Post on 30-Dec-2015
description
Happy Valley Races Quality
Favourite runners' performance in Happy Valley
Meeting has improved compared to 5 years ago
10121416182022242628
Fa
vo
uri
te w
inn
ing
pe
rce
nta
ge
(%
)
98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03
Season
16% 26.6%
Happy Valley Races Quality
The placing percentage for favourite runners was
also in an upward trend.
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
Fa
vo
uri
te p
lac
ing
pe
rce
nta
ge
(%
)
98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03
Season
48.9% 52.7%
Happy Valley Races Quality
More than half of the races were won by the top 3
favourite runners
40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
To
p 3
fa
vo
uri
te w
inn
ing
pe
rce
nta
ge
(%
)
98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03
Season
47.5% 57.0%
Happy Valley Races QualityUpward trend also occurred for the top 2 favourite runners finishing in the first 3 places together (i.e. winning Quinella Place pool)
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
Fa
vo
uri
te w
inn
ing
pe
rce
nta
ge
(%
)
98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03
Season
16.9% 22.5%
Happy Valley Races Quality
Among all Happy Valley winners, 40% of them could finish
in the first 3 places for their next run in Happy Valley
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
La
st
run
win
ne
r fi
nis
he
d
the
firs
t 3
pe
rce
nta
ge
(%
)
98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03
Season
27.9% 39.9%
Happy Valley Races QualityThe track-bias characteristic in some courses did not affect the
winning chances of our favourite runners. This season, the
favourites winning % in all courses were at similar levels.
10
15
20
25
30
35
Fa
vo
uri
te w
inn
ing
pe
rce
nta
ge
(%
)
A B C C+3
Course
Happy Valley Races QualityThe favourite runners' performance on C+3 course was
better than average in general. Customers may have
learnt to make use of the track-bias in HV to select horses.
15
20
25
30
Fa
vo
uri
te w
inn
ing
% f
or
C+
3
co
urs
e (
%)
98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03
Season
HV C+3
HV Overall