Quote:
Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS
Wow - you are truly weapons grade stupid. You actually think there are 5 lengths in a second? Tears, Jerry, Tears.
Mathematically speaking, a length should equal 1/5th of a second only when a horse travels a furlong in 15 seconds. Do you have a harness racing background or something?
It obviously depends on the rate of speed....but as a rule of thumb, one full second equals about six lengths.
I told you already - based on the information in the result chart - Zenyatta ran her final mile in 1:36.27 - and final six furlongs in 1:12.59 - those times come from Formulator's chart.
You - keep saying she ran her final seven furlongs in 1:23 1/5.
Which means you keep insisting that she ran the 4th furlong of the race in 10.61 seconds... after running her 3rd furlong of the race in 13.07 seconds.
|
I actually did used to go to the harness races occasioanlly as a teenager. And you are right that in thoroughbred racing it is approximately 6 lengths per second rather than 5. That is what I should be using. It is more accurate.
I was being conservative when I said Zenyatta was 20 lengths back after 3 furlongs. There is no official number of how far back she was, but there are plenty of people (Richard Migliore) and articles that think she was closer to 25 lengths back (between calls after about 3 furlongs). If she was 24 lengths back, that would mean she ran her final 7 furlongs in 1:23 1/5. If she was exactly 20 back, then she ran her final 7 furlongs in 1:23 4/5. If she was 22 lengths back, then it was more like 1:23 2/5 or 1:23 3/5.
How far back do you think she was after 3 furlongs?