Horse racing draw advantage bias YARMOUTH 1m
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 1         111    
9 1 111       1 1   1
10   1   1111 1     1 11 111
11   11 1 1 1 111 1   1 1 1
12   1 1       11     1    
13   1 1 1111 1   1     1 11    
14 1 11       11   1 1          
15   1 1 1     111 11              
16     1   1   111 1     1     1   1
17 1             1           1      
18       1           1   11       1   1
19 1 1 1     1 1                       1
20 1 1   11 1           1 111 11       1 11 11 11
3 12 5 10 4 8

<--Good or better -->

6 1 4 13 5 9
42 44

Copyright 2005 [H Hutchinson]. All rights reserved.

A very weak pattern, and all very even.
On good or better going, stalls 1 to 6 won 42 of 91 races 46%.
The Top 6 stalls won 38 races.
5 winners were dead centre.
On good or better going in races of 8 to 16 runners, there are spreads of results across most stalls.
On good or better going in races of 17 - 20 runners, the Top half of the draw won 19 of 26 races 73%.
You may choose to follow that trend, but there is not a similar pattern in 7F races which would be reassuring.
The
6F chart with stalls positioned High, produces something very similar, with winners clustered in the Top 7 stalls.
The max field size at Yarmouth 5F to 1m in 2006 was 16 runners.
That could be coincidence, or a safety measure being implemented.

It is interesting that on
good/good to soft in places or softer going, results are spread across most stalls.
In races of 14 or more runners, the Bottom half of the draw won 10 of 12 races 83%.
12 races is a very small sample, and over such a long distance on a straight course, those results could easily be coincidence.
There is no recommendation.

2006 results :-  6-8, 6-8, 2-9, 10-10, 10-11, 4-13, 5-13, 11-13, 2-15,
                       5-16, 7-16, 7-16, 7-16,
8-16, 11-16, 16-16