G'day Punter!

In this Discussion

Who's Online

0 Members & 27 Non Members

Above benchmark?

West Australian Racing
Where do all these pundits get this info from? They talk about race ratings being above or below benchmark. Where are these benchmarks published?

Comments

  • H-BOMBERH-BOMBER    10,567 posts
    Agree, I'd love to hear this. Sounds a bit like buzz words to me
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,949 posts
    I think the benchmark is a private guess
  • paraleticparaletic    3,750 posts
    H-BOMBER said:

    Agree, I'd love to hear this. Sounds a bit like buzz words to me




    Very much a buzz word. if u watch racing.com the buzz word there is “syndicates” are coming for this horse...
  • DamienWyerDamienWyer    7,949 posts
    'Syndicate' buyers **** me to tears. They run up the cost of a horse then take forever to find owners to pay up for it and every story you hear in recent times about non payers is one of them.
  • TheDivaTheDiva    13,248 posts
    From what I can gather, Perth racing media guys use puntingform... which publishes how horses have rated compared to the benchmark for the class of race they are in. I can only assume they come to the benchmark using the average of years of data for each class of race.

    H-BOMBER likes this post.

  • H-BOMBERH-BOMBER    10,567 posts
    I see that stuff popping up on Twitter all the time. Never taken the opportunity to actually read it. To those that do, does it work?
  • ThewogboysThewogboys    58 posts
    Bomber ,, Farrrkd if I know, just look at sectional splits ,& will suit some , not many can do it at both ends,, so u have to factor in the human context, to get a fairer reading, than just computer models setting up the analycal data , that they work off

    H-BOMBER likes this post.

  • H-BOMBERH-BOMBER    10,567 posts
    Kudos to those who use it but I think if you mine data enough you can find anything (positive or negative).

    So the way I see it is that for a 60+ race for instance it should be run a certain way based on years of race data. This is the created bench mark for a 60+ race, which for all intents and purposes is 0 lengths. It looks as though it is broken up into 200m splits.

    Then the race is run and won on the day. Data such as track condition, wind etc are taken into account, somehow. Then, the numbers are crunched for the leader and the winner of the race to give comparitive splits and hence comparisons to the bench mark figure. So the more negative the number, the quicker the split is and therefore this is "x lengths above benchmark". Vice versa if positive.

    What does it actually tell you though? Let's take Jericho Missile as an example.

    Puntingform give you the last 800m in 200m splits I'm seconds. To me this means nothing but when all is inputted to the computer it will give you 200m split times for each 200 from the the 800. It also gives you To6 ( to the 600 split)

    To6 = 12.39

    8-6 = 11.00
    6-4 = 11.40
    4-2 = 11.28
    2-F = 11.40

    Again, these times mean SFA if you don't have a bench mark to assess them against. As the computer program does, it says the following, which is in the benchmark column in lengths. This is for Jericho Missile

    To6 = 6.4
    L6 = -8.7

    Therefore the finish benchmark value for Jericho Missile is -2.3 lengths. So he WENT VERY SLOW (6.4 lengths slower than benchmark) to the 600m mark and then WENT VERY FAST last 600m (8.9 lengths faster than benchmark).

    The race itself measured as follows

    To6 = 0.4
    L6 = -2.7

    So the race benchmark value is of course the same, -2.3 lengths. But the To6 value is important.

    It says that To the 600m mark, the race pace itself was run fairly close to what it should have, based on previous data etc. It also says that Jericho Missile was well off them, to the tune of 6 lengths.

    Then, the race pace for the last 600m was -2.7 lengths, so quite quick. Hence why Jericho Missile had to run -8.7 lengths better than bench mark to win from a 6 length deficit at the 600m.

    So does this mean anything?
    Maybe.

    Watching the replay you can see this quite clearly. What does it say going forward?

    1400-1600 m shouldn't be a problem for Jericho Missile providing the race is run at near bench mark for the first 600m so he can unleash his powerful last 600m burst. If the race is run slow to the 600m then he's on trouble. Plus he's never gone 1200m+.

    To me, if I've interpreted correctly, this is a whole lot of data to explain what you see on a reply, specific to the winner against the race. Not sure if I'll jump into it.





    TheDiva, Thewogboys likes this post.

  • Ridersonthestorm33Ridersonthestorm33    10,930 posts
    edited October 2019
    All hocus pocus!

    Replays, replays, replays - that's all you need - Little Fish three and four wide the entire race in a Hannans behind a Railway Stakes contender - 12/1 next start in an average field. Megazone fair dinkum poleaxed at Geraldton carrying 62kgs, they normally don't recover from checks like that in the run, narrowly went down, 20/1 winner next start.

    There's that many variables with times, the only time that matters is if you're in gaol.
  • H-BOMBERH-BOMBER    10,567 posts
    Agree 100%
  • RodentRodent    7,446 posts
    Puntingform is my NUMBER ONE resource for accurate form analysis. Their sectional time information covers most tracks in Australia and is presented in an extremely user friendly database set up which of course also includes all the usual race day information. I would recommend the service to any punter serious about winning.
    Chris Nelson (thoroughbred industry Form Analyst and Media Commentator)
  • sonnysonny    1,538 posts
    The service is good but his tipping???
  • TheDivaTheDiva    13,248 posts
    sonny said:

    The service is good but his tipping???

    Shouldn’t they go hand in hand


  • TheDivaTheDiva    13,248 posts
    I took the time to get it explained to me and I looked at a race that one of my horses won at northam.. it said that overall the race was run below benchmark for a maiden when they ran 56.36 and they flew. That left me scratching my head as to whether I understood what I was looking at OR whether the data was actually any good.

    H-BOMBER likes this post.

  • LuckyLongshotsLuckyLongshots    4,270 posts
    'Sectional Stars' on Racing.com - uses the benchmark figures from Vince Accardi.

    You will find it uses
    Barrier to 800m
    800m to 400m
    400m to finish

    It is meant to balance out all conditions and tracks so you can do the form on a race, with form from multiple tracks/races/wind conditions etc.

    Last weeks episode as a podcast:
  • ElitistElitist    366 posts
    All these blokes spruiking puntingform in media/twitter wherever clearly aren’t paying the massive subscription prices, so hard to determine whether it’s really worth it
  • LuckyLongshotsLuckyLongshots    4,270 posts
    Elitist said:

    All these blokes spruiking puntingform in media/twitter wherever clearly aren’t paying the massive subscription prices, so hard to determine whether it’s really worth it

    Too true, one person pays and then they all share it.

    That IVR info from Vince Accardi is $55 per meeting.  A week of Vic tracks and you're up for quite a few hundred.  Be good if they had a cheat sheet for purchase, which showed the data for the runners each Saturday.  I will just stick with backing my blackbookers (then I can only blame myself) 
    :D
  • hashhash    7,495 posts
    Ask to see their results or past last weeks spreadsheet sent out to paid members
Sign In or Register to comment.