Please Explain

[Beltane]

Here's the report:

PACMAN HAMMER– (barrier 3) Broke gait during the score up and as a result was out of position at the start and took no competitive part in the event. Prior to the declaration of all clear, Stewards reviewed the start of the event with regards to the gelding breaking gait and also the circumstances regarding driver J McCarthy raising his right arm. Upon review, Mr McCarthy stated that his gelding, in his opinion, broke gait as a result of chasing the mobile barrier and as he was of the opinion that his gelding was not afforded a fair start and this being the reasons for the gelding breaking gait, he attempted to alert the starter. It was further established that there had not been any gear faults with PACKMAN HAMMER. Upon consideration, Stewards concluded that as PACMAN HAMMER left the pre-race formation, the mobile barrier was still stationary before proceeding forward. It was further established that the gelding broke gait free of any interference and free of any gear faults. Although acknowledging the comments of Mr McCarthy, Stewards did not find that the manner in which Mr McCarthy was approaching the mobile was an adequate reason establish the cause of the gelding breaking gait. Having formed this conclusion Stewards were of the view that PACKMAN HAMMER was afforded an opportunity to score-up and the gelding breaking gait was as a result of the geldings own tractability. As a result, PACKMAN HAMMER was declared a starter and the all-clear was subsequently given on the judge’s numbers. PACMAN HAMMER was issued with its last chance in the mobile barrier draw.

It was all the horse's fault that the punters did their dough.

[JanellePeter]

Hi - As an analyser I see things like the run at Menangle 5/2/21 all the time. The runs prior at Bathurst were much slower pace.
See below after I have applied all required factors to the runs to convert them to Menangle times:

Date Location Mile First Last8 800-400 400T
05-Jan-21 MEN 114.7s 57.5s 57.2s 28.7s 28.5
26-Dec-20 BAT 117.6s 61.5s 56.2s 28.4s 27.8
16-Dec-20 BAT 117.8s 62.7s 55.1s 28.2s 26.9
The times above are without including actual distance run and that brings them closer again.

Noting that on average horses times over similar distance between Menangle and Bathurst will decrease by 1.5 seconds and last 800m by around 1 second. Yes this race was run quick comparatively (Mainly due to the fast first pace) and this horse was not tried at this pace previously. Given the advantage of leading I didn't see it is a massive discrepancy. If you chart first vs last800 you will see what I mean.
In saying all that I had no idea Pacman Hammer would lead this race or that it would be run at that speed so my pre-race analysis was wrong. Also note I see it a lot when a horse runs a much quicker race that it will gallop next start. Happens regularly but you can't bank on it.

Hope this helps explain it a little bit.

[aussiebreno]

Hi - As an analyser I see things like the run at Menangle 5/2/21 all the time. The runs prior at Bathurst were much slower pace.
See below after I have applied all required factors to the runs to convert them to Menangle times:

Date Location Mile First Last8 800-400 400T
05-Jan-21 MEN 114.7s 57.5s 57.2s 28.7s 28.5
26-Dec-20 BAT 117.6s 61.5s 56.2s 28.4s 27.8
16-Dec-20 BAT 117.8s 62.7s 55.1s 28.2s 26.9
The times above are without including actual distance run and that brings them closer again.

Noting that on average horses times over similar distance between Menangle and Bathurst will decrease by 1.5 seconds and last 800m by around 1 second. Yes this race was run quick comparatively (Mainly due to the fast first pace) and this horse was not tried at this pace previously. Given the advantage of leading I didn't see it is a massive discrepancy. If you chart first vs last800 you will see what I mean.
In saying all that I had no idea Pacman Hammer would lead this race or that it would be run at that speed so my pre-race analysis was wrong. Also note I see it a lot when a horse runs a much quicker race that it will gallop next start. Happens regularly but you can't bank on it.

Hope this helps explain it a little bit.

Explain how you got each sectional? Makes no sense to me.

[Messenger]

Not that clear I'm afraid Janelle

All I can tell is that you added 2 secs to both his first and last halves at Menangle

I think all you are saying is that they had not tried letting him run from the get-go before (although it was not intentional)
I guess they will just have to let him run all the way from now on as he showed amazing stamina and can run 5 secs faster that way

[JanellePeter]

How the sectionals were calculated is specific to the program I use. The important part is the relationship between each of the sectionals.
The first sectionals seem to agree with your statement above.

[aussiebreno]

How the sectionals were calculated is specific to the program I use. The important part is the relationship between each of the sectionals.
The first sectionals seem to agree with your statement above.

So despite your post saying you usually decrease 1.5secs for Bathurst compared to Menangle you have added 3 seconds (instead of 1.5seconds) in this case to get to 114.7 for the Menangle run (extra 20metres). You say last 800m add 1 second yet you have added 1 second for both the 3rd and 4th quarters.
Despite the extra addition seemingly at your discretion the adjusted time is STILL 3 seconds quicker than the Bathurst time (40metres). So off your own normal adjusted time its a roughly 60metres improvement (covered what 10m extra so still 50m improvement in distance covered) and you're saying things like this happen all the time?

[Showgrounds]

So despite your post saying you usually decrease 1.5secs for Bathurst compared to Menangle you have added 3 seconds (instead of 1.5seconds) in this case to get to 114.7 for the Menangle run (extra 20metres). You say last 800m add 1 second yet you have added 1 second for both the 3rd and 4th quarters.
Despite the extra addition seemingly at your discretion the adjusted time is STILL 3 seconds quicker than the Bathurst time (40metres). So off your own normal adjusted time its a roughly 60metres improvement (covered what 10m extra so still 50m improvement in distance covered) and you're saying things like this happen all the time?

I smell bovine droppings.

[Messenger]

3 weeks ago Nikks Pick was racing in Tasmania
She had 50 starts for the leading stable of Ben Yole, 46 of them as a 3yo, for only 1 win
After a 7 month spell she had 10 starts in 10 months for a couple of different trainers over there for 1 more win

Now a 5yo she comes to Victoria where the racing is superior and starts $2.70 and $2.60 fav for a second and a win for Kate Hargreaves
She was a NR36 in an 'up to 51NR' race at Wedderburn today.
I reckon it is a PLEASE EXPLAIN job, I and I am sure Ben Yole would be interested (remember she was racing in Tassie just 3wks ago)
Maybe the question didn't so much need to be asked today as she had finished 2nd at Stawell - maybe Stawell was where it needed to be asked (but nothing in the Stewards Report)

http://www.harness.org.au/racing/fie...21#WDC31012104

Just click on her name to get her complete record

I can imagine someone bringing her over to try as a broodmare as she has VG bloodlines - maybe they decided to give her a try first and got lucky but that is instant improvement
Maybe Alex Ashwood's Tassie connection spotted something we don't know about

[Messenger]

The Hargreaves stable has actually snuck up on me
I didn't realize that they are now the 4th leading stable in Vic, with only Stewart, Gath and Lilley in front of them

In 18/19 she trained 24 winners from 129 starters
In 19/20 she trained 59 winners from 315
Good strike rates of about 19% (close to a winner every 5)

Then in the extra 4 months added to the end of 2020
an incredible 60 winners in 218 starters
that is a strike rate of 27.5% (better than a winner every 4)
That is Emma Stewart stuff

Doing a little more investigation of Nicks Pick, I noticed that that 2nd win of hers in Hobart on Nov 6, she started $1.65 fav despite having only won 1 of 55 - she was first up for a new stable (only at the trots!)

[Hanrahan]

Messenger.

I assume prior to your ” I reckon it is a PLEASE EXPLAIN job” statement you watched and reflected on the last four performances in Tassie where it won, came third and had two tougher runs. Obviously the punters view that it was a decent chance was reflected in the starting price and Wedderburn is a track that generally attracts weaker horses. For the record I have no acquaintance with Hargreaves stable.