Horse racing draw advantage bias York 1m 2f
Stalls usually positioned LOW 
Link to course and distance menu     Back to Race Of The Week 
York 5F     York 6F     York 7F  
York 7F 205yds

WINNING STALL NUMBER

 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
No

of

R

U

N

E

R

S

8 1111 1 1 1 1111 1 1 1
9   1111 111 1 11   1 1 1111 3yr olds and older
10 seasons results
1997 - 2006
10 1 1   1     1   11  
11   1     1 1 11        
12     11   11     1 1   1  
13   1 1   11     11     1 11  
14         1 1 1       1      
15       1   1         1     1 1
16 1         1       1            
17 1   1                            
18       1           1 1              
19                           1   1      
20 11   11 11   1 1   1 1     1           11  
21 1                           1            
22   1 1 1       111 1   1             1   1    
7 7 6 7 5 6

<--Good or better -->

4 4 6 4 5 4
40 25

Copyright 2005 [H Hutchinson]. All rights reserved.

These results are shown as a direct result of extremely misleading draw advantage information have been given for this course and distance by television presenters, specifically in relation to The John Smith's Cup.
Stalls 1 to 9 were recommended very forcefully in 2004 and 2005 for that race.
The effect of the going was completely ignored.
A recommendation of 9 horses, is not an indication of a strong draw advantage.

This is a very weak pattern indeed, with results not favouring a small minority of stalls on any type of going anywhere on the chart.
No doubt television presenters will continue to recommend a Low draw advantage in these races, but do these people really have time to look at results in detail, or are they looking at the shape of the course and the proximity of the running rail, and making an uneducated guess ?

Distance is a great leveler, and draw advantages are often affected in a negative way by increased distance.
These races are over 10 furlongs, and show a great deal of inconsistency.
Although the Bottom half of the draw has been favoured to some extent during the last 10 years, the 2004 results demonstrate how these results will let you down.
Just 3 winners in 8 races started from the Bottom half of the draw in 2004.
All 3 of those races took place on good/good to soft in places or softer going - by far the weaker (and less predictable) part of this pattern.
On good or better going in 2004, there were no wins from the Bottom half of the draw.

On good or better going, (results shown in black), the Bottom half, Top half split shown at the Bottom of the chart favours the Bottom half of the draw by 40 wins to 25.
During 2004, on good or better going, the Top half of the draw won 3 of 3 races.
In 2005, there were 3 wins from stalls 1 to 4, and 3 wins from the Top 3 stalls.
In 2006, Stalls 1 to 6 won 2 of 4 races, the Top 6 stalls won 3 of 4 races.

On good or better going during the last 10 seasons in races of 16 or more runners, the Top 6 stalls won only 3 in 26 races, but even so, the best that can be said of this part of the chart is that results have favoured the Bottom half of the draw by 19 wins to 7.
Over such a long distance, this could easily be coincidence and results will not consistently favour the bottom half each year.
This is demonstrated by the 2004 results -  both drawn in the Top half, 11 of 18 and 13 of 20 runners.

A recommendation of half the runners in fields of 16 or more runners would be a recommendation of 8 or more horses.
This is a very weak draw advantage when compared to sprint races over other courses and distances, and demonstrates a great deal of inconsistency if we look at results each year, and the 2004 results in particular.

On good, good to soft in places or softer going, (results shown in red), results are spread across most stalls throughout the chart.

This course and distance is not a good betting or laying proposition from a draw advantage point of view.
There is no recommendation.

2006 results :- 4-8, 5-8, 5-8, 5-13, 12-13, 5-14, 14-19, 1-20, 9-20 (John Smith's Cup)

2005 results :-  1-8, 3-8, 3-9, 9-9, 9-9, 9-10, 11-12, 3-20, 4-20, 19-20 (John Smith's Cup)

2004 results.  5-8, 1-10, 8-12, 5-13, 7-14, 11-18, 13-20, 18-22 (John Smith's Cup)
Results on Going softer than good (good/good to soft in places or softer), shown in Red.