As 2025 moved into 2026, we have, somewhat without fanfare, filled the gaps in our UK section data coverage by including the UK RMG (Racing TV) tracks. So both forward and two years back we have a complete picture of all completed British runs for each horse. [That is to say, we do not publish sectional data for runs in Ireland or where a horse failed to finish for any reason].
To support this, I’d like to add more usability to the dataset: simply put, and in line with other elements of the site such as Instant Expert, I want you to be able to see ‘the headlines’ at a glance.
To be honest, I don’t think we’re there yet… although I think this first iteration of the visualized data is a step forward. It’s likely that there will be changes to the current layout, and we’ll be sure to add some spice to the full results display as well. But rather than jinx it before I’ve even shared it, I’d like to introduce you to a new block – now live on site – within Full Form (Gold subscribers only, I’m afraid).
It’s called, brilliantly innovatively, ‘SECTIONALS’, and it’s right under the current ‘RACE FORM’ section:
There it is, highlighted in the yellow box.
What it was like…
Previously, we had a ‘show sectionals’ checkbox at the top of the RACE FORM block, which merged some traditional race data with some sectional data. Because I wanted to publish more of the latter, I gave it its own place. The horse form in the CARD tab will retain the ‘show sections’ checkbox, at least for now.
Let’s take a look at the new SECTIONALS block:
There’s quite a bit to unpack here (terrible sentence, right? I’ll never use it again… until the next time I forget), so let’s get started.
The left block, through to ‘Race Speed vs Par/FS%’ corresponds to the previous ‘show sectionals’ view within RACE FORM. In my opinion, there’s a lot to tell from the running lines – a five-part breakdown of a horse’s position in the race and its distance behind the leader (or in front if he’s in the lead) – and I think this is a hugely underutilized part of our profiling. It may be unknown to British students, but this is it in reality layout in North America for showcasing past achievements.
For example, we can see from this horse’s four consecutive wins (or actually first past the posts because he was disqualified and finished in fourth place in one of them) that he has some gate speed but is largely behind and makes his move late in the race; indeed, he only touched the front in the final split (from the furlong pole to the finish line in those five furlong races). The table below shows the furlong marks in the race, by distance, with which each ‘point of calling’/running line entry lines up. The fifth and final point of calling/running line entry is always the finish line.
As with anything new, it takes some getting used to. Having spent a lot of time in the American form book on numerous Breeders’ Cups, I find this layout a lot quicker to use and more accurate than the (generally very good, but often subjective) in-running commentaries traditionally presented on this side of the pond.
So much for yesterday. What exactly is new here?
Race/Runner Speed vs. Par
The central block from the image above, ‘Race Speed vs Par / FS%’, is the pivot point. It’s both old-fashioned and new, as we’ve given users the option of a text label of ‘speed band’ (e.g. Q FAST) or a percentage faster or slower than par (where par is our algorithm’s projection of what a real run race looks like in terms of energy distribution). Here is the more technical and detailed ‘Percentage’ view of the finishing speed – note the buttons above the table that allow you to switch from one to the other.
And here is the simpler version, which in itself is very convenient to analyze at a glance:
I deliberately left the last manual call point (final positiondistanced) of the running lines in the images – left side – so that we could compare this horse’s winning performance with its losing performance from the perspective of ‘the way the races were run’.
There is a clear contrast here: his victories came when the race speed (left box trios) was equal, and the defeats came faster in the beginning. We can also see from the right side of the three boxes that this runner won while generally even making his way to the finish line.
That’s the most efficient way to run in any race, whether it’s a horse race (over five furlongs or in the Grand National), a 1500-metre track and field race, or in a Formula 1 Grand Prix (the latter pair in terms of lap times: people, horses and cars go slower in corners than on straights; and faster downhill than uphill).
So now that we’ve found the suggestion of a pattern, the question is, “how will today’s race be run?”
I’m not trying to pick a winner here, so that’s academic for the purposes of this article; but our model horse is being pulled wide today against a projected lone front runner and with quite a bit of pressure from within for the leader. That’s an elaborate way of saying that I’m not sure how exactly it will be executed and/or whether it will suit our protagonist: on balance, I suspect not.
But he’s a horse who could easily be added to a tracker based on an observed performance pattern, and with a note that says something like “worth a bet if the pace seems even.” For the sake of completeness, the horse in question is Hint Of Humor and the race (5.30 Wolv, February 9) will have been run by the time this is published.
Sectional times
Let’s see what else has been added to the SECTIONALS view. We added some time data and some user configuration around it. Specifically, you can look at the race leader’s times in each of the three sections of the race, or at the times of the horse in question – and you can view the time for each section or the incremental (i.e. total) time up to that point.
In the example below, again Hint Of Humor, I filtered for his Wolverhampton 5f form.
Look how consistent his times have been. In the four races prior to his Boxing Day spin, he completed the first quarter mile within a tenth of a second either side of 26.2 seconds; he then had a little more variation in his middle furlong of five – but still only 0.4 seconds from fastest to slowest; and his last two furlong splits ranged between 22.8 and 23.1 seconds: incredibly consistent speeds over an unchanging track/trip combination.
On that most recent run, he went faster than ideal early, then was slower in the middle and closing stages. It turned out he had only been beaten by half a length, but that was after leading at the furlong post before tiring.
FS% difference and UP
Moving a little further to the right, we have two more columns: FS% Diff and UP.
FS% Diff is the finishing speed difference for the final section, in percentage, between the race leader and the runner in question. And for completeness, finishing speed percentage is how fast a horse ran the last part of a race compared to how fast he ran the entire race. You don’t really need to know the formulas.
Now if you focus on the image below, hovering over the number 0.76 in the view shows the percent race (leader) finishing speed (97.62%) and that of this runner (98.36%).
98.36 / 97.62 = 1.00758 (or 0.76% FSP difference).
Again, the calculations are for the curious only. The implication of a positive number is that the runner in question finished stronger than the leader at the start of the final leg; and of course a negative number (none in this example) means that the runner in question was slower to the finish than the leader at the start of the final section.
All you need to know is:
Positive FS% Diff = faster to the finish
Negative FS% difference = slower to the finish
Finally, and with the title awkwardly hidden, on the right we have the UP column: it’s the one with the numbers 4, 0, 1, 1, 3 in it.
UP is Upgrade, and it is our attempt to improve the performance of some horses in some races based on how inthey were ridden efficiently. The least efficient rides often get the biggest upgrades, with the suggestion that that horse might be more capable on another day.
REMARK: an inefficient ride is not always bad. Think of the horse that does everything at a very fast pace and clambers home at the front; his jockey has simply made the other runners (and their riders) even more inefficient. Everything is relative. It doesn’t necessarily take the most efficient ride, sometimes it just needs the least inefficient one.
Again, the confusion is added by me. All you need to know is that there is the suggestion that a horse might bid more on another day if the UP number is greater than 0. In the example above, we’ve already talked about how the top form line was reached at a noticeably faster early – and proportionately slower late – pace. Our algo believes that efforts should be increased.
Summary
So that’s an introduction to the new SECTIONALS block on FULL FORM. It can help contextualize racing performance and shine a light on horses that may have more to offer than meets the eye. In all cases, when considering a horse with attractive upgrade numbers or a clear pattern in their better efforts, you should consider the likely pace of today’s race relative to those previous positive spins; if the setup looks the same, you may have discovered a value play. But keep in mind that context is critical when it comes to things like this.
One final thought: No approach to past performance data should be used in isolation. Sectional times are just one more weapon in your form reading arsenal. There will be races where it isn’t particularly useful, and others where it might be the kingmaker. Just like any other corner.
The great thing about sectional data is that its lack of awareness is a barrier to entry for many; that means some of the lightly coded messages are there for you and not for many others. We don’t just have to look for the horse that might step forward, but similarly we can identify runners who may have over-bet based on a flattering recent win or a close run. We are working on content for the RESULT tab that may make this clearer. More about that another day…
Mat
Other recent posts from this author:
#section #data #presentations #geegeez.co.uk