you are indicating it is faster. I'd have never thought of doing that! I'm glad you've mentioned Don't Panic, as it falls in my little system today. (I am having a little cover shot on Blythe Knight though).

Thanks to all.

BC

blackcat what about a wee 2 singles and a double with winker watson in the 2000 guineas and dont panic they maybe training together at home you just dont know?

quote:

Originally posted by les henderson:
blackcat what about a wee 2 singles and a double with winker watson in the 2000 guineas and dont panic they maybe training together at home you just dont know?

Don't know Les. Sounds like a plan!! I just take the racing as it comes day by day. That takes me enough time!!

Les winker watson has no chance of winning the guineas imho.

TRAINER PETER Chapple-Hyam today confirmed that he is intending to saddle two in the Doncaster Mile this Saturday.

Don't Panic, an impressive four-length winner of the Spring Mile last month, will return to Town Moor - this time stepping back up to Listed class.


He had Sally Wall on board in a solid spin on Racecourse Side on Tuesday morning.


Don't Panic showed himself to be in top order as he strode out on Racecourse Side in a gallop with Shallal and an unraced three-year-old.


The four-year-old chestnut is all set to be joined in the Doncaster event by stable-mate Medicine Path (John Lowe) who exercised in company with Aeroplane and one other.


Chapple-Hyam said: "We've decided to run him on Saturday as I was worried about running him off 9st 10lb in the Spring Cup at Newbury the following weekend.


"He has definitely improved from his win in the Spring Mile and while it looks like it will be a tough race on Saturday I think he will be very competitive."