|
Horse racing draw advantage bias EPSOM 7F
Stalls usually positioned
LOW
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 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
11 |
1 |
|
|
11 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
11 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
1 |
|
|
1 |
111 |
|
|
|
11 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
1 |
|
11 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
11 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 17 |
1111 |
1 |
|
1 |
11 |
1 |
|
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
| 18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
10 |
3 |
<--Good or better --> |
2 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
|
|
22
|
22
|
Copyright © 2005 [H Hutchinson]. All rights reserved.
|
You will no doubt see advice recommending a Low
draw advantage in these races, probably influenced by the sweeping, downhill
bend into the straight, but this is a very weak pattern.
On good or better going, there
were 22 wins from both halves of the draw.
3 other winners were drawn dead centre.
There
are obvious spreads of results in races of 8, 9, 13, and 17 runners.
Stalls 1 to 6 won 26 of 47 races 55%, a very low percentage for 6 stalls.
The Top 6 stalls won 22 of 47 races.
The overall pattern is very even.
On good,
good-soft in places or softer
going, 10 of 14 winners started from the Bottom half of the draw, but as a
general rule results on that type of going often prove unreliable in the long
term.
There is no recommendation for this course and distance.
2006 results :- 7-10,
7-10, 5-12, 3-13, 12-17,
|