says The Centaurian
The thing about the Pure Maths approach to finding a winner is that moderate horses tend to have inconsistent form and thus their race times are typically unreliable. However good horses perform consistently and so Pure Maths should be confined to horses with indexes above 80 – or more.
In the case of the ZimbabweGuineas, I kind of felt we had some good horses running and so it proved. The Pure Maths approach picked the winner – it said Lily Blue was a blinder and I suggested you “get on”.
I can now report this horse improved by at least six lengths on the time I expected her to run in – that is, she won in 95.62 seconds – not the 96.30 seconds I predicted. The maths on this is 0.70 seconds at 0.12 secs per length – equals six lengths.
Now the other interesting fact is that I was sceptical about the time performance of Prescott in her pointer race – my calculations said she would complete in 96.20 seconds – and on that basis should win the race. I just didn’t believe it – I thought the timekeeper had gotten it wrong!
Well, this filly ran five lengths off Lily Blue – and the maths? 5 lengths x 0.12 equals 0.60 seconds – add that to 95.62 and you get 96.20 – bang on the Pure Maths prediction.
I didn’t mean to put you off from backing her – in fact, I thought she looked well in the paddock so included Prescott in my swingers – and in future, I will believe my Pure Maths more enthusiastically.
Oh, and Wantage improved 6 lengths on his Pure Maths prediction to come second.
There is also a moral here. The timekeepers must get it right and the guys who position the stalls must get it right too or the times become a nonsense!
When the new UK flat season starts, we shall have some fun applying some Pure Maths to their top races – and try and find you some good priced winners.