"This horse ran a faster time"

There seems to be a common betting view that many racing media tipsters give us that all you have to do is compare times run by horses over the same distance to find out which horse is better. This betting myth is simplistic and of course does not work.

One racing media tipster, when tipping "This Is A Mug Tip" to beat "No Hope," pointed out that This Is A Mug Tip won a 1000 metres race at its last start in 57.40 seconds but No Hope won a 1000 metres race at its last start in 58.55 seconds, over a second slower.

The problem of course was that This Is A Mug Tip's win was at Flemington carrying 53 kg. on a Good track but No Hope's win was at Caulfield two weeks later carrying 55 kg. on a Slow track.

Surely these media tipsters must know that different tracks vary in speed? Surely these media tipsters must know that horses carry different weights? Surely these media tipsters must know that conditions are also different on different days? Surely these media tipsters must know you cannot make such simplistic comparisons?

Whenever racing media tipsters resort to simply comparing times run by horses on different days and different tracks, they're being as silly as someone drawing a conclusion about who is the better spin bowler in cricket based on one bowler's results on the spinner unfriendly Perth wicket and the other bowler's results on a spinner friendly Indian wicket!