|
5th April 2011
Good afternoon, friends,
In today's Horse Racing Focus....
- Picking winners in the early part of the flat season....
- A few initial observations....
- The yards hitting the ground running....
Picking winners in the early part of the flat season....
Picking winners right at the outset of the flat season can be
difficult. There's no form in the book to work with. Most of the
horses running in the early days of the season have been off the
course for some time - or have been running on the all-weather. But
whilst recent runs at the all-weather tracks offer some instruction
on a horse's fitness and well-being, I don't trust sand form to
transfer to turf.
If you're looking for bets early on in the turf season and you just
do not want to wait until the form settles down and patterns start
to emerge - and I'm a firm believer that it doesn't happen until at
least mid-May - then you're faced with a choice:
- You can take a view on old form and take a chance on a horse
being ready to reproduce it.
Or...
- You can take a view on which horses have an advantage right
NOW and bet on the basis of those observations.
Certain yards always seem to be ready to fire as soon as the season
starts. With other yards it's a seasonal thing. Weather, illness in
the yard or just a slightly backward start to the campaign all
directly affect the amount of work an individual trainer can get
into his string. Yet other yards like to get work into a horse at
home but use the racecourse to bring their runners to the peak of
fitness - only at which point are they actually ready to win races.
Of course you can make attempts to figure out what's going on in
certain yards. But the simplest way to figure out which strings are
ahead of the rest during these early days of the season - and which
yards therefore hold the competitive edge - is to pay careful and
close attention to the results.
The 2011 flat season is just a few days old but study of the results
already reveals the yards which are hitting the ground hard and
running a little better than the others.
A few initial observations of my own...
I spent a couple of hours last night scrutinising the results we've
seen so far and I wanted to share a couple of observations that the
wider market may have missed and which might prove very useful if
you're looking for bets on the flat over the next fortnight or so...
-
BRYAN SMART hasn't managed to find the winner's enclosure with
any of his 8 runners so far this term on British turf courses - but
his string shows all the signs of being ready to strike. Smalljohn,
Mother Jones, Verinco, Eilean Mor and Dubai Hills all ran
sufficiently well to place in their races. It's only a matter of
time before his runners start getting their noses in front of the
opposition. None of Smart's early-season runners have contested a
race further than a mile. Just a single 2-year-old has gone to post
- producing a very disappointing effort.
-
JOHN QUINN and his team cannot be accused of sleeping at the
wheel. The yard's first 7 runners of the new season have produced 3
winners in Kiama Bay, Madamlily and Bonfire Knight. In addition,
Mastership and Veiled Applause placed in their races. Quinn's
runners have been older horses - no 2- or 3-year-old runners as yet.
No sprinters either. All his runners have contested races at 7f or
longer - the majority at trips of 1m2f or further. Followers are
already 8 points in profit on the season and with his yard showing
all the signs of being ready to go there are sure to be more decent
performers over the next few days.
-
KEVIN RYAN is another handler with a yard whose inmates appear
to be in the best of heart in the early days of the campaign. His 14
runners to date have produced 3 winners, Red Kestrel, Masked Dance
and Hamza - in addition to 3 placed efforts. The yard shows a level
stakes profit of 8 points for the season already. The majority of
his runners have contested sprint events over 5, 6 and 7 furlongs.
It is worth noting that his brace of 2-year-old runners have gone
very well and appear forward - Hamza won and Jimmy the Lollipop
finished just over 4 lengths behind the winner on his 1st ever run -
up against a few runners with the advantage of racecourse
experience.
-
RICHARD FAHEY and his industrial-sized yard are another outfit
showing signs of being race fit and ready to win. His 25 runners so
far have produced 4 winners - Lord Aeryn, Cracking Lass, She's A
Character and Las Verglas Star - and an additional 4 placed efforts.
Backed to win to level stakes his runners have produced 8 points
worth of profit on the season so far. Not one of his winners has
been shorter than 11/2 - suggesting his runners are a little way
ahead of the market's assessment. It is worth noting that stable
jockey - and reigning Champion jockey - Paul Hanagan has ridden all
4 winners.
Obviously other yards will start to produce wins - and over time the
other yards will make up whatever shortfall exists in fitness and
race-readiness. But, for the moment, these yards look to me to be a
little way ahead of the others - and should provide a little value
over the next fortnight or so.
Until next time, be lucky.
8th April 2011
Good afternoon, friends,
In today's Horse Racing Focus....
- The biggest steeplechase on the planet....
- What tomorrow's winner looks like this afternoon....
- Bet clever.... Why that 5th place is worth getting....
The biggest steeplechase on the planet....
You don't need me to tell you that on Saturday afternoon Aintree
plays host to this year's renewal of the most famous jumps race on
the planet - the Grand National.
An estimated 500 million people worldwide will watch 40 horses
negotiate 30 of the most forbidding fences in racing over a marathon
trip of 4m4f.
The consensus amongst most judges is that this year's renewal
represents one of the most competitive in years and over the past
few weeks I've seen strong cases made for at least two dozen of the
runners that will go to post at 4.15 tomorrow afternoon.
It might seem like the Grand National is a bit of an indecipherable
puzzle - a big field, the potential for chaos and catastrophe, the
need for luck in running, the marathon distance - but the fact is
that similar types of horses win and place in the Grand National
year on year. They share common attributes and characteristics which
- when looked at collectively - represent what I call the 'race
winning profile'.
Applying the profile to all the runners enables you to split the
field into those most likely to be going well on the 2nd circuit and
those most likely - on the stats - to be making up the numbers. You
just need to know what to look for in a Grand National selection -
and why. And that's where HRF comes in....
What tomorrow's winner looks like this afternoon....
I've studied the last 11 winners of the Grand National with the
objective of identifying their commonalities and constructing a
'profile' based on my findings. Here's what you're looking if you
want your money to be riding on a competitive animal....
-
Stick to the chasers in their prime - exclude all horses aged
younger than 9 and older than 10. Young horses have a poor record in
the race because they lack the stamina necessary to excel in this
searching test of a horse's energy reserves. No horse younger than 8
has won the race since 1940. Last year - only one horse in the first
8 home was younger than 9-years-old. A racehorse's stamina develops
with age - explaining the dominance of older horses. If you want to
win a National then it pays or your horse to be in its prime - and
that means 9- or 10-years of age. The record tells the story - 11 of
the last 14 winners were 9- or 10- years old. In 2009 4 of the first
5 finishers were 9- or 10- years old. Last year it was 5 of the
first 8.
-
Demand proof of stamina - there's always a lot of talk about
2m4f horses making the best Grand National runners but the facts
simply don't support the claim. All of the last 11 winners had won
decent races over at least 3 miles. The last National winner who
hadn't previously won over 3m was Gay Trip all the way back in 1970.
As the quality of horse contesting the National improves year-on-
year the standard of 3m+ form required to win the race has been
steadily elevated too. Ten of the last 14 winners had either won or
placed in one of the 'big' Grand Nationals - comprising the English,
the Irish, the Scottish and the Welsh.
-
Ignore the weakest form - when it comes to comparing and
contrasting runners on your shortlist you should make the quality of
form at 3m+ your number 1 tie-breaker. Ignore form in 3m+ races
worth less than £17,000 to the winner. All of the last 11 winners
had won a chase worth at least £17,000. All of the last 11 winners
had demonstrated their class by landing a Listed or Graded race
before heading to the National.
-
Exclude the inexperienced - each of the last 11 winners had
run in at least 10 chases prior to winning at Aintree. It takes
experience to build the confidence required to handle the massive
national obstacles. That can only come from having jumped plenty of
racecourse fences before. No amount of schooling in the yard will
make up for racecourse experience where jumping must stand up to the
hustle and bustle of a competitive race. This is one reason why no
novice has won the Grand National since Mr What in 1958.
-
Identify the horses 'laid out' for the race - because the
Grand National is a handicap race and good performances in advance
of it attract the official handicapper's attention, an increase in
rating and, as a consequence, additional weight on the horse's back,
trainers with a 'live' one in their care like to protect their
horse's chase handicap mark as much as possible. One way to do this
is to keep the horse off the track. But horses need to get race fit
and over the last 10 years all the winners of the National appeared
at least 4 times on a racecourse in the season running up to
Aintree. A better angle to pursue is to look at horses that have
been campaigned over hurdles at some point during the season. A good performance over hurdles does not affect a horse's chase rating - so running
over hurdles is a good option for trainers. It means the horse can be given a
race and got fit without attracting lead in the saddlebag. Over the last decade
8 National winners ran over hurdles in the same season - and prior to - running in the National.
-
Course experience is a significant advantage - 7 of the last
10 winners had experienced the big Grand National fences before
returning to the course to win the big one. Five of those winners
had contested the previous year's National.
-
Watch the weight - it's traditional to ignore horses towards
the top of the handicap. But this trend looks to be changing. The
handicapper has compressed the handicap in recent years in a bid to
attract better horses into the race. One of the effects of that is
that horses high in the official ratings are able to go to post with
less weight on their backs than would ordinarily be the case - and
that represents a competitive advantage. Since 2005 3 horses have
won shouldering weight in excess of 11-0. Don't Push It carried 11-5
to victory last year - beating Black Apalachi (carrying 11-6) into
2nd. So tread with caution where weight is concerned. I would make
11-5 the cutoff point - excluding any horse carrying more. Only 5
post-war winners have won carrying more than 11st 5lbs and two of
those were Red Rum! In 2009 only one horse carrying more than 11st
5lbs finished in the first 8.
-
It's gentleman before ladies in this instance - mares don't
have a great record in the Grand National. No mare has won since
Nickel Coin way back in 1951. Bluesea Cracker is fancied by many
observers this year - but this stat stands against her.
-
The market has a pretty decent record - 15 of the last 20
winners occupied one of the top 8 berths in the market.
-
The Irish have developed an imposing knack - 6 of the last 12
winners were Irish-trained raiders. Irish trainers often bellow and
bawl when the weights are published - but they can't have too much
to complain about given their recent dominance in the race despite
providing just a fraction of the overall runners.
Take a subjective view.... And bet clever....
Of course, very few horses will match up to every aspect of the
profile. But that's not the point. You're looking for horses that
most closely meet the profile criterion... and there's plenty of
wiggle room for subjective interpretation and weighting.
You might not hold it against a horse if he's not one of the top 8
in the betting or if he's not run over hurdles this term. But if
he's never won a chase over 3m or is 12-years-old then you might not
be quite so forgiving. It's for you to bring your own opinions,
judgements and experience to bear.... But I hope this 'road map' to
the National winner proves useful.
If you're backing each way then make sure you do so with one of the
bookmakers offering enhanced place terms of 1/4 1-2-3-4-5. Avoid
those bookmakers paying out on the first 4 home only.... avoid them
like they're carrying the plague.... The last five 5th place
finishers in the Grand National were sent off at odds of 20/1,
100/1, 12/1, 40/1 and 66/1. Imagine how gutted you'd have felt if
you'd backed any of them each-way with a tight-fisted bookie paying
out on just the first 4 places....
Bluesq and Sportingbet are offering an interesting Fallers'
Insurance Market where you get your stake back in cash (not as a
free bet) if your National selection falls, is brought down, is
carried out, refuses or unseats its rider.... Horses which pull up
don't qualify. The prices are a little skinnier but it's not a bad
insurance policy... since 2005, on average, 17 horses per year would
have qualified you for a refunded stake...
Click here for latest Grand National odds >>
It only remains for me to wish you good luck...
Until next time, be lucky.
15th April 2011
Good morning, friends,
In today's Horse Racing Focus....
- The profile does the business....
- Lessons from the Grand National....
The profile does the business....
If you applied the winning profile I sent you last Friday then
there' a very strong chance you backed Ballabriggs to win the Grand
National on Saturday - scooping a nice 14/1 payout. Donald McCain's
10-year-old was one of just half a dozen Grand National runners
which measured up closely to all the key elements of the race
winning profile.
Oscar Time - another one of the 'profile' horses I flagged up to my
Racing Angles readers - pushed Ballabriggs all the way to finish
2nd.
Big Fella Thanks, Backstage and Silver By Nature (who probably
needed a bit of cut in the ground despite his connections'
insistence that he'd improve for the drying conditions) all measured
up strongly on the profile and all of them ran decent races to get
round and finish the race.
Killyglen was my 'dark horse' for the big race. He could be backed
at 100/1 on the morning of the race and he rewarded supporters with
a fine effort. He was going very well with the leading pack and
looked to have a decent chance of going all the way when getting in
a bit of a tangle and falling for the first time in his career at
the 24th obstacle.
Backing all the profile qualifiers to £10 each-way delivered a clear
£120 profit - and that adds up to not a bad day at all for the race
profilers amongst us.
Lessons from the Grand National....
Before we move on from this year's renewal of the biggest
steeplechase in racing we should pause to learn the lessons. After
all, I guarantee we'll find them useful when it comes to
taking any ante-post prices about runners in next year's Grand
National....
-
There is an optimum age-band for the National: All the
evidence of recent years suggests that the 9- and 10-year-old
runners hold the whiphand. Nine of the first 12 home on Saturday
afternoon - including the winner and the runner-up - conformed to
that age stat. The 9- and 10-year-old runners have now won 12 of the
last 15 Grand Nationals. No horse younger than 8-years-old has won
the Grand National since 1940 - and no horse threatened to dislodge
that stat this year. No younger horses actually completed the
course. Of the 8-year-olds, King Fontaine led the way finishing
11th.
-
Weight stops the majority of horses: Defending Grand National
winner, Don't Push It, ran a cracker to finish 3rd under 11-10. But
his was the exceptional performance amongst the top weights. Vic
Venturi, What A Friend, Tidal Bay and Majestic Concorde all carried
in excess of 11-4 and all ran below expectation. The evidence of
recent history suggests they had too much lead in the saddlebag to
get competitive.
-
Proven stamina is a significant pointer: Don't even consider
backing a horse to win next year's National unless it has already
proven it possesses sufficient stamina to get competitive in the
race. Your National selection absolutely must have won a 3-mile+
race before going to Aintree. All of the last 12 Grand National
winners conformed to this significant stat. All of the first 10 home
this year had already won a 3m chase. Discount wins in races worth
less than £17,000 to the winner. All of the last 12 winners had
taken a 3m+ chase worth in excess of that figure.
-
The optimum experience level: Ballabriggs made it 12 out of 12
National wins for horses with at least 10 chases under their belts
going into the race. It takes experience to build the confidence
required to handle the massive national obstacles. That can only
come from having jumped plenty of racecourse fences before. No
amount of schooling in the yard will make up for racecourse
experience where jumping must stand up to the hustle and bustle of a
competitive race. This is one reason why no novice has won the Grand
National since Mr What in 1958. Quinz was fancied by some
commentators in this year's race. He was pulled up before the 16th
fence - but with only 7 chases to his name going into the race he
was always likely to be up against it.
Until next time, be lucky.
20th April 2011
Good afternoon, friends,
In today's Horse Racing Focus....
- Habits and patterns tell the story....
- Paul Midgely's repeat performers....
- This year's suspect....
Habits and patterns tell the story....
Picking out patterns in a trainer's overall performance or
identifying habits in the preparation or placement of his string is
an informative and worthwhile process.
We're all creatures of habit. We all have specific areas of
expertise - areas in which we consistently perform better than
others. We all - generally - stick to what we know. We stick to what
we know works. When we find an effective method of getting the job
done... of meeting our objectives... of securing the desired
outcome... we are more than likely to revisit the winning formula
whenever confronted with the same or similar challenges in the
future.
Trainers of horses are no exception. They have a set of skills, a
set of tools and a range of working methods which will underpin 80%
of what they do. Sure there's scope for improvement, evolution and
innovation but - more often than not - a method of working or
operating that has met with past success is unlikely to be
discarded or plain forgotten.
When he/she gets it right... when the trainer wins... when he meets
some objective... he will tend to repeat the pattern or the process
in future times... after all nobody knows better than he does how
effective his actions have proved to be in the past.
When we identify a significant pattern of behaviour or a habitual
method used by a trainer then we have some valuable information to
work with - information we can base bets on (depending on whether
the pattern we've noticed is a positive or a negative indicator).
Sometimes we will identify patterns and trends that, if not widely
know, are certainly not official secrets... Other times we'll
stumble across a nugget or a gem that the market is generally
unaware of... and that's a very definite edge....
Paul Midgely's repeat performers....
When Paul Midgley saddles a short-price winner in a handicap race on
the all-weather then there is a very good chance that the horse will
follow up and win again next time out on the surface...
Not many people are aware of this pattern within the wider ebb and
flow of the racing results... but the evidence on which to build the
case is definitely out there... waiting to be spotted....
In late 2009 the North Yorkshire-based handler pulled off the trick
with Smarty Socks. Midgley sent him to Southwell to contest a Class
5 handicap over 7f. The market sent the horse off at 5/2 and he duly
obliged. Just 10 days later he is returned to Southwell where he
wins another Class 5 handicap - this time over a mile having been
sent off at 15/8. The horse was then given a break until February
2009 when he once again reappeared on the Nottinghamshire fibresand
track and succeeded in making it a hat-trick with a win in a Class 4
event priced at 6/4.
Last year Midgley gave a repeat performance with Charging Indian. At
the end of January he sent the 4-year-old to Southwell where he won
a Class 5 handicap over 1m3f - having been sent off at 5/2. Just a
week later Charging Indian is back at Southwell and winning another
Class 5 event over the 1m3f trip - this time sent off at a generous
9/2. Then just another week on the horse makes it a back-to-back
hat-trick with a 9/4 success in a Class 5 handicap - once again over
the 1m3f at Southwell.
On this evidence a fancied Midgley handicapper which obliges on the
sand might well be standing on the cusp of further improvement...
primed to run up a series of successes and secure some return for
connections....
This year's suspect....
Of course, all this makes Dazakhee's win yesterday at Southwell
slightly more interesting than might otherwise have been the case.
The Midgley-trained 4-year-old was on a run of 8 consecutive losses
on the turf and the all-weather before being sent to race yesterday.
Nor had she been fancied on either of her last two runs where she'd
subsequently finished down the field and well beaten.
So shrewd market watchers knew something was afoot yesterday morning
when money suddenly came for the Midgley horse. The gamble was
obviously fuelled by 'in-the-know' money from 'inside' punters
anticipating improvement and a competitive performance as a result
of something they've 'seen at home' and away from the public domain.
The race was a low-grade affair and Dazakhee was made to pull out
all the stops to score by the runner-up, Richard Guest's On The
Cusp. That said she was up against horses with much more experience
on the sand - this was only her 5th race on the all-weather and
there is room for a little more improvement yet.
Last year Dazakhee managed to place on turf 4 times off a mark of 61
and so a current mark of 55 on turf and the all-weather doesn't
suggest we've completely tapped the tank just yet.
Midgley has obviously got the horse to the point where it is ready
to win races. If the horse is ready to go again then - on the
ratings at least - there does seem to be scope for more to come.
Dazakhee has no current entries - but Midgely's recent record with
short-price all-weather handicap scorers suggests the declarations
are worth keeping an eye on over the next couple of weeks. The 4-
year-old can score again.
Until next time, be lucky.
28th April 2011
Good afternoon, friends,
In today's Horse Racing Focus....
- Take a light slap or a heavy blow....
- What happens when you lay really low?
Take a light slap or a heavy blow....
Regular readers of this column will know that I like to lay horses
on the exchanges - and that the majority of my methods involve
identifying horses that can be layed at prices of 4/1 or less.
It doesn't take any fresh-faced exchange user long to figure out
that where laying horses is concerned - focusing your efforts on
the horses priced up the shortest is the way to go. And it is
certainly the least painful.
If you put back a 33/1 shot to the tune of £1 then you get the £33
if the horse wins and the bookie wins your £1 if it loses. When you
lay a horse on the exchanges you are effectively adopting the role
of the bookmaker. You are opposing a horse (laying it) rather than
supporting it (backing it). You get the £1 if the horse loses and
you have to shell out the £33 if the horse bucks market expectation
and wins.
Getting caught out laying a winning horse at 33/1 totally wipes out
the fruits of 32 successful earlier lays (and that's the best case
scenario). Get caught out a couple of times (and it happens) and
the old cheeks start to sting a bit.
As a layer you're going to get it wrong. And when you do you want
your liabilities to be as minimal as is reasonably possible. Laying
a 3/1 winner still hurts. That's 3 points down the swanee - the
proceeds of 3 successful lays (minus commission) - the equivalent
of a light slap on a cold morning. It isn't the concussive blow of
a blunt instrument that paying out on a 25/1 shot represents.
Where the subject of laying horses is concerned the most common
question I'm asked goes something like this: 'Why don't you just
lay odds-on shots?'
I can see how the question arises. Focusing purely on the odds-on
shots can seem appealing. It reduces liabilities bet per bet.
You're never in a position where you can lose more money than
you're set to gain. It appears like it might be a sweet deal. But
does it pay? Can you twist a worthwhile profit out of it? The
answer is No.
What happens when you lay really low?
Let's have a look at what odds-on shots have achieved as a group on
the turf in Britain over the last few seasons.
Year |
Runners |
Wins |
WSR% |
2005 |
346 |
192 |
55.49 |
2006 |
444 |
259 |
58.33 |
2007 |
400 |
230 |
57.50 |
2008 |
468 |
272 |
58.12 |
2009 |
461 |
269 |
58.35 |
2010 |
462 |
265 |
57.35 |
So far during 2011 44 runners have been sent off at odds-on on the
turf - 25 of them have won (a winning strike rate of 56.81%)
That's pretty conclusive. Approaching 60% of odds-on shots win
their races. What about the profits? Were there any? No - on SPs
the figures show negligible profits for some of the seasons. But
that's more than wiped out when you take into account that on
occasions you'll be laying on the exchanges at odds slightly bigger
than SP and paying an exchange commission of up to 5% on all your
successful lays.
Maybe a bit more selectivity is what's needed here? Maybe we need
to find a sub-group of odds-on shots that don't win quite so
frequently?
How about if we just focus on 2-year-old odds on shots? 2-year olds
are young horses, still learning the trade, prone to mistakes,
unpredictable - and often over-hyped by pundits and punters who see
the next wonder horse emerging at every turn. Is this a good group
to oppose at short-prices? 1060 2-year-olds have been sent off at
odds-on since the beginning of the 2005 season. 613 of them won at
a strike rate of 57.8% - and produced no significant, if any,
profit.
How about 2-year-olds over 5 furlongs? Not all 2-year-olds are
sprinters. Many will be at their best in later years over longer
trips. But they will still often run over 5 furlongs at 2. Do these
types go off at odds-on? Does the market miss a trick and over-
support 2-year-olds not suited to the minimum trip. Not on the
figures. 56.5% of odds-on 2-year-old runners over 5f win their
races - and produce no profit for layers.
Okay. What about odds-on 2-year olds over 7f and beyond - the kind
of trips that provide a test of stamina for a 2-year-old? Maybe the
market gets these types of races wrong and consistently over-bets
horses that shine over shorter distances but can't subsequently
step up to trips as a 2-year-old. It's worth a look - but the
results are getting predictable. 58.7% of 2-year-olds sent off at
odds-on over 7f+ win their races - and produce no profit for
layers.
What about focusing on odds-on shots that have been off the
racecourse for 6 weeks or more? Plenty of these types are likely to
be short peak fitness and in need of a run. The short price about
them might have more to do with past achievements than current
race-readiness? How does this group perform on the stats? 430 such
runners have gone to post since 2005 - 246 won at 57.2% and
produced no profit for layers.
Do the top jockeys get over-bet? Does the wider market over-bet
their rides? Are some horses backed into short-prices more because
of who is onboard rather than their true chances based on their
bare ability? It doesn't look like it - Dettori, Moore, Spencer,
Fallon, Hughes and the like all win on odds-on shots at least 50%
of the time and produce no profit for layers.
How about the lesser lights of the weighing room? They might not
draw quite so much of the racing media's attention but you can get
your fingers burnt underestimating them. For example, Joe Fanning,
Paul Hanagan, Martin Dwyer, Richard Hills, Michael Hills and
Phillip Robinson all get their odds-on shots home in 1st place at
least 55% of the time - and in some cases well over 60% of the
time. It is not profitable to lay their odds-on rides.
I could keep on going. Whichever way I look at it I can't find a
way of laying odds-on shots for profit on the exchanges. And I'm
not sure it's worth the effort involved trying. My focus is better
employed in other areas - on alternative price bands and different
groups and sub-groups of horses which can be laid consistently to
produce long-term profit. I'd suggest that yours is too.
Until next time, be lucky.
|
