Naseem Sea - OHR

andthereoff · **04-05-11**, **02:45 AM**

Interested in her run Saturday, wanted to know what you guys had for her victory?

I was wondering if this was the race Meow won last year, also won in a very eye catching time although this seems to be far better.

Just the filly herself costing £2k, failed to win on debut, had to work hard for her win etc doesnt add up to the time recorded, is this because Dundalk gets quicker during the sun do you think?

Anyhow, you could rate her a minimum 97 through Measured Approval, Ascot filly for sure.

**Spook** · **04-05-11**, **07:43 PM**

96.94 on the clock, although the race comments and beaten distance would suggest the runner up might be the one to take from the race. 96 through Measured Approval given that she carried 1Ib less

I've never rated a card from Dundalk before and don't know how common this is, but you've got to be suspicious of where they had the stalls. The whole card is littered with fast times (again I don't know how common this is on polytrack). I suppose you can harrow it to speed things up, or periodically it might ride 'thin' before another layer is laid down?.

I notice it was an auction race though. There's been a trend in the last few seasons for qualified horses to shirk group races at 2, and go in search of some of these increasingly 'big pots' that are available

**Spook** · **04-05-11**, **11:27 PM**

Actually something looks iffy about that time. If its genuine then its Natagora territory in which case you'd have expected her to have come 6-7 lengths clear. She'd be a lock for the Queen Mary on that time. It might be worth keeping an eye on it and see if the RP amend it in the next week. The other thing to consider is an email to Dave Edwards and see if he can cast any light on it. I've never done it myself, but I understand he does respond them

**CPGagie** · **04-05-11**, **11:47 PM**

Not a place I bother with, and was told to stay well clear a while ago, as there is more cheating goes on there than anywhere. So I've been told by someone I trust on such matters. I've just had a quick look through raceform at the clear FAV's SR since 01/01/00.

DUND - HCP 21.3% - Non HCP 32.7% - TOTAL 26.7%
LING - HCP 28.8% - Non HCP 37.8% - TOTAL 33.0%.
KEMP - HCP 27.5% - Non HCP 37.1% - TOTAL 31.0%.
WOLV - HCP 26.7% - Non HCP 37.9% - TOTAL 31.7%.
SOUT - HCP 30.3% - Non HCP 37.5% - TOTAL 33.7%

That tells its own story I guess.

I've also timed the races before using a sequence of video processes I go through to get sectional times, so I got it exact (within 0.04 of a second), and it was totally different to what was published. They may move the stalls a bit here and there, but when I've timed it myself, (on more than one occasion) the times were out way more than stall placement problems. I recall one instance for a sprint where there was an error against the published time of nearly 2 seconds. Which is totally unacceptable.

It may have been a one off with a few meetings when I did it. Maybe their timing equipment was dodgy at the time. I dont know.

**Spook** · **05-05-11**, **12:00 AM**

Timing error was the conclusion I was starting to come to Chris.

2yo fillies can't put up that kind of performance in May unless they're seriously top drawer and well forward (Jealous Again, Natagora, types) and even then its once every now and then . This horse had had two previous runs without distinction. The other thing of course is that you'd expect her to come clear. The others are running into the mid 90's which seems totally unrealistic.

The only place I've ever encountered timing errors with a degree of regularity is Longchamp where it's not unknown for the French to screw up and time them past the first of the two winning posts, and the other one that sometimes crops up is the use of the straight course mile standard for the round course mile at the Curragh too

2 secs is worth what? 11.75L's, seems a bit more realistic

andthereoff · **05-05-11**, **12:06 AM**

Safe to say we should scrap this one then gents?

Personally ive not had troubles with Dundalk times in the past which is why i flagged it up, imperial rome is already one who franked his time at dundalk, you could add mount athos to that list maybe

**CPGagie** · **05-05-11**, **07:56 PM**

It could be they use different timing equipment. The stalls look different, so maybe.

Anyway, out of curiosity I timed the first 3 races (the tractor was in the way of the 3rd race, but due to a hood being flung off, and horse back legs going down to jump out, I estimate that the published time for the 3rd race was correct, or very close). The first two races on that card were both 5F races which is interesting.

I timed both from when the stalls opened. It is a fraction before, as the bar has to drop and when it reaches halfway it starts the timer. Thats how it goes in the UK anyway.

The 2nd 5F race was exactly the same as published time. The first race however, was 0.62 seconds slower than published. I used the same method for both races, and so something isnt correct. maybe they use an infra red sensor or something, and the horses have to cross it to start the timer. I've always been under the impression it was the stalls that activated the timing mech.

I guess it was an OK time, even allowing for the 0.62 error (if thats what it was) but there are problems with the first race on AW surfaces.

A couple of points ATO. First you said this......

"Just the filly herself costing £2k, failed to win on debut, had to work hard for her win etc doesnt add up to the time recorded, is this because Dundalk gets quicker during the sun do you think?"

You're thinking about this upside down. Actually, I suspect you were thinking too much about things and got yourself muddled up. An easy thing to do with +/- numbers bouncing around in your head.

The first race was the fast time you're talking about. So the sun may have dried the course out and made it a bit slower throughout the afternoon, which would leave you with a faster time for the first and a slow time for the last. That may have happened a little, if it was a hot summers day. Similar (but the other way around, and not quite as significant) to how the ground usually speeds up a bit through the afternoon on turf, until it reaches certain levels, and or from certain saturation points. This isnt the time or place to discuss that though.

The other issue, is that it was the first race on the card. Now I dont know about Dundalk, but the clerks at the AW courses in the UK (not sure about Kempton), use the first race as a guide to the speed of the surface. they then go out if it isnt to their liking and slow it down if its riding too fast. They do this by harrowing a little deeper.

It is an artificial surface, and they now feel it is their duty to manipulate it. So if its riding too fast in their opinion they will slow it down for the rest of the meeting. There was a UK meeting recently (I cant recall which off hand), and I had to conclude that they'd done that. All I could do was have a stab at the first, and rate the rest of the card as normal.

The clerk at Wolverhampton is on record as saying he attempts to get the course so horses clock as close to the RP standard as possible. REGARDLESS of class or age. We know this, so can sort of work with it, but as I said, if they do this based on the first, you have to treat that race in isolation to the rest of the card.

So, in a nutshell, these are the 3 potential problems with the clocking you have...

1) 0.62 timing error, unless they use some sort of infra-red/laser system at the start.

2) Sun slowing down the meeting through the afternoon, resulting in earlier races being rated fast, and later races being rated slow.

3) Clerk of the course harrowed a little deeper after the first to slow the track down. Which looks possible, as it was run in a quick time anyway you'd think (dont have standards for dundalk).

**Manchesterskytrain** · **05-05-11**, **10:20 PM**

i haven't done to Dundalk caed yet but just a few observations that may or may not help
i have timed many races at Dundalk myself and found many discrepencies from the official times as pointed out earlier in this thread it is a big issue that continues to affect times there.
also the 5f races are run on a shute and on occasions the shute does ride faster than the normal course
off thhe top of my head no data at hand Arganil won a race there over 5f where the shute was riding faster than the main track so it can happen
i am a strong believer in dundalk form and i think it is a goldmine for future winners and well worth working out your own standards and timing the races to get accurate figures it is proper racing and you can unearth some nice little gems
the likes of copper dock, hujalaya, banna biorche and danday boy all signalled they were much better than the official handicapper realised at the time with fast runs there, and sole power was on my list of horses to follow from a very fast time it produced there as a 2yo and he wemt on the win a group 1 sprint
if you have taken every care in timing yourself and have accurate standards for the track don;t just dismiss seemingly out of line fast performances at the track as they have a habit of being franked, also seen a couple of horses owned bt jabbars son win there and he seems to target dundalk

andthereoff · **10-05-11**, **05:55 PM**

Runs in the 6.00 Naas tomorrow

11/2 tissue.

**Frankel** · **10-05-11**, **10:16 PM**

Have heard they think quite a bit of Prophesy; and despite him making his racecourse debut it wouldn't be the biggest surprise were he to make it a winning one.

**Manchesterskytrain** · **11-05-11**, **05:56 PM**

just beaten by well backed O'Brien colt, but i still like this filly, one to keep an interest in

**The Duke** · **11-05-11**, **06:09 PM**

Originally Posted by Manchesterskytrain

just beaten by well backed O'Brien colt, but i still like this filly, one to keep an interest in

Yeah she ran well, took a while to pick up but kept on all the way to the line. Winner looks smart also so the form might work out.

**Spook** · **11-05-11**, **11:45 PM**

Typical Naas though!!! I seem to recall I've had trouble with this particular card before actually and violent discrepancies between round and straight course. I can only assume they doll out this time of year? (unless there's a perma-hurricane blowing from the same direction)

**Natagora** · **13-05-11**, **11:31 PM**

Just seen this thread gents and it's safe to say that nearly every time in Ireland is wrong. I now have to go back and hand time every race over there before I'm happy to give a rating for a race.

04-05-11, 02:45 AM	#1 (permalink)
andthereoff Banned. Join Date: Oct 2008	Naseem Sea Interested in her run Saturday, wanted to know what you guys had for her victory? I was wondering if this was the race Meow won last year, also won in a very eye catching time although this seems to be far better. Just the filly herself costing £2k, failed to win on debut, had to work hard for her win etc doesnt add up to the time recorded, is this because Dundalk gets quicker during the sun do you think? Anyhow, you could rate her a minimum 97 through Measured Approval, Ascot filly for sure.

04-05-11, 07:43 PM	#2 (permalink)
Spook World Class Join Date: Sep 2005	96.94 on the clock, although the race comments and beaten distance would suggest the runner up might be the one to take from the race. 96 through Measured Approval given that she carried 1Ib less I've never rated a card from Dundalk before and don't know how common this is, but you've got to be suspicious of where they had the stalls. The whole card is littered with fast times (again I don't know how common this is on polytrack). I suppose you can harrow it to speed things up, or periodically it might ride 'thin' before another layer is laid down?. I notice it was an auction race though. There's been a trend in the last few seasons for qualified horses to shirk group races at 2, and go in search of some of these increasingly 'big pots' that are available Last edited by Spook; 04-05-11 at 07:48 PM..

04-05-11, 11:47 PM	#4 (permalink)
CPGagie Moderate Handicapper Join Date: May 2009	Not a place I bother with, and was told to stay well clear a while ago, as there is more cheating goes on there than anywhere. So I've been told by someone I trust on such matters. I've just had a quick look through raceform at the clear FAV's SR since 01/01/00. DUND - HCP 21.3% - Non HCP 32.7% - TOTAL 26.7% LING - HCP 28.8% - Non HCP 37.8% - TOTAL 33.0%. KEMP - HCP 27.5% - Non HCP 37.1% - TOTAL 31.0%. WOLV - HCP 26.7% - Non HCP 37.9% - TOTAL 31.7%. SOUT - HCP 30.3% - Non HCP 37.5% - TOTAL 33.7% That tells its own story I guess. I've also timed the races before using a sequence of video processes I go through to get sectional times, so I got it exact (within 0.04 of a second), and it was totally different to what was published. They may move the stalls a bit here and there, but when I've timed it myself, (on more than one occasion) the times were out way more than stall placement problems. I recall one instance for a sprint where there was an error against the published time of nearly 2 seconds. Which is totally unacceptable. It may have been a one off with a few meetings when I did it. Maybe their timing equipment was dodgy at the time. I dont know. Last edited by CPGagie; 04-05-11 at 11:52 PM..

05-05-11, 07:56 PM	#7 (permalink)
CPGagie Moderate Handicapper Join Date: May 2009	It could be they use different timing equipment. The stalls look different, so maybe. Anyway, out of curiosity I timed the first 3 races (the tractor was in the way of the 3rd race, but due to a hood being flung off, and horse back legs going down to jump out, I estimate that the published time for the 3rd race was correct, or very close). The first two races on that card were both 5F races which is interesting. I timed both from when the stalls opened. It is a fraction before, as the bar has to drop and when it reaches halfway it starts the timer. Thats how it goes in the UK anyway. The 2nd 5F race was exactly the same as published time. The first race however, was 0.62 seconds slower than published. I used the same method for both races, and so something isnt correct. maybe they use an infra red sensor or something, and the horses have to cross it to start the timer. I've always been under the impression it was the stalls that activated the timing mech. I guess it was an OK time, even allowing for the 0.62 error (if thats what it was) but there are problems with the first race on AW surfaces. A couple of points ATO. First you said this...... "Just the filly herself costing £2k, failed to win on debut, had to work hard for her win etc doesnt add up to the time recorded, is this because Dundalk gets quicker during the sun do you think?" You're thinking about this upside down. Actually, I suspect you were thinking too much about things and got yourself muddled up. An easy thing to do with +/- numbers bouncing around in your head. The first race was the fast time you're talking about. So the sun may have dried the course out and made it a bit slower throughout the afternoon, which would leave you with a faster time for the first and a slow time for the last. That may have happened a little, if it was a hot summers day. Similar (but the other way around, and not quite as significant) to how the ground usually speeds up a bit through the afternoon on turf, until it reaches certain levels, and or from certain saturation points. This isnt the time or place to discuss that though. The other issue, is that it was the first race on the card. Now I dont know about Dundalk, but the clerks at the AW courses in the UK (not sure about Kempton), use the first race as a guide to the speed of the surface. they then go out if it isnt to their liking and slow it down if its riding too fast. They do this by harrowing a little deeper. It is an artificial surface, and they now feel it is their duty to manipulate it. So if its riding too fast in their opinion they will slow it down for the rest of the meeting. There was a UK meeting recently (I cant recall which off hand), and I had to conclude that they'd done that. All I could do was have a stab at the first, and rate the rest of the card as normal. The clerk at Wolverhampton is on record as saying he attempts to get the course so horses clock as close to the RP standard as possible. REGARDLESS of class or age. We know this, so can sort of work with it, but as I said, if they do this based on the first, you have to treat that race in isolation to the rest of the card. So, in a nutshell, these are the 3 potential problems with the clocking you have... 1) 0.62 timing error, unless they use some sort of infra-red/laser system at the start. 2) Sun slowing down the meeting through the afternoon, resulting in earlier races being rated fast, and later races being rated slow. 3) Clerk of the course harrowed a little deeper after the first to slow the track down. Which looks possible, as it was run in a quick time anyway you'd think (dont have standards for dundalk). Last edited by CPGagie; 05-05-11 at 08:16 PM..

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

04-05-11, 11:27 PM	#3 (permalink)
Spook World Class Join Date: Sep 2005	Actually something looks iffy about that time. If its genuine then its Natagora territory in which case you'd have expected her to have come 6-7 lengths clear. She'd be a lock for the Queen Mary on that time. It might be worth keeping an eye on it and see if the RP amend it in the next week. The other thing to consider is an email to Dave Edwards and see if he can cast any light on it. I've never done it myself, but I understand he does respond them

05-05-11, 12:00 AM	#5 (permalink)
Spook World Class Join Date: Sep 2005	Timing error was the conclusion I was starting to come to Chris. 2yo fillies can't put up that kind of performance in May unless they're seriously top drawer and well forward (Jealous Again, Natagora, types) and even then its once every now and then . This horse had had two previous runs without distinction. The other thing of course is that you'd expect her to come clear. The others are running into the mid 90's which seems totally unrealistic. The only place I've ever encountered timing errors with a degree of regularity is Longchamp where it's not unknown for the French to screw up and time them past the first of the two winning posts, and the other one that sometimes crops up is the use of the straight course mile standard for the round course mile at the Curragh too 2 secs is worth what? 11.75L's, seems a bit more realistic

05-05-11, 12:06 AM	#6 (permalink)
andthereoff Banned. Join Date: Oct 2008	Safe to say we should scrap this one then gents? Personally ive not had troubles with Dundalk times in the past which is why i flagged it up, imperial rome is already one who franked his time at dundalk, you could add mount athos to that list maybe

05-05-11, 10:20 PM	#8 (permalink)
Manchesterskytrain Claimer Join Date: Apr 2009	i haven't done to Dundalk caed yet but just a few observations that may or may not help i have timed many races at Dundalk myself and found many discrepencies from the official times as pointed out earlier in this thread it is a big issue that continues to affect times there. also the 5f races are run on a shute and on occasions the shute does ride faster than the normal course off thhe top of my head no data at hand Arganil won a race there over 5f where the shute was riding faster than the main track so it can happen i am a strong believer in dundalk form and i think it is a goldmine for future winners and well worth working out your own standards and timing the races to get accurate figures it is proper racing and you can unearth some nice little gems the likes of copper dock, hujalaya, banna biorche and danday boy all signalled they were much better than the official handicapper realised at the time with fast runs there, and sole power was on my list of horses to follow from a very fast time it produced there as a 2yo and he wemt on the win a group 1 sprint if you have taken every care in timing yourself and have accurate standards for the track don;t just dismiss seemingly out of line fast performances at the track as they have a habit of being franked, also seen a couple of horses owned bt jabbars son win there and he seems to target dundalk

10-05-11, 05:55 PM	#9 (permalink)
andthereoff Banned. Join Date: Oct 2008	Runs in the 6.00 Naas tomorrow 11/2 tissue.

10-05-11, 10:16 PM	#10 (permalink)
Frankel Claimer Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: London	Have heard they think quite a bit of Prophesy; and despite him making his racecourse debut it wouldn't be the biggest surprise were he to make it a winning one.

11-05-11, 05:56 PM	#11 (permalink)
Manchesterskytrain Claimer Join Date: Apr 2009	just beaten by well backed O'Brien colt, but i still like this filly, one to keep an interest in

11-05-11, 11:45 PM	#13 (permalink)
Spook World Class Join Date: Sep 2005	Typical Naas though!!! I seem to recall I've had trouble with this particular card before actually and violent discrepancies between round and straight course. I can only assume they doll out this time of year? (unless there's a perma-hurricane blowing from the same direction)

13-05-11, 11:31 PM	#14 (permalink)
Natagora Claimer Join Date: May 2008	Just seen this thread gents and it's safe to say that nearly every time in Ireland is wrong. I now have to go back and hand time every race over there before I'm happy to give a rating for a race.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)