Forums
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Cheers For Thea
13 Apr 10 14:29
Joined:
Date Joined: 11 Jan 09
| Topic/replies: 303 | Blogger: Cheers For Thea's blog
Any thoughts on how its riding?

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 26
By:
ratpack
When: 13 Apr 10 14:30
Time 1.18.04 Slow by 2.84 or +0.47 per furlong.
By:
Cheers For Thea
When: 13 Apr 10 14:32
Sorry Rat - what does that translate to?
By:
Muqbil
When: 13 Apr 10 14:34
I would guestimate just on the slower side of good.
By:
Cheers For Thea
When: 13 Apr 10 14:35
Perfick thanks lads...
By:
grendel
When: 13 Apr 10 14:49
for a 0-70 handicap thats not a slow time
By:
Muqbil
When: 13 Apr 10 14:52
08/06/2009 =77.04 (official going = good)
09/06/2008 = 76.74 (official going = good)

It certainly isn't a quick one?
By:
ratpack
When: 13 Apr 10 14:57
Race 2 (not truly run) 2.18.02 vs std 2.11.40 = 6.62 slow =-0.66 pf,
By:
grendel
When: 13 Apr 10 15:12
going by the first race the next should be run in something like 1m 46.4
By:
Cheers For Thea
When: 13 Apr 10 15:12
So are we talking good ground? No jar innit?
By:
grendel
When: 13 Apr 10 15:21
i would say its ever so slightly on the faster side of good - you can't go by official going descriptions
By:
ratpack
When: 13 Apr 10 15:26
Race 3 - 1.44.51 vs 1.43.60 standard so +0.91 = +0.11 per furlong

Decent standard of horse for track but winner significantly faster than the rest.
By:
grendel
When: 13 Apr 10 15:28
first race was 1m 17.35 according to sporting life website
By:
grendel
When: 13 Apr 10 15:29
and 2m 17.09 for the second, where are you getting your winning times from ratpack?
By:
ratpack
When: 13 Apr 10 15:30
From the track pa
By:
ratpack
When: 13 Apr 10 15:34
Which are the same as the POst website. Take care of those SL times then because they are not in line with the official ones.
By:
Ricky Santini
When: 13 Apr 10 15:35
Official description about right, ever-so-slightly on the slower side of good but no more.
By:
Muqbil
When: 13 Apr 10 15:36
Sporting life have been wrong on several times recently.

Should carry a wealth warning.
By:
Muqbil
When: 13 Apr 10 15:39
I was quoting SL times, someone else using rp (unknown to both of us) I was suggesting a totally different going. Official formbook carried the rp times, so why SL use different ones is unclear?
By:
ratpack
When: 13 Apr 10 15:57
Race 4 4.03.97 std 3.52.00 Slow 11.97 =+0.66 per furlong
By:
Roger De Bris
When: 13 Apr 10 16:07
depends what standards you use. The ones I use give:

Race
1: + 9L/m
2: + 18L/m
3: + 1L/m
4: + 4L/

Dropping the first two looking at just on the slow side of Good (+0.06 s/f).
By:
Billy Jay
When: 13 Apr 10 16:11
Roger

It doesn't matter what standard times you use, you need to compare them with the actual time of the race: it's a bit disconcerting that two sources have different race times
By:
Roger De Bris
When: 13 Apr 10 16:16
of course it f*** matters what standards you use. Every organisations standard times are different.
By:
ratpack
When: 13 Apr 10 16:27
Race 5 - 2.13.22 Strd 2.11.40 Slow 2.82 =+0.28pf

Faster than maiden by 4.80 secs.
By:
Roger De Bris
When: 13 Apr 10 16:30
so now I've got
1: +9L/m
2: +18L/m
3: +1L/m
4: +4L/m
5: 0

Its bang on Good ground imo.
By:
ratpack
When: 13 Apr 10 16:31
Sorry should be +1.82 so +0.18 pf
By:
ratpack
When: 13 Apr 10 16:56
Race 6 1.18.89 Std 1.15.20 +3.69 =+0.61 per furlong
sort by:
Show
per page

Post your reply

Text Format: Table: Smilies:
Forum does not support HTML
Insert Photo
Cancel
‹ back to topics
www.betfair.com