SOUTHWELL 5f draw

9yrs on forum and all posts today

Must be some sort of record, particularly when 16 of the 17 posts are the same!

To answer what you asked, Nigh Eve, I'm a fairly serious punter with no interest in NH racing. My winter betting on horses is therefore exclusively at AW tracks. I've checked my betting records for the past three winters (1st November - 21 March) and I find that about 90% of my bets have been at Southwell.  That didn't surprise me, because of all the AW courses in the country, Southwell most consistently meets the 'horses for courses' theory.  By no means all horses (or trainers) like fibresand, but those that do like it tend to like it a lot.  For the present, I'm ignoring Newcastle, because it's too new for reliable data.

I've also spent a lot of time looking into draw bias on the straight course.  Beware of the various online sites that purport to give 'quick punter guides' to the draw effect on UK tracks.  Most of them are very superficial, and several of them are about ten years old.  This isn't a definitive explanation, but it's my firm view that the centre-to-outside path is best over 5f these days.  Various possible explanations, some pretty far-fetched but, in order of plausibility, I suggest:-

1) the way the track is harrowed.  To expand, the harrow-blades seem to cover about 60% of the 5f track-width. When they drive up against one rail, and down against the other, the centre 20% is effectively being treated twice: in decent sunlight, you can actually see a different shade of sand up that strip.
2) the hardcore base isn't level, and there's a slight slope from outside to inside.  Water will follow the slope and make the going heaviest on the inner rail.
3) the sun, for some reason, doesn't dry the track evenly (highly improbable, imo)
4) it's a temporary thing, and the next time the track is relaid, it will change again.

As far as I know,the only daily which supports the centre-ground theory is the Mirror,whose Southwell draw guide simply says "Middle numbers best on straight course".

For what it's worth, I think they're right, and I'll be following the theory until results show that they're wrong.  You were right originally, because for years before about 2014, you could RELY on low numbers being best over five.  Whatever the reason, it's not true now.

A thinking mans punter ^^^^

Hats off sir

(Cheers, GAB).

Naive (I've only just got that!) I neglected to answer your main question.  In October 2016, the track was given what it described at the time as "a £120,000 refurbishment"
which doesn't sound much to me for a serious job of work (round this way, you pay that for a couple of Bulgarian roofers and a scaffolding tower). Refurbishment reads like a weasel word for a a bit of tidying up, rather than a major track relaying/overhaul: the objective of the refurb was 'to improve the drainage and provide an optimal racing surface'.  Since my previous post, I've gone back and checked 5f results,from the reopening up to today,and there is indeed a significant(about 9%)increase in winners from stalls higher than No.5 (nb. this isn't too scientific because I've not cross-checked it against field sizes).

That brings in the very simple extra theory that if one or more of the drainage outlets is blocked, or isn't functioning efficiently, it could significantly affect the top surface (i.e. we're looking at the sand when we should be looking at the drains).  In which case, we're all guessing.  Best advice is to follow middle-drawn horses until the trend runs itself out.

interesting post ,petruchio..I am a former groundsman/tractor driver, and i assumed that the harrowing and rolling would always be in the same direction, with minimal overlap, so that all parts of the track receive identical treatment.obviously harrows and rollers come in different widths,so no excuse for overlapping ,or change of direction...of course turf tracks are mown and rolled differently to give pleasing stripes,, even then some say that the direction of the turf blades can make a difference .. i remember years ago a groundsman at a greyhound track deliberately rolled the outside of the track many times before a meeting to make it faster.his cronies backed trap 5 and 6 every race,winning on 6 of the 8 races. think trap 6 won 5 times..what do you think of the round track draw ? and hold up horses as the kick back is horrendous at southwell

The first sample is 2008-2014, second 2014+.  Both samples are handicaps

Draw Range    Wins    Runs    Win%    Plc%    IV    A/E    £1 Win     ROI%
Low        93    646    14.4%    36.5%    1.33    1.09    £31.63     4.9%
Middle        76    728    10.4%    30.2%    0.97    0.87    £-106.17 -14.6%
High        68    817    8.3%    22.6%    0.77    0.90    £-69.41     -8.5%

Low        34    220    15.5%    38.6%    1.43    1.07    £16.60     7.5%
Middle        21    251    8.4%    27.5%    0.77    0.74    £-71.04    -28.3%
High        26    276    9.4%    26.1%    0.87    1.06    £39.49    14.3%

non handicaps 2008-14 first

Low        47    316    14.9%    38.3%    1.22    1.09    £138.51  43.8%
Middle        53    364    14.6%    29.1%    1.20    1.12    £66.48     18.3%
High        31    398    7.8%    28.9%    0.64    0.68    £-133.37 -33.5%


Low        13    77    16.9%    32.5%    1.15    0.93    £-18.63      -24.2%
Middle        14    90    15.6%    38.9%    1.06    1.09    £-23.62      -26.2%
High        13    105    12.4%    36.2%    0.84    0.88    £14.91      14.2%


So I can't see any conclusive evidence of a big change post 2014.

Morning, NE.  On the round track, I've a general preference for front-runners.  Some hold-up horses are brave, and will run through kickback; but most aren't, and are consequently at a disadvantage.  If a hold-up horse is drawn really wide - say 12 of 12 - then either the jockey drops in and suffers eleven lots of kickback, or else he keeps it wide for as long as he dares.  Neither of those can be a good thing, to my mind.

But some jockeys - Luke Morris, Ben Curtis, and the less-fashionable Kieran O'Neill - do seem to have mastered this track.  And it seems increasingly true that the lower the level of race (my serious bets here are almost wholly in Class 6) the more the winner has an intelligent jockey on board.  With bad racing, it's usually not the strongest jockey who wins, but the smartest.

Just 8 declared for the 0-90 on NYD, so I myself won't be considering the draw on this occasion. A more pertinent question imo is whether Aleef will handle the surface. Should go very well if it does. If the mid-bias theory does hold any water though, stall 6 is obviously a bonus.

If the mid-bias theory does hold any water

It doesn't

As I said though, I've assessed the race without taking the draw into consideration. That's the advantage of sticking to smaller fields when betting in handicaps.

Impossible to know if there's any advantage anywhere now looks unlikely so far this season have seen races won on standside broadway haven,foolaad pearl acclaim came from the 1 draw over to the nearside to win,all over the place and races have been won on far side archie stevens and something lucky clear on that rail and a few other races complete poles apart..

Whatever the draw , the horses tend to  make their way to the middle of the track. never see them deliberately racing on either rail..if the jockeys want to race down the middle,that suggests the middle is fatest

12.05 southwell... raced middle to near side... be interesting to see where race in the handicap today

1.45 southwell raced near side to middle ...winner drawn 7 of 7

It was a small field and the stalls were centre (and that's where they raced).

It might well be that the fastest part of the track is the middle, but the draw that faces that ground will depend on the field size (and stall position if they move this, do they? I can't remember)