|
Horse racing draw advantage bias
CHEPSTOW 7F
Stalls usually positioned High
Link
to course and distance menu
|
WINNING STALL NUMBER |
|
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
| No
of
R
U
N
E
R
S |
8 |
11 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
|
1 |
11 |
1 |
111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
|
1 |
|
|
11 |
|
1 |
1 |
1111 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
11 |
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 17 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
| 18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
| 20 |
|
1 |
|
11 |
11 |
111 |
1 |
111 |
11 |
|
1 |
11 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
11 |
1111 |
1 |
11 |
1 |
|
|
2 |
4 |
2 |
5 |
8 |
3 |
<--Good or better --> |
2 |
8 |
6 |
5 |
6 |
5 |
|
|
26
|
35
|
Copyright © 2005 [H Hutchinson]. All rights reserved.
|
A very weak pattern.
On good or better going, there are obvious spreads of results in races of 11,
15, and 20 runners.
Wins are spread across most stalls throughout the rest of the chart.
Any advantage here has been very marginal.
On good or better going, the
Top 6 stalls won 32 of 65 races 49% - a very low percentage for 6 stalls.
Stalls 1 to 6 won 24 of 65 races.
4 other winners were drawn dead centre.
On good/good
to soft in places or softer
going, in races of 8 - 15 runners, stalls 1 to 6 won 8 of 10 races 80%.
10 races is a very small sample, and as a general rule, results on that type of
going often prove to be unreliable, especially as distance increases beyond 6F.
These wins from Low stalls suggest an advantage towards the middle of the
course, or at least away from the High rail.
2006 results :- 5-9, 5-9,
5-11, 7-14, 9-16, 12-16, 12-16, 13-16
|
|