Steward's Cup -Draw -ITV pundits..

I see they had Page Fuller ( ex jockey ) on, now working for Raceiq telling us low numbers are at a definite disadvantage, not going to look good for attracting future subscribers if wrong.

racing IQ says drawn low is big ADVANTAGE not DISADVANTAGE

28 runners, draw 1, was the stall last out in yesterdays draw, so theres 28 trainers,connection who dont buy in to racing IQ so why should anyone else, thats not say she,s wrong

... Correct, LOW have the advantage, my mistake. Just looked at their slick website, no sign of cost anywhere which is always ominous.

to be fair you didnt need racing IQ yesterday just use your eyes,but goodwood like ascot can change in 24 hrs

but turftracks said far side/low  was quicker on tues/wed and yesterday

The fact that Page Fuller is a regular guest on the ridiculous Final Furlong podcast says it all..

I saw her on ITV this morning.

Last 15 year's results indicates you can win from high or low.

1-5 drawn
Allways Fc 20bets
High looked long way back yesterday
Hope you hit good one

Or just leave it well alone

few years ago moved the rail on far side for final day, was a golden highway for those drawn low.

7 of the last 8 winners drawn 15 or higher. 16 of the last 20 from a double figure draw.  More importantly I think 23 of the last 27 aged 4, 5,or 6.  Not a race for the old timers esp if drawn low !

Get it will make it a true test - pace on the far side should be beneficial.

Race would be better with a sea fret

why isnt murphy on puransague ?
and as he isnt surprised kevin ryan hasnt put him on the fav

I'm on Apollo One at 40s, who is drawn 28
Really deserves one of these big H'caps
Hope Alice Bond gives it a good go

I have backed Orazio each way at 33-1.

Purosangue for me. He ran no race when well fancied recently.

152% overround

Theiving gets

High draw , 4 year old wins .

Aug 2, 2025 -- 3:09PM, Poppydog. wrote:

152% overround Theiving gets

Some of those prices were a disgrace, how so many were under 10/1 beggars belief

Raceiq, what do they know.

back to the drawing board for polly and racing IQ

I bet ITV don't mention the terrible overround. Ed probably doesn't understand it anyway.

Nice to see a well backed horse win the race instead of the usual absolute skinner for the bookies.

Quite categorical, the weaver shark knew.
The rest nowhere

Race IQs logic maybe made sense.
But they used GET ON as an example,seemingly forgetting it won the race last year drawn highest,with the 2nd drawn 2nd highest.

Given rain,drainage,storms,wind.

Perhaps raceIQ,might better look at other aspects of anyalsis.instead of guessing which side.

They could have walked the track and call themselves,race best ground IQ.

Last 10 year draw trends.

Bar
Storms,watering,pace,long summers,bad summers.

Literally guessing.

dont quite get the racing IQ draw stats ,
stall one say 1.7 lengths advantage ,stall 28 1.7 disadvantage, so is stall one 3lgths better off than 28 , or all the + advantaged stalls added together better of than 28
if its just the 1.7 in a 28 runner spring the whole field will either lose or gain a length or more as the stalls open anyway
so if stall 28 breaks a length quicker than stall 1,does that mean 1 has lbasically lost any advantage of any stall breaking a lgth quicker, that cant be right can it ?

and obviously going forward for racing IQ and THE CAPTAIN,did those drawn high overcome a disadvantage or were those drawn high yesterday getting an advantage
basically  the draw data is all a waste of time a joke

The stewards cup low draw logic was a reasonable assessment,felt it was slightly wrong,but within t the margin of error.
But to use GET ON as their example guide,stating low numbers over the years were best,when GET ON won it last year off the highest draw.

High numbers won,GET ON was drawn highest again,yet finished last.

So they were right,then wrong,then right,then wrong again,and then died on the GET ON hill.

point i,m trying to make is do you downgrade the horses drawn low peformance because they were supposedly favourable drawn,or did high numbers out run their draw,or were they favoured by the draw,pace, if everyone is just left guessing cant see the point in racing IQ data on the  draw

Think the pace angle is a diversion away from draw advantage,
Clearly at some meetings,espically big fields across the track,there’s sometimes an advantage,other times it might be pace.

But if there’s an obvious advantage,the clerks soon try and even it up overnight for the next day,and so they should,it’s unfair on connections .

So the only advantage is useful,is during that day,which is too late for anyone to publicise it.

Basically it happens,on raining days or drying ground,

On the ratings,everyone’s stuffed,the hcpers have to assess bare form,good or lucky,

Twilight calls was clear on low side,not won for years,blew his best chance now.
But that’s down to the trainer,walk the track,then tell jockey don’t go crazy to get a place,cos you’ve no chance,or better still,drawn 1, track over.

Remember zidane once at Beverley,drawn worst  wrong side .Spencer came out last,veered sharp left,to opposite rail,then won.then won next 2 I think.


1st time poster,
They can’t downgrade performance,you can,but official assessment can’t.

Strange that draw result as on Friday it was low I backed both sides but more low and not the winner, complete turnaround from Friday, all very strange with these draws this season at the big meetings

Know all
As I said above,if one side favoured,the clerks water to correct it.its unfair not to,makes a farce of the next days if they don’t.

turtrack said low
history said low
friday said massively low
trainers giving a free choice 99% went highest available
COME RACING

But history didnt say low. It pointed to high quite clearly. As I said above.

7 of the last 8 winners drawn 15 or higher. 16 of the last 20 from a double figure draw.  More importantly I think 23 of the last 27 aged 4, 5,or 6.  Not a race for the old timers esp if drawn low !

cheers , but where did those drawn say under 20 race ,finish ?

so RACING IQ were using.feeding in the wrong data as they showed clear advantage to low

Of course pre 2011 Low was High and High was Low ........

were the stands on the downs side pre 2011