My little (14.3 hands) filly ran 3rd in a maiden special weight yesterday. As a 3 yr. old, she was only required to carry 113 lbs- the rider carried 119 lbs. She missed 2nd by a fast closing 3/4 of a length. The race was at a mile, she is showing that she needs more distance.
I was wondering what you thought the extra 6 lbs cost her in terms of distance. Personally, I would think that it cost me 2nd place.
Opinion on weight
Moderators: Roguelet, hpkingjr, WaveMaster
ONe of the pioneers of wt assigning said in the old days that it was 2 lbs per length in sprints and 1 lb per length at classic distances. I think it was Vosburgh but could be wrong on the author.
I did a little analysis of my own using some handicap horses from the 60s and assumed they were running as well as they could: Kelso, Gunbow, etc. and the numbers seem to hold up.
So we could guess that 6 lbs could have cost her 3 lengths..Still they are so unpredictable and so much uncertainty in it.
I did a little analysis of my own using some handicap horses from the 60s and assumed they were running as well as they could: Kelso, Gunbow, etc. and the numbers seem to hold up.
So we could guess that 6 lbs could have cost her 3 lengths..Still they are so unpredictable and so much uncertainty in it.
Re: Opinion on weight
jfw wrote:I was wondering what you thought the extra 6 lbs cost her in terms of distance.
Negligible. Some people think 6 pounds makes a big difference, some like me don't think it means anything.
The truth is, you could run the same race with the same horses carrying the same weight over the same track 3 weeks from now and your filly could win by 9 or lose by 30.
The weight spread, IMO, has very little to do with anything. It's just a construct we humans came up with. If we were talking a weight spread of 15lbs or more, THEN I might be inclined to believe it cost your filly a placing. If your girl's had less than 5 starts, I'd say it had more to do with seasoning than weight.
As for the 2lbs equal one length ... antiquate thinking to justify an antiquated practice.
Opinion on weight
Here in the UK where we run mainly handicaps with every qualifying horse being given an Official Rating ( ie handicap mark) by the Jockey club handicapper he works off a sliding scale viz - 3lbs a length at 5f, 2lbs a length at 8f and 1lb a length at 2 miles.
The highly authoritive Timeform uses the same scale for handicapping purposes. It is amazing how often it works out.
________
easyvape vaporizer
The highly authoritive Timeform uses the same scale for handicapping purposes. It is amazing how often it works out.
________
easyvape vaporizer
Last edited by Galejade on Thu Feb 03, 2011 12:40 am, edited 1 time in total.
Easy Goer wrote:why would someone say 15 lbs might mean something but 6 lbs means nothing? how does that work exatly? does 7 lbs mean anything? 8.5?
The bigger the weight spread, the more impact it will have. It's the SPREAD of the weight, not the weight itself. 5 pound spread, IN MY OPINION, means nothing. 7 pound spread, might mean something, might not. 10lbs or more, definitely a factor.
Anything under 5 lbs is negligible. Run the same 10 horses of equal ability (so no throwing a Ghostzapper against a bunch of Delta Downs bottom claimers) 10 times on the same track with the same weight spread of no more than 5 pounds to any horse, and you'll likely get 10 different winners.
Run 10 horses of equal ability over the same track with 9 horses carrying 115 and one horse carrying 130, I bet the horse carrying 130 couldn't win unless the rest of the horses fell down in front of him.
It's the 6-10lbs that I find as a grey area. Some horses, 7 pounds more than everyone else is nothing. Others, 7 pounds more is a train.
And I'm really hoping that was simple enough for you to follow, EG, because I'm not going to repeat myself or try to explain it to you any further. It would only be a waste of my time.
Weight
"A pints a pound the world around"; Makes you wonder about the old supersition about betting the horse having a bm in the post parade. Was it really just losing 10 pounds just before the race and that was the betting edge?
Is a side benefit of Salix the weight reduction? A pint of urine weights 1 pound so if the horse urinates a 1 and 1/2 gallons just before the race is it like losing 12 pounds from the total weight package? Who knows? Who could figure it out? The poop and pee stewards?
Is a side benefit of Salix the weight reduction? A pint of urine weights 1 pound so if the horse urinates a 1 and 1/2 gallons just before the race is it like losing 12 pounds from the total weight package? Who knows? Who could figure it out? The poop and pee stewards?
[quote="Sam"][ quote]
The bigger the weight spread, the more impact it will have. It's the SPREAD of the weight, not the weight itself. 5 pound spread, IN MY OPINION, means nothing. 7 pound spread, might mean something, might not. 10lbs or more, definitely a factor.
Anything under 5 lbs is negligible.
It's the 6-10lbs that I find as a grey area. Some horses, 7 pounds more than everyone else is nothing. Others, 7 pounds more is a train. [quote]
If weight under 5lbs is negligible, why do you think trainers drop the price
of claiming horses $2,000 to lose 2lbs of "negligible" weight difference?
The bigger the weight spread, the more impact it will have. It's the SPREAD of the weight, not the weight itself. 5 pound spread, IN MY OPINION, means nothing. 7 pound spread, might mean something, might not. 10lbs or more, definitely a factor.
Anything under 5 lbs is negligible.
It's the 6-10lbs that I find as a grey area. Some horses, 7 pounds more than everyone else is nothing. Others, 7 pounds more is a train. [quote]
If weight under 5lbs is negligible, why do you think trainers drop the price
of claiming horses $2,000 to lose 2lbs of "negligible" weight difference?
reese wrote:If weight under 5lbs is negligible, why do you think trainers drop the price of claiming horses $2,000 to lose 2lbs of "negligible" weight difference?
For the same reason they put a horse who's never bled a day in its life on Salix. For the same reason people believe light coloured hooves are more prone to feet problems (even though there have been studies that show otherwise). Belief and superstition are hard things to overcome.
ak1 wrote:Isn't the type of weight considered to be a difference too? Weight pads vs rider?
I've heard some trainers prefer dead weight to a rider, because dead weight (theoretically) doesn't move during the race.
I've also heard some prefer a rider because it balances better over the horse than dead weight.
Which just goes to prove everyone has an opinion and no one is right or wrong.
personally I would not want to carry six extra pounds if I didnt have to.
Doubt than anyone would knowingly agree to add weight (because it is negligible) that wasn't required.
"Hey Trainer Dan, I want to enter Lulabell in the overnight stakes race tommorow. Condition book says she'll need to carry 120, but let's be sporting and go 126."
JFW--I would be interested to know what the reason the trainer gave you when you asked and congratulations to your mare for a heavyweight performance. Hopefully it is promise of good things to come.
Doubt than anyone would knowingly agree to add weight (because it is negligible) that wasn't required.
"Hey Trainer Dan, I want to enter Lulabell in the overnight stakes race tommorow. Condition book says she'll need to carry 120, but let's be sporting and go 126."
JFW--I would be interested to know what the reason the trainer gave you when you asked and congratulations to your mare for a heavyweight performance. Hopefully it is promise of good things to come.
Last edited by syndeis on Tue May 02, 2006 4:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
It makes no logical sense to say that 5 lbs means nothing and 6 lbs goes into a grey area. It would defy the laws of physics and gravity to think that there is some magical threshold where wt. suddenly matters and only a few oz. less and it doesnt matter at all.
Much less that the number 5, is the magic cutoff line.
Did you know those guys who climb Mt. Everest will cut the handles off off of their toothbrushes? Cut the handles off! This must weigh a total of 4 or 5 grams...
Those tour de france guys have aerodynamic engineers who work on shaving off a few ounces off their handle bars. Apparently a few oz. make a difference to them.
Those guys who swim in the olympics will shave off all their body hair! Imagine that, how much effect could a few strands of body hair have?
What about those bob sled guys? The whole thing comes down to GErman engineering so those guys win every time. They shave a few oz. here a few oz. there.
Gee I wonder what type of thinking is really archaic thinking?
Much less that the number 5, is the magic cutoff line.
Did you know those guys who climb Mt. Everest will cut the handles off off of their toothbrushes? Cut the handles off! This must weigh a total of 4 or 5 grams...
Those tour de france guys have aerodynamic engineers who work on shaving off a few ounces off their handle bars. Apparently a few oz. make a difference to them.
Those guys who swim in the olympics will shave off all their body hair! Imagine that, how much effect could a few strands of body hair have?
What about those bob sled guys? The whole thing comes down to GErman engineering so those guys win every time. They shave a few oz. here a few oz. there.
Gee I wonder what type of thinking is really archaic thinking?
Easy Goer wrote:Those guys who swim in the olympics will shave off all their body hair! Imagine that, how much effect could a few strands of body hair have?
First off, I did not say 5lbs means "nothing." If you are going to start questioning every thing I say, EG, then you better start getting what I say right. This is now the second time you've foolishly tried to make it look like I said something I did not even imply.
Secondly, I was specifically addressing the weight SPREAD, not the weight itself. If you aren't willing to read the whole post, please don't bother responding. You are only wasting my time and I find it increasing difficult to not be condescending to you for saying things that clearly show you are not paying attention to what you read.
Third, just about every thing you mentioned relates to DRAG or FRICTION, not WEIGHT and is about either Aerodynamics (air) or Hydrodynamics (liquid). AERODYNAMICS is the reason owners started moving to body forming silks rather than the button shirts because the shirts were creating as much as 10 pounds of drag when they filled with air at racing speed. Obviously you don't sail.
I've dated a swimmer, I know damn well why they shave down their whole body. Body hair creates DRAG, or friction in the water. FRICTION decreases speed. They shave off their body hair to increase speed by decreasing drag, NOT WEIGHT.
Neither Aerodynamics nor Hydrodynamics is about weight, it's about the speed at which AIR or LIQUID travels over a surface. Hair on a body causes FRICTION, which creates RESISTANCE, which reduces SPEED. WEIGHT is not involved in that equation anywhere.
If you think they are shaving off body hair to lighten their own weight to increase speed, you need to go back to junior high and take some rudimentary science classes and if you don't know the difference between weight and drag, then going any further in this discussion with you is an exercise in futility.
So basically, "NEVER MIND" (and then go back to the other thread and see what 'never mind' translates to).