Horse
racing draw advantage bias THIRSK 1m
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 |
111 |
1111 |
111 |
|
11 |
111111 |
11 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 9 |
1 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 10 |
11 |
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
11 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 11 |
1 |
|
1 |
11 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 12 |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
11 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 13 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 14 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
1111 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 15 |
|
1 |
|
1 |
1 |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
11 |
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 16 |
|
|
1 |
|
111 |
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 17 |
|
1 |
1 |
1 |
|
111 |
11 |
1 |
|
|
1 |
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
| 18 |
11111 |
111 |
111 |
|
111 |
11111 |
11 |
11111111 |
11 |
1111 |
11 |
1 |
1 |
11 |
111 |
11 |
1 |
11 |
|
|
| 19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12 |
12 |
11 |
8 |
12 |
15 |
<--Good or better --> |
5 |
5 |
5 |
10 |
4 |
6 |
|
|
76
|
34
|
Copyright © 2005 [H Hutchinson]. All rights reserved.
|
A weak pattern.
On good or better going, The Bottom half, Top half split favours the Bottom
half by 76 wins to 34. A ratio of 2 : 1.
On good or better going stalls 1 to 6 won 70 of 112 races 62%.
In races of 10 or more runners, the Bottom half of the draw won 65 of 89 races
73%.
In 2006, Stalls 1 to 6 won 7 of 7 races on good or better going.
On good/good
to soft in places or softer
going, the Top half of the draw
won 24 of 33 races 72%.
In 2006, the Top half won 4 of 7 races under those conditions.
With the stalls positioned Low, these are the horses drawn away from the running
rail, towards the Centre of the course.
As a general rule, results on that type of going do not produce reliable patterns
worth following.
You may choose to follow these trends, but from a draw advantage point of view,
the distance of 1m should be seen as a big negative.
Historically, this has been a pattern of no advantage.
Coincidence could easily be at play here.
There is no recommendation.
2006 results :- 1-11,
4-11, 12-12,
1-13, 10-13, 5-14, 9-14,
4-15, 5-15, 2-17,
6-17, 6-17, 9-18, 15-18
2005 results :- 1-8,
5-8, 6-8, 5-9, 9-9, 10-10, 8-11, 8-11,
6-12, 6-13,
15-16, 11-17,
1-18, 2-18, 3-18, 4-18, 14-18, 14-18, 16-18
|
|