A regular contributor has sent me some interesting
facts and figures about the gender imbalance in racing
results which may give you pause for thought.
She
has apparently done a study of 115,793 mixed sex
races to determine if there was a gender imbalance
in the results and the findings are quite interesting.
In total ,the 115, 793 races were contested by some
862, 292 male horses and 356, 178 female horses.
In
other words, in a total of 1,218, 470 competitors,
70.7% were males and 29.3% were females. It goes without
saying that the males won far more races than their
female counterparts simply based on the numbers advantage
but here are some interesting figures that you can
make of what you will.
In
total, males won 9.82% of their starts in mixed sex
races while females won 8.74% of heir mixed sex races.
Now that doesn't sound like a huge difference but
over such a large sample size, the numbers do become
significant.
If
you had $10 on each of the 862,292 males at
their starting price ( a largish bank
would be required! ) you would have got back
66% where as the females returned just 57%
If
you'd been punting these on the NSW TAB
the returns were 81%.for males and 72% for females.
Now, as well as noting the gender imbalance, aren't
they interesting TAB vs SP figures on such a large
sample?
At
the end of the day, and bearing in mind the size od
the database sample, what allowances do you therefore
make to your final ratings / weight formulas or whatever
you are using?
Tamika's
"headline" conclusion, based on the stats
above and many others that would takes reams of printouts
to demonstrate, is that she allows a 14% final rating
reduction in any mixed sex race as she believes on
balance that the male / female gender advantage is
just that - 12%.
In
other words, on the rating system she uses, she has
a "final" calculation column on her "spreadsheet"
where females are penalised 12% of their ratings figure
but only, of course, in mixed sex races.
Interesting
figure to think about and I do know there are many
good judges who will not undertake any betting activities
on mares older than five.
