MY CALL - ACCURACY OF INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT

By David Fowler | Tuesday, April 5, 2011

David Fowler is the principal thoroughbred caller for Radio TAB, taking the position upon Wayne Wilson's retirement last August. David, who is a keen form student and punter, has enjoyed a lifetime involvement in the racing media. His personal blog, ‘My Call’, will appear every Tuesday on HRO.

Backing a winner is often not an easy task so to start the process we need as much information at our disposal and we need to rely on that information to be accurate.

The rating of the track is one such piece of information that lays the foundation of our form analysis and subsequent betting.

But how accurate are these ratings?

I throw this up as my first talking point on ‘My Call’ because it is clear that some ratings have just been "plain wrong" in recent months and some are wide of the mark.

Let me start by saying that no one can be held responsible if we start out at a "good 3" and then rain falls and the track deteriorates.

The major issue at hand, I believe, is that rating a track is not an exact science.

For example my opinion of a "heavy 8" might be totally different from someone else's and one track manager's assessment might differ from a track manager at another racing centre.

If stewards are called upon for their assessment the same thing might happen.

Eagle Farm was assessed as a "heavy 8" on race morning which surprised most but with that rating in their armoury many gamblers did the form around the dead set wet trackers.

The track clearly played out as a "slow 6 to dead 5" from the start of racing until its end.

Understandably, the track dried out with the warm conditions and the chance of an upgrade was anticipated. But was it ever a heavy 8 which was the morning call and what most punters rely upon?

I don't single this case out. I recently broadcast a meeting at another venue where the rating was a "heavy" 9 yet the first race was within half a second of the class record!

Should one person and one person only be employed at either RQ or club level to make these ratings?

It would certainly enhance the consistency aspect of the argument.

**************************************************************************************************

As one who cut my teeth in the betting ring many years ago, it gets me cranky when some of my media colleagues spruik "this is a big go" or "this is off the map".

How do they know this?

Because they see a $6 to $4 fluctuation they immediately assume there is a truckload of money for this horse.

"They" might be right but on many occasions they are wrong and it's a case of misleading the public.

Broadcasters should merely inform the public of the fluctuations whether they are firmers or easers and let the punter make up his or her mind.

Leading Brisbane bookie Hadyn Flynn illustrates this point quite clearly with the following example.

"There is only one or two bookies at many places I work at and I generally go up first with the prices.

“I do my form as well as I can but if I make a "blue" and someone has $500 on at $10 and I turn it to $5, it's because I might have got it wrong, not that it's a big
go," he explained.

It's also understood the first horse backed shortens quicker than others because the market hasn't had time to find its feet.

So punters beware of the "big goes" and "off the maps". More often than not there are other reasons that the price has tightened.

Hopefully in 'My Call' in the weeks ahead, we can let you know what really happened in the betting ring with a view to finding a winner for the future.

**************************************************************************************************

April is always the "crunch" month in Brisbane racing.

If you can't win now, well, it might be a long and lonely winter ahead because it isn't going to get any easier with the Carnival on our doorstep.

And if you are winning now either make hay while the sun shines or gear up for bigger and betting things ahead during May to July.

Very little came out of Saturday's Eagle Farm meeting except for two horses who contested the same race and are from the same stable, Excellantes and Fillydelphia.

Both are prepared by fellow HRO blogger Rob Heathcote and I have little doubt they are Carnival material.

While Excellantes is probably slightly ahead of Fillydelphia in terms of preparations, I think Fillydelphia is Queensland's best chance of Carnival glory in 2011.

She worked to the line impressively Saturday and I'm sure she will develop into a genuine Oaks prospect while Excellantes is a readymade 1200m to mile three-year-old.

Neither three-year-old will let you down in the starts ahead of them.

Until next week.

More articles