Whats your thoughts everyone on an "official" notice of some sort in race guides as to the announcement that a particular horse is having its first start under a new trainer?
This can quite often make a significant difference to a horses chances, new or newer training styles, feed, atmosphere of new stable and care taken by staff, etc...
And yes an opposite effect can happen, either way, do you think it would be a good thing?
I am with you Ash, the form tells us who drove the horse of late but not the more important info of who trained it. Not highlighting a change of stable is not spoon feeding, it is an omission that should be corrected. If you follow Brendan's line of thinking they should not tell us anything - hell, why would you want to encourage punters LOL
Greg Sugars was a Champion harness racing person
http://www.harness.org.au/fields.cfm?mc=YU150314
The official fields there list the trainers. If you're doing the form from the paper or a tab sheet you're doing it wrong to start with, and if you someone cant realise a horse has changed trainer are they really going to take the time to be looking at a notification of changed trainers or even gear changes? There are unknown variables like eating up and how the horse worked during the week that are more important and there is no reporting on that.
I get it Brendan - you are a super punter. While the fields list trainers you do not have the previous starts field list for comparison at your finger tips. The average punter likes the form but I guess you would argue they should stop putting who drove the horse for its previous starts too. You talk about important unkown variables BUT the change of trainer is NOT an unkown variable - it is listed but it gets lost in the wash and I think Ash's point is, that if they list the trainer for each start in the form guide or made a note of a change it wouldn't. Hardly a biggie
Greg Sugars was a Champion harness racing person
Super punter? No. Able to click a mouse yes. Able to recall and process some basic info yes.
http://www.harness.org.au/fields.cfm?mc=YU150314
The results with listed trainers are right at your fingertips.
Do we also need a registrar for change of barrier position? There has to be some kind of edge for those bothered to delve a little deeper. Punting is a battle of intellect and knowledge (and luck), no exam I've ever endured has laid out the answers, those students who chose to study a bit harder done better.
Your drivers argument is moot, trainers barely change, drivers can change from race to race quite regularly.
I think Ash has a point. Just following the form, most times I'll notice a change of stables. More-so, if I do notice a change, that will be significant to my thoughts on the race. Once again, if I do notice, I might delve deeper into trial results. But for me, it's only for interest sake.
The form does list previous barrier positions and drivers and on the subject of gear changes, purely for interest sake, I'd be interested in Brendan's view on all gear changes. Are there some you think are pretty insignificant?
Certainly not denying the astute form student reaping the rewards but IMO some of the gear changes notified aren't as significant as a change of trainer. I guess there's only so much space in the form guide so something might have to give.
I'm just a punter, not a trainer, I have a vague idea of what gear is for but not fully up to speed. But even if I was fully up to speed, are you able to put a quantifiable amount of improvement on a horse? Ok we've put deafeners in, will that improve the horse a length or two? Will letting the hopeless out improve the horse a length or two? Because the difference between a length and two lengths could be the difference between winning and losing. Gear changes for me are more are moreso a part of saying, ok I got the form wrong on that horse, maybe it was the gear change that improved it.
If you want a change in the way form guides and results are presented I would be pushing for 200m sectionals rather than 400s. If a horse takes 400m to work forward three wide to the death between 1400 and 1000m and first two quarters are 31 and 32 you might say the horse got there easy enough. But the 200m sectionals can tell a different story. They could be 16 15 15 17 or 15 16 17 15. Working forward in 15 and 15 means you worked pretty hard, working forward in 16 and 17 means you got there pretty cheap. Same story last 400m. Horse may appear to be getting home well late, but if last 400 is covered in 13 and 14 well maybe it was other horses stopping, whereas if it getting home in 14 and 13 well that could be a ripper final 200m. Probably wouldn't be as much variance as I've put in my examples, and to some extent you can tell the change of pace watching a video, but the big difference between thoroughbred and harness racing form is the recording of sectional times from a furlong to two furlongs.
Although it's not a 'biggie' I get where Ash is coming from. It could easily be listed on the 'Horse's Racing Performance' list (and as it's not right in front of u on the formguide it couldn't be regarded as 'spoon-feeding'), it would definitely be a whole lot easier than having to go back and search the results page from horses previous start(s) (as Kevin pointed out).
Whilst on the formguide issue, the harness.org.au really needs to sort their **** out when it comes to how the formguide reads of a horse that crosses the Tasman....it's all over the place, and has been for a long time now.