Aussiebreno's Graded PBD System

[aussiebreno]

I don't think the current system is broke, it works just fine and is fair and will be quite content if it stays in place. However I think my idea might be 'more' fair.
Lets take a C3/C4. The race will allow C5 mares or C5s with a claim to enter the race, but when it comes to doing the barrier draw they will be assessed as C5s and not C4s.

So say the order of draws is 10,6,9,8,7,5,4,3,2,1.

Under the current system the race draw could look like this:
Hairy McLairy C4 with a claim driver
Donaldsons Dairy C5 mare with claim driver
Hercules Morse C3
Bottomley Potts C4 mare
Muffin Mclay C16 Claimer $xxxx
Schnitel Von Crum C5 mare
Scarface Claw C6 mare with claim driver
Skin and Bone C5 with claim
Kids Book C5 mare
Tough Tom C4

So we have a position where Hairy McLairy, Donaldson Dairy, Hercules More & Bottomley Potts were all treated as C3s for the purpose of the draw. The rest were all treated as C4s.

Under my system, it would be what you really are. So a C5 can still stop back into the race, but will we assessed as a C5 for the purposes of the PBD.

The barrier draw could then look like this


Hercules Morse C3
Bottomley Potts C4
Tough Tom C4
Hairy McLairy C4
Schnitzel Von Krum C5
Scarface Claw C6
Kids Book C5
Skin and Bone C5
Donaldsons Dairy C5
Muffin McLay C16

As the race is a C3/C4 in this situation the the C4 mares/claim drivers don't actually mean anything. (If it was C3 only, the C4 mares/claim drivers would get into the field, but draw the back)
But it stills allows the C5 mares/claim drivers to drop back into the race - giving then an advantage. At the moment that is a double advantage imo (both getting into the race, and then the chance to draw better than lesser classed horses), and a disadvantage to the C3s who should be getting the best draw, not just a chance at it.
It brings it into par with PBD $ as well. It's not like they say Horse A (with a claim driver) has $60,000 prizemoney, but then take off the amount of its last win for the purposes of the draw. So why take off its last penalty for the purposes of the draw?

Not being an owner, trainer etc but it must peeve them off when a horse who has won more races a) drops back into the race but then b) gets a better draw.
The dropping back into the race is fine, it gives incentive for mares to race on and for junior drivers to get some experience. That's fine, but its just too big an advantage to them if they then take the prime barrier draws.

Thoughts?

[Danno]

G'day Brenno,
I reckon the doubling of concessions should be a no go myself, and the system you are proposing is very similar, allows access into an easier race but doesn't disadvantage the other competitors in the draw so I reckon if there was voting on "preferences" for your system you'd be on a winner. Great idea, and would defenitely get more support than simply doing a 'one concession" rule.

Another thing that needs looking at (in NSW anyway) is how the PBD system actually works at each track, take Newcastle for example, statistically the best draw over 2030M is either 6 or 7, however the actual best draws are probably 2,3,4,5,6,1,7,8,9,10. The current preferential draw system just goes 1 thriough to 10 and doesn't take into account the disadvantage of the 1, similarly at tracks with a 6 off the front and 4 off the back set the 6 is actually one of the worst barriers ( depending on the track) but it's not treated as such in the PBD.

Cheers,
Dan

[aussiebreno]

http://www.harness.org.au/fields.cfm?mc=WW071212

Final race at Wagga on Friday. It is a C3-C4. There is a C6 drawn 1 and C3 drawn 6. Shouldn't happen.

[clumsy]

Aussiebreno we don't mind buying a mare to race because of the advantage they have in dropping back a grade or two and still have the chance to get a good barrier draw. To take this advantage away would shorten the racing life of mares and Make fillies even less attractive to buy from the sales ring.

[aussiebreno]

Aussiebreno we don't mind buying a mare to race because of the advantage they have in dropping back a grade or two and still have the chance to get a good barrier draw. To take this advantage away would shorten the racing life of mares and Make fillies even less attractive to buy from the sales ring.

It is a double advantage though. Dropping back a grade is great, but it is unfair on others when they superior horses draw better. If a C3 keeps drawing 6 when C6s draw the pole that is also a quick fire way to stop racing careers.

Edit: I just looked at race conditions and it was $L. So that is fair enough for the race at Wagga, but there are still plenty of other scenarios where inferior horses get a rough deal.

[2minuteman]

I don't think the current system is broke, it works just fine and is fair and will be quite content if it stays in place. However I think my idea might be 'more' fair.
Lets take a C3/C4. The race will allow C5 mares or C5s with a claim to enter the race, but when it comes to doing the barrier draw they will be assessed as C5s and not C4s.

So say the order of draws is 10,6,9,8,7,5,4,3,2,1.

Under the current system the race draw could look like this:
Hairy McLairy C4 with a claim driver
Donaldsons Dairy C5 mare with claim driver
Hercules Morse C3
Bottomley Potts C4 mare
Muffin Mclay C16 Claimer $xxxx
Schnitel Von Crum C5 mare
Scarface Claw C6 mare with claim driver
Skin and Bone C5 with claim
Kids Book C5 mare
Tough Tom C4

So we have a position where Hairy McLairy, Donaldson Dairy, Hercules More & Bottomley Potts were all treated as C3s for the purpose of the draw. The rest were all treated as C4s.

Under my system, it would be what you really are. So a C5 can still stop back into the race, but will we assessed as a C5 for the purposes of the PBD.

The barrier draw could then look like this


Hercules Morse C3
Bottomley Potts C4
Tough Tom C4
Hairy McLairy C4
Schnitzel Von Krum C5
Scarface Claw C6
Kids Book C5
Skin and Bone C5
Donaldsons Dairy C5
Muffin McLay C16

As the race is a C3/C4 in this situation the the C4 mares/claim drivers don't actually mean anything. (If it was C3 only, the C4 mares/claim drivers would get into the field, but draw the back)
But it stills allows the C5 mares/claim drivers to drop back into the race - giving then an advantage. At the moment that is a double advantage imo (both getting into the race, and then the chance to draw better than lesser classed horses), and a disadvantage to the C3s who should be getting the best draw, not just a chance at it.
It brings it into par with PBD $ as well. It's not like they say Horse A (with a claim driver) has $60,000 prizemoney, but then take off the amount of its last win for the purposes of the draw. So why take off its last penalty for the purposes of the draw?

Not being an owner, trainer etc but it must peeve them off when a horse who has won more races a) drops back into the race but then b) gets a better draw.
The dropping back into the race is fine, it gives incentive for mares to race on and for junior drivers to get some experience. That's fine, but its just too big an advantage to them if they then take the prime barrier draws.

Thoughts?

Here Ladies and Gentlemen is the perfect illustration of something that has had me beaten for a long time and is a major reason that my wagering is now almost non-existent.

How on earth are we expected to do the form when there are so many variables to factor in?

I have been having a bet on the trots for 60 yrs and the above system, as explained by aussiebreno, is totally un-intelligible (no reflection on you aussie)when it comes to doing form unless you have a lot of time and a complete data base that allows comparisons between horses in the example (in red)given.

The variables are simply too great to arrive at a meaningful result.As an example aussie, how long did it take to come up with your example?

Now I must add another factor here.

It could be that I am as thick as a brick.

While on form,would it not be possible to have a meaningful form guide available?If we did the above discussion becomes academic.

Why is our system so convoluted? Pardon me for looking backwards here but I need to ,to make my point.

Way back when,races were handicapped C4+ and C4 was on the front and a C5 was off 12yds,C6 off 24yds and so on,with mobile starts this (at the moment) can't be done,so what we have is a schemozzle.

The current system is one of the reasons for bastardising the Interdominions.When it comes to the final we will have two,maybe three live chances.

What are the most anticipated races on the Australasian calendar?

Victoria Cup,A G Hunter Cup,NZ Cup,Kilmore Cup,etc.etc. All handicaps and all much more open (IMO) than the bastardised Inter.

[aussiebreno]

Here Ladies and Gentlemen is the perfect illustration of something that has had me beaten for a long time and is a major reason that my wagering is now almost non-existent.

How on earth are we expected to do the form when there are so many variables to factor in?

I have been having a bet on the trots for 60 yrs and the above system, as explained by aussiebreno, is totally un-intelligible (no reflection on you aussie)when it comes to doing form unless you have a lot of time and a complete data base that allows comparisons between horses in the example (in red)given.

The variables are simply too great to arrive at a meaningful result.As an example aussie, how long did it take to come up with your example?

Now I must add another factor here.

It could be that I am as thick as a brick.

While on form,would it not be possible to have a meaningful form guide available?If we did the above discussion becomes academic.

Why is our system so convoluted? Pardon me for looking backwards here but I need to ,to make my point.

Way back when,races were handicapped C4+ and C4 was on the front and a C5 was off 12yds,C6 off 24yds and so on,with mobile starts this (at the moment) can't be done,so what we have is a schemozzle.

The current system is one of the reasons for bastardising the Interdominions.When it comes to the final we will have two,maybe three live chances.

What are the most anticipated races on the Australasian calendar?

Victoria Cup,A G Hunter Cup,NZ Cup,Kilmore Cup,etc.etc. All handicaps and all much more open (IMO) than the bastardised Inter.

I know a bloke who bangs on about making a staggered mobile. So you could adjust it to have horse starting from different positions eg the 1 horse from scratch, the two horse from 1m, the three horse from 4 metres. One problem may present itself is finding happy mediums for the back row horses. Maybe thats just a luck of the draw thing!

I'm no engineer, can it be done safely and effectively?

[Danno]

I know a bloke who bangs on about making a staggered mobile. So you could adjust it to have horse starting from different positions eg the 1 horse from scratch, the two horse from 1m, the three horse from 4 metres. One problem may present itself is finding happy mediums for the back row horses. Maybe thats just a luck of the draw thing!

I'm no engineer, can it be done safely and effectively?

Hahahahahaha brenno thats hilarious! (to my sick mind anyway)....I can just see the coyote tinkering with his ACME staggered start mobile, getting ready to launch it at the road runner!! hahahahaha

I'm thinking Ron was more interested in standing starts, but we should never say never,

Thanks Brendan, thats a cracker!

cheers,
Dan

[2minuteman]

Hahahahahaha brenno thats hilarious! (to my sick mind anyway)....I can just see the coyote tinkering with his ACME staggered start mobile, getting ready to launch it at the road runner!! hahahahaha

I'm thinking Ron was more interested in standing starts, but we should never say never,

Thanks Brendan, thats a cracker!

cheers,
Dan

Yes,SS was what I was meaning,however,I am not SS to the exclusion of all else,all have their place.Question:Why is the mobile revered so? Trainers not wanting to educate horses to SS?
My original post was in regard to the bowl of Fruit Loops that make up fields when it comes to doing the form.No comments there?
Nice to see your reaction to suggestions that don't agree with yours are still the same Dan.Ridicule instead of reason.Sorry but I am just a punter,and as you pointed out in an earlier post,not to be taken seriously.
This forum is about opinion and as we know,they are like arseholes,we all have one.
Cheers,
Ron.

[Danno]

Yes,SS was what I was meaning,however,I am not SS to the exclusion of all else,all have their place.Question:Why is the mobile revered so? Trainers not wanting to educate horses to SS?
My original post was in regard to the bowl of Fruit Loops that make up fields when it comes to doing the form.No comments there?
Nice to see your reaction to suggestions that don't agree with yours are still the same Dan.Ridicule instead of reason.Sorry but I am just a punter,and as you pointed out in an earlier post,not to be taken seriously.
This forum is about opinion and as we know,they are like arseholes,we all have one.
Cheers,
Ron.

Got a chuckle out of that one too Ron, and if it read like I was trying to ridicule Brendan, then an apology is required from me and will be delivered to him as that was certainly not my intention,just my twisted sense of humour at work.

As to your original question, I believe, we are falling over ourselves trying to provide SO MUCH information to punters we are in actual fact over arming them with information to the point where too many short priced favourites are occurring, thus stifling the betting.
From your post there appears to be another issue ( which doesn't surprise me in the least) that some people find the information a complete overload, which they feel bogged down by.

Completely agree with you that we all have a "purge point" located in a very similar position to everyone else, to me that is further evidence that we are all equal and nobody should feel like they are "special" or should receive preferential treatment over other individuals and/or other groups.

So please Ron feel free to express your opinion, while you are doing so, think about the fact that others ought have the same liberty, this is a forum afterall.

Cheers,
Dan