There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
I just had a chunky bet on the fav in the second at Thirsk winning by more than a length.
It clearly won by 1 and a quarter at least yet the official distance was given as a length.
Madness - but what recourse do you have??
It clearly won by 1 and a quarter at least yet the official distance was given as a length.
Madness - but what recourse do you have??
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 52
|
By:
I'd agree, it's clearly one by more than a length but they do it on time these days.
|
|
By:
chunky bet = 8 quid.
|
|
By:
Yep, I'm disgusted.
Of course the second has to run a stormer too with the rest beaten miles |
|
By:
Can I ask j foxxx who the bet was with? I had one a while ago, think it was 5L or more, and looking at it thought I should have landed the bet too but it was deemed as a loser
|
|
By:
it won by 1 1/4L
#FACT |
|
By:
Yeah it was on here, so I think I even fell foul of the MORE than a length as opposed to a length or more.
Also, I do know they do it by times but I rarely see ones that are clearly 1.25 moved back to one length. |
|
By:
They measure the distance in pixels now and it probably won by one pixel short of 1 and a 1/4 lengths so officially it is 1 length.
|
|
By:
Haha, thanks for rubbing it in Mac.
|
|
By:
I have watched it 3 times J F and I agree with you, it looked a winning bet.
I would feel the same as you do. Unlucky. I just bet the Skelton odds on shot and it got brought down after two hurdles. I feel your pain. You just have to forget about these things and move on. Good luck. |
|
By:
They count the tail.
|
|
By:
winner's time 1m 38.49s
2nd's time: 1m 38.66s 0.17s diff 6lps on g/f ground on the flat 6 x 0.17 = 1.02 rounded to 1l |
|
By:
no issues whatsoever
|
|
By:
Good maths Wonder but if you think that distance was 1.02 lengths you need to start questioning it!!
I'd be more than happy to take my lumps but I've rarely seen one called so badly when presented with the evidence of ones eyes! |
|
By:
Yep, they round it down. Well explained W.
|
|
By:
Looked more than 1.02 lengths indeed.
|
|
By:
All done by time foxy...
A judge calculates the distances based on the elapsed time between each horse. Then a scale known as the lengths per second scale (Lps) is used. The length-per-second measurements can vary depending on: Flat Racing National Hunt Jump Racing Type of surface in use at the all-weather fixtures Official going description issued on the day |
|
By:
Yeah I knew that and accept that it's the method used Hayden.
Just rarely seen it so 'off' with the visuals. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
strong tailwind in the home straight today so horses will be slowing down slower than normal...so that's a factor also
|
|
By:
Thanks for all the supporting info chsps.
It's also nice that I'm finding new and exciting ways to lose |
|
By:
 looks more than a length to me, regardless of what the clock says |
|
By:
Cheers Hulk, says it all really.
|
|
By:
do a cut & paste bringing the 2nd horse's nose to the winning line (as if its a photo finish)
you'll see the 2nd is the length of the winner + the winner's tail then refer to my 3.17pm post |
|
By:
So if that ar$e to that nose has been calculated above at 0.02 lengths - how big is the horse??? 50 times that gap????
|
|
By:
fox, u need to ignore hulk and listen to wonders, it's got zero bearing on what you see and is calculated on the clock, it can be adjusted by code (as in flat/jumps) going etc but in essence it's a time distance calc and nothing to do with the eye
|
|
By:
But guys, I'm accepting the timings explanation. I know that's the method used. I'm just bemoaning my luck by posing the question "When have you ever seen that called 1 length and not 1.25 lengths.
Because let's face it, the calculations on the timings are done for a reason and they usually match up with the naked eye's opinion over these sorts of shorter distances. Wouldn't you have thought you were up had you done the bet? |
|
By:
nah, elise be sitting there thinking it's a length. cos he's an expert
 |
|
By:
you're not an expert in anything hulk and as for calculating we have seen your 108 padi maths and are still laughing
https://www.britishhorseracing.com/faqs/how-does-the-judge-calculate-the-distances/ there's a link on there to the adjustments for ground etc if you want to have a look fox |
|
By:
In truth he has bet a Certain Horse to win by more than a Length , the Distance it has won won by is more than a Length of the named horse ,Regardless of Times or Horse size
its not far off 1.5 Lengths of the Said horse ,and he has still not Collected |
|
By:
well sed case
|
|
By:
as for calculating we have seen your 108 padi maths and are still laughing
still dining out on that elise ? remember, you read it and didn't see anything wrong. then climbed on the bandwagon when someone else pointed it out. wac  |
|
By:
and i told you back then go read the thread and you'll see you were wrong on that too, you're just not bright enough
|
|
By:
we'll add your lack of understanding of winning distances to your thicket file
|
|
By:
Don't think anyone will deny that visually it's won by over a length , only problem is that visual is the incorrect way to determine so counts for nothing.
|
|
By:
If the 2nd Bigger Orse had won by the Same Distance , that would surely be more than a Length
So he has no Drawn because he bet a smaller orse than won by a 1.25 Lenghts |
|
By:
|
|
By:
I suggest anyone playing these bets does not get involved if its a small orse TBH
|
|
By:
Just back the horse to win.
|
|
By:
What if there was an Extremely Big Orse that Won by Just under a Length Would that be a Winner ?
|