Aluminum plates

Do you believe those have some relevance ?
If so, is the changing of plates from aluminiums to irons, irons to aluminiums that frequent to make it worth following ?
Is the info available someplace ?
If you want I can give you some stats I have worked out about aluminiums to see how they compare.

the physical shoe makes NO difference, its the overall picture that is completed by the addition of allies, much like Usain Bolt will train in a pair of trainers all the time but on race night he will wear the new ones just to make sure all the t's are crossed and all the I's dotted.

I (and a few on this site) could tell you about how serious this shoe thing is but that is a story really that should be told in a book because fortunes were made off this by guys like
warren
frankie
marlon

and a few more

They say aluminium absorbs vibrations better than iron.
I don't fancy it's to the same extent the same as in humans. When I was schoolboy I went to the stadium without athletic shoes one day. I forgot. So the gym teacher said to me don't run but then he changed his mind and he said you run too. It was painful and I could n't run well either.

My stats table is this:

301 races
changed from iron to aluminium, winners = 39 out of 25 expected (*)
aluminum to aluminum, winners = 237 out of 231 expected
Iron to iron, winners = 15 out of 28 expected
changed from aluminium to iron, winners = 10 out of 15 expected

This shows a degree correlation and furthermore certain trainers who are known never to use aluminiums have not been discounted. It's a table of observations from 2007 while another one I have from 2003 shows more or less the same things.

The "aluminum reporters" use their eyes to see the plates - they don't get the info from the trainers. They are very sharp and even when the horse is galloping in the sand they can tell it wears them or not.
Bit I have heard those trainers who do not use aluminiums really do use aluminiums but of a certain variety (anodised plates) that are not discernible to the eye.

Even if it is ornamental it's the stats that count.
So I 'd like to know if the info is available and the late changes.


(*) when I say "x from y expected" it's based on probability count. The win probability of each of those horses was taken as the fraction of "money wagered on horse / total win pool"

.....in a nutshell the aluminium shoe is lighter and has better ductility(flex).....do not be conned when a trainer leaves the steels on.....it could be that the horse is working in steels and has no or slow hoof growth to warrant re shoeing....the horse is difficult to shoe so steels are left on...if the horse has poor feet the need for continued (weekly)re-shoeing is avoided....ideally horses should be reshod 2 days before a race event....this gives a chance for a horse to walk/work into the shoe and get used to the ductility.....with so much racing shoes are more and more fitted a day before or on race day.....this may be the reason for the increased occurance of shoe spreading on the way to the start and even in the race......:S

Kajamix ,are you saying that horses that normally run in steel have a strike rate of >50% (15 out of 28)
and that horses switching from Al to Steel,a strike rate of 66% (10 of 15)

I am also confused as to how some segments have a more than 100% strike rate ?

Please elaborate.

rob faux Wrote:

---

> Kajamix ,are you saying that horses that normally
> run in steel have a strike rate of >50% (15 out of
> 28)
> and that horses switching from Al to Steel,a
> strike rate of 66% (10 of 15)
>
> I am also confused as to how some segments have a
> more than 100% strike rate ?
>
> Please elaborate.


Sorry it's 301 races, not 301 horses ! I corrected my previous post.

It's four groups there, [iron-alu], [alu-alu], [iron-iron], [alu-iron].
Iron-alu means the horse was wearing irons penultimate start and alus this start. Similarly for the other cases.
When it says iron-alu 25 expected to win it means:

Sum of probabilities = 25

where probability = money wagered on horse to win / total win pool for the race

(probability is of course somewhat undefined in races, but the above is a fair estimate)

My table does n't say how many horses made up the group [iron-alu], maybe 150 (I don't remember). But the sum of probabilities was 25 (25.05 to be exact). And those that actually did win were 39. So that indicates the win probability of those horses was enhanced by the factor 39 / 25 = 1.56. Likely more in practice, as I more or less know the local trainers who should n't count re. alus ! All those 301 races were on dirt.

Don't ask me what the exact effect of the aluminium plates is or what goes on with those trainers whom we discount (there are some bloggers who give explanations though). What I know is the stats.

I asked in American forum once but the Americans told me they don't bother because the irons are a rare exception in the States. I don't bet in American races anyway.

The bit that interests me is where to find info in SA website, if available.


(*) To compute probabilities if you know only the prices but not the total pool size, luckily the number "pool size" factors out. You can do this: probability = constant / decimal price, where "constant" = the reciprocal of the sum of the price reciprocals.