Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > Main Forum > The Paddock
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-10-2008, 04:12 PM
RolloTomasi's Avatar
RolloTomasi RolloTomasi is offline
Oriental Park
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,612
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
The use of stats are often deceptive, especially so in horseracing. The number of starts per year has been decreasing since 1950, with horses going from 11 starts to 6 per year. Of course they forget to mention that field size has decreased from 9.06 horses per race to 8.17 last year. So the average race in 1950 had 9 horses and the average race in 2007 had 8. Seems to me that is a signifigant stat that never seems to be brought up. They way it is portrayed, in the 50's every field was 12 horses and they ran every week. The reality is that they raced less than once a month and the fields were roughly the same size as now. This of course is the reality of facts which are not to be confused with hysterical opinions that are being presented. But that would take a basic understanding of the sport and its evolution, which seems to be in short supply.
Wasn't winter racing in the '50s somewhat sparse? If most horses back then got the winter off, the racing season was really around 9 months, so an 11 start average meant horses were running more frequently than once a month.

Also, wasn't the foal crop size dramatically different back then, with less horses being foaled? There were less available horses to fill races, yet there were still more horses per race on average than now. I don't have the figures, but I suppose this comparison would be offset quite a bit if there are more races being run nowadays then there were back then.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-11-2008, 08:32 AM
Cannon Shell's Avatar
Cannon Shell Cannon Shell is offline
Sha Tin
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,855
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RolloTomasi
Wasn't winter racing in the '50s somewhat sparse? If most horses back then got the winter off, the racing season was really around 9 months, so an 11 start average meant horses were running more frequently than once a month.

Also, wasn't the foal crop size dramatically different back then, with less horses being foaled? There were less available horses to fill races, yet there were still more horses per race on average than now. I don't have the figures, but I suppose this comparison would be offset quite a bit if there are more races being run nowadays then there were back then.
Northern winter racing was but most of the outfits went south where there was racing and California was still year round. But facts are facts, the average field in 1950 is roughly the same size as it is today. I guess my point is that compaing 1950 horses to 2008 horses is apples to oranges because of the vast differences in the sport today versus then.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.