Re: Change of topic (1043 Views)
Posted by:
sekrah (IP Logged)
Date: May 24, 2017 04:28AM
wherethevalue Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sekrah Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If one is a 100% convinced that a bias existed,
> > you still need to use the race (adjusted) in
> the
> > context of the pattern, and most people who use
> a
> > perceived bias do not do that. They
> automatically
> > dismiss or promote a horse in their next race.
> A
> > horse that was affected positively by a bias
> might
> > make his pattern for the next race either
> stronger
> > or weaker. Same if they were negatively
> > affected.
>
> People automatically dismiss or promote a horse in
> their next race because bias has nothing to do
> with subjectively reading a form pattern. People
> who inheret bias as a study calculate the average
> speed figure incline/decline in relation to the
> bias. Example: Horse A was on a dead rail and
> horses on the dead rail from that day have come
> back to run an average of 7 points higher.
If they are using bias that way (other horses came back to run 7 points higher), they might as well throw darts when they handicap.
First, the paths are always changing as the moisture changes and as the maintenance crew performs work on it. The "bias" is always changing. Tracks will go from slow to fast or fast to slow throughout the day, sometimes race to race. The same would apply to paths.
Second, every horse has a different pattern. If a horse is in a dead or hot path than you have a horse that ran on a completely different track speed variant than the rest of the field, likely completely altering his pattern. It could change his last race from a Top to an Off or vice versa.
Third, they are using a sample from only a handful of horses. How many horses actually ran on the rail? 4? 5? What condition were they in that day? What condition were they in the next race? You don't have a chance of knowing any of this if you don't use form cycles.
If one isn't going to use pattern context then why use the horse's next start to judge how much a bias affected a horse? Why not just use the previous start before the biased race?
This is a very poor method to use a bias. The ones who use this are trying to make scientific adjustments to a speed figure and it's just not possible using the data at hand.