Directory of Past issues - July 2009

3rd July - Things to spot in the paddock before you bet

10th July - Go green to boost your profits

20th July - A Laying system that anybody can use

26th July - Do not place a Goodwood bet until you've read this

31st July - Goodwood - Top trends for the Stewards' Cup

RETURN TO MAIN MENU

3rd July 2009

Good afternoon, friends,

In today's Horse Racing Focus...

• They all look the same to me...
  
• Why it pays to visit the paddock...
  
• More equine behaviour that spells 'lay'...

They all look the same to me...

They say you can't really tell much about a horse until you've sat
on it. I wouldn't know. I've never been on the back of one. The
only experience I've got as a jockey is riding a sullen donkey
called Jenny down Blackpool sands as a nipper. Any comparisons with
a young Lester Piggot are gross exaggeration.

Similarly I've never worked with horses. I've never so much as
mucked one out. I'm not a 'horseman'. I can't look into a horse's
eye and give you the lowdown on its psychological make up, its
temperament or its racetrack potential. I can't watch a horse walk
and then, based on what I observe, tell you how it will run,
whether it will be a nippy type or a galloping sort.

I can tell a sprinter from a middle distance horse - the sprinter
will have a big backside on it. I can tell a jumps bred from a flat
bred - the former are generally quite a bit bigger and stronger
than the latter. And I can tell you when a horse is carrying plenty
of condition. But I am no expert on the conformation of a horse.

My angle into the sport - and the betting - is largely statistical.
It's not got a lot to do with equine science or any intimate
knowledge of horses or how they function. As opposed to someone
like John Francome, for example, whose selections for races are
generally based on the body of knowledge he built up as a Champion
jockey. Only someone with Francome's background and expertise could
pick out 40/1 shot Moonax for the 1994 St Leger based purely on how
well it looked in the paddock pre-race - and be bang on the money.

Why it pays to visit the paddock...

That said, I do visit the pre-parade ring and the paddock when I go
racing. Not because I necessarily know too much about what I am
looking at if I'm honest, but because I recognize the big benefits
of picking up bits and pieces here and there and improving as a
paddock judge. I work on the principle that if you do something
often enough for long enough getting better at it becomes pretty
much inevitable.

A major advantage of visiting the paddock when you go racing is
that only a very tiny percentage of punters betting on a race
actually get to see what happens there. Sure, you do see paddock
activity if you watch the racing on TV, but you don't see
everything and you're something of a hostage to the editor's
decisions during the live broadcast. Most punters aren't interested
anyway or watch the paddock parade passively - making no attempt to
connect what they see before the race with the ultimate outcome.

Over the years I've noted that being a half - or even quarter -
decent paddock judge can give you a real edge over the market.
Because so few punters know what they are looking at in the paddock
(and so few are looking anyway - even on course), what happens
there doesn't impact on the market to the degree it probably
should. If you've got half an idea of what you're witnessing
actually means then you can take advantage.

For example, imagine this scenario. You're in the paddock and you
see one of the first three in the betting for the next race not
cooperating with the stable hands. Instead of walking normally this
horse's ears are flat and it's thrashing its head around. Maybe
it's even lashing out with its hind legs or trying to bite someone.
When the jockey mounts, the horse will probably try to jettison
him/her.

What you're looking at is an angry horse. Apart from not being in
the best frame of mind, this horse is using up vital energy, which
it will need to run the race to its full potential, in reacting to
whatever or whoever has upset it.

The market often doesn't respond to this fact in the way you'd
expect. Instead of lengthening in price the horse's price will
often remain static - on occasions I've seen horses behaving like
this actually contract in price. If this angry horse were 4/1 or
less then I'd be laying it on the exchanges. If I'd been thinking
of backing the horse, I'd change my mind. Only those who are
watching and have some idea of what they are looking at can take
advantage of it in the market.

More equine behavior that spells 'lay'...

A scared horse is highly unlikely to win its race - the physical
expression of its state of mind will take so much out of the animal
it is at a severe disadvantage against less fretful opponents. A
combination of fear and a short price spells 'lay' in my book.

A scared horse - like an angry horse - exhibits specific behavior
which you can tune into if you're in the paddock observing what's
going on. A scared horse will be wheeling around in the paddock and
its handler will be struggling to move the horse around keep it on
the right path. On the way down to the start a scared horse may
pull hard for its head and the jockey may be struggling to keep the
animal from bolting.

Another signal of a scared horse is excessive sweating - look for
horses literally soaked in sweat and pay particular attention to
the forelegs and a lot of sweating between the hind legs. Another
bad sign is a horse which is foaming at the mouth.

Just because a horse hasn't exhibited fear previously doesn't mean
it is immune to fear. Different racecourses and their specific
layouts can extract very different reactions from highly strung
thoroughbred racehorses. The proximity of the crowd, the noise of a
large crowd on a major race day, flags blowing in the wind, litter
blowing about, loud music etc etc - any one of these new
experiences can spook a horse and condemn it to a losing effort in
the race.

There's no way of predicting these things - it's a case of being on
the spot to observe them as they happen so that you can bet
accordingly.

A little familiarity with what goes on in the paddock and what it
means can go a long way to getting you an edge in your betting.
More on this subject in upcoming issues.

Until next time, be lucky.

10th July 2009

Good afternoon, friends,

In today's Horse Racing Focus...

• What is a 'green' horse?...
  
• How do we bet a 'green' horse?...
  
• The dangers of laying at big prices...

Last week's issue focused on some elements of paddock watching. It
generated a considerable mailbag with plenty of questions and
queries. In the spirit of sharing information with all readers I've
decided to answer the most interesting question in this issue.
There's plenty to get through and space is limited... So without
further ado...

What is a 'green' horse?...

'Green' is a term applied to young and inexperienced horses which
either play-up or visibly reveal their inexperience on the
racecourse - whether in the paddock or during the actual running of
their race.

The first couple of times a horse encounters a racecourse are novel
and sometimes frightening experiences. Think in terms of 2-year-old
animals with little experience outside of their training yard.  The
crowd, the noise, the unfamiliar sights and smells and the presence
of strange horses are all new and possibly intimidating experiences
for the immature horse.  Some will exhibit signs of being affected
by the occasion or being 'green'.

In the paddock a 'green' horse might carry its head high and be
trying to look around - exhibiting a curiosity with its surrounding
that an older and more race-seasoned horse doesn't. The 'green'
horse's ears will be twitching this way and that as it tunes into
all the new sounds the racecourse presents. Its mind is not on the
race.

Some horses enjoy the experience. Others get frightened - wheeling
about and maybe even whinnying. A 'green' horse may show some
initial reluctance to have the jockey on its back. But the 'green'
horse will generally accept the jockey once he's in the saddle -
unlike an angry horse which may well try and buck the jockey off.  

Young horses still in the early stages of their career and still
being worked on by their trainers may draw attention to their
'greenness' by showing some reluctance to go into the stalls. In
the race itself a 'green' horse, amongst other things, may lollop
along with no discernible sense of rhythm, hesitate to pass other
horses when asked or swerve wildly off a straight line as the race
reaches its climax.

A 'green' horse is still learning its job and coming to terms with
what is expected of it during a race. 'Green' horses do win their
races - especially talented horses - but plenty more of them lose.

So how do we bet the 'green' horse?...

When I see a 'green' horse in the paddock or one displaying signs
of 'greenness' on the way down to the start, my first instinct is
to check out its price with the on-course bookmakers. If it's short
enough and other factors support my thinking then I may well be
getting on the phone to the betting exchange and laying the animal.

Take this season, for example. A quick and dirty query into my
database tells me that 173 horses have been described as 'green' or
running 'green' in the formbook. Of these only 10 won their races
at a paltry strike rate of just 5.8%. If you'd been observant or
sufficiently clairvoyant to lay every 'green' horse before the race
then you'd be £92.12 to the good to a £1 stake.

At one point this season 31 'green' horses lost in sequence. That's
the kind of run an exchange layer will tell his grandchildren
about.

I don't lay anything priced above 4/1 - so a lot of these 'green'
runners (assuming I'd seen signs of their greenness before the
race) would fall outside my criteria. However, 34 of the 173
'green' runners went off at 4/1 or less. Of these 8 won their race.
Had you laid all 34 you'd be £13.12 in profit to a £1 stake.
Spotting signs of greenness in a horse - in the paddock, on the way
to the start or at the start - can form the basis of a profitable
short-priced lay.

The danger of laying at big prices...

Braver men than me might think about laying all the runners priced
ABOVE 4/1. A cursory glance at the numbers above suggests this
tactic should pay off handsomely. After all, there have been 139
'green' runners priced over 4/1 and only 2 of them won. But there
are a couple of problems with this strategy.

First, it simply isn't possible to lay every 'green' runner. You
can't watch EVERY race. Even if you do, unless you spot signs of
greenness before the race, you've no way of knowing whether or not
a horse might/will run green until the race unfolds. My point is
that you're not going to be laying every single one of the 139
runners. The likelihood is that you'd lay a fraction of them.

Secondly, big price runners do win their races. Let's say that two
of the runners you'd laid on the basis of being 'green' were
Romanticize at Salisbury in May and Bahati at Newbury later the
same month. Both showed signs of greenness before their respective
races. Both were reported as running 'green'. But both won their
races - at 33/1 and 25/1 respectively.

If you'd laid one or both of these horses on the basis of being
'green' then you'd still be wiping the tears from your eyes. The
33/1 and 25/1 were SPs. There's no way you'd be laying at those
prices on the exchanges where outsiders trade for much bigger
prices than they do on the bookmaker's boards. You'd probably be
paying out at closer to 50s or even 60s.

Big priced horses can and do win - and when they do they put a
serious dent in the individual exchange layer's betting bank.
That's why I prefer to lay shorter priced horses. Okay, more of
them win. But they don't clean me out. I can stand the liabilities.
And, over time, I back myself to find sufficient losers to more
than take care of my liabilities on the winners.

To help me achieve that objective I have a portfolio of angles I
use to detect short-priced horses ripe for laying. 'Greenness' is
just one of those angles. If it produces 3 or 4 winning lays for me
over the course of a season, then I'm happy. The numbers suggest
these opportunities are out there. All I have to do is be observant
and spot them.

Until next time, be lucky.

20th July 2009

Good afternoon, friends,

In today's Horse Racing Focus...

• A laying system for just about anybody?...
  
• What proposition to short-priced runners represent?...
  
• So much can go wrong in a sprint race...

A laying system for just about anybody...

Since I started producing HRF, the most common query I've received
regards exchange betting and whether or not it's possible for
anybody to make decent money laying horses on the exchanges - even
if they don't have much knowledge of the sport.

When you lay a horse you're playing bookmaker. If you back a horse
at 3/1 you get the 3 from the bookmaker if the horse wins and you
lose the 1 if it doesn't. When you lay it's the other way round.
When you win you get the 1 but when you lose you have to part with
the 3. As a layer your risks will outweigh your rewards on all but
the occasions you lay odds-on shots. Losing when you lay can be a
financially painful experience.

It's one of the reasons you don't want to be laying big-priced
rags. Sure, a lot of the bigger priced horses have no chance. Sure,
plenty of them will lose. But big priced horses win too. Every day
of the week. And, when they do, those big liabilities will cripple
you.

Remember, to win the 1 you risk the 33 or the 25 or the 16. Not a
game for the faint hearted. The liability on a winning 33/1 shot
will cost you every penny you won on the previous 32 successful
bets you laid (assuming you're playing to level stakes). That's a
pretty soul destroying experience. Get it wrong a time or two too
often and you really are in trouble.

So, when you lay horses it stands to reason you want to be laying
at the shortest prices - reducing your potential liability? That's
right. But don't short-priced horses trade at short-prices
precisely because they are fancied? That's right too. And that's
the problem with laying short-priced horses. Plenty of fancied
horses win their races. Lay too many of those winners and you'll
feel it in the pocket.

What proposition to short-priced runners represent?...

Earlier this week I threw myself into some research and analysis. I
wanted to find out exactly what kind of proposition short-priced
horses represent to the layer. What exactly is the exchange layer
up against? The results surprised me. Had you laid every odds-on
runner that went to stalls on a British flat track since
January 1st 2004 then you'd be in profit. The table below
illustrates the figures:

Had you laid every odds-on shot running on the British flat since
January 2004 to a £10.00 level stake you'd be £2768.00 in profit.
To £100 you'd be £27,680 in profit. You can see that well over 50%
of odds-on runners win their races each year. However, sufficient
numbers fail to justify their short price and lose their races -
producing a year-on-year profit for layers in the process.

But the figures also show you that you'd have to work for your
money and make an investment of time that would be impossible for
all but the most committed punters. Over the period you'd have had
to lay over 3500 horses - requiring you to be at your computer to
identify odds-on shots in the moments before racing and lay them on
the exchanges. In the long term you're making less than a £1 for
every bet you place.

And these figures don't take into account any slight differences
that might have existed between SP and the prices you could
actually lay on the exchanges. Nor do they take into account the
Betting Exchange commission structure - where up to 5% of your
winnings disappears.

Clearly, there's something of an effort/reward ratio issue here.
Too much effort and time and not enough profit to justify it. What
we need to do is pinpoint smaller groups of horses within this
larger group - smaller groups of horses requiring less bets and
ideally producing a more profitable loser-to-winner ratio. In
laying, as with backing, we need to specialize to improve on the
outcome.

So much can go wrong in a sprint race...

When I lay a horse during the flat season it will, more often than
not, be contesting an event over 5, 6 or 7 furlongs. These are the
flat horses I study and have most conscious knowledge of. I know
their quirks and preferences and it makes sense to play (whether it
be backing or laying) in an area where I'm most likely to have an
edge over the wider market. 

There's another great advantage to laying in sprint races. I get
other little percentages on my side. Sprint races are short, fast
and furious. The race is over within a minute and a half of the
horses leaving the stalls.

If anything goes wrong during the running of a sprint race then a
horse has very little opportunity to recover and get back on terms.
In other words, a hiccup in running can ruin a horse's chances...
however fancied the horse was before the race. And, in sprint races
with their big fields and furious pace, plenty can and does go
wrong.

• Headstrong and highly-strung sprinters can runaway with
  jockeys on the way to the start - running their race before it
  begins.

• Sprinters can refuse to go into the stalls or miss the break.

• Big sprint fields can create horses plenty of trouble in-
  running - with barging, clipped heels, and getting boxed in common
  sights in such races.

• Hold-up sprinters may not get the strong pace they need to be
  running on at the end.

• Front-runners may go to fast and get picked off in the
  closing stages.

In sprints in particular the best horse in the race can be undone
as much by circumstances and events as by its own shortcomings
(which on their own will often be enough to get the horse beaten).
Unlike in races over longer distances there simply isn't sufficient
time to recover from trouble or mistakes. That's a nice natural
advantage to have as a layer.

But specialist knowledge and luck are not enough on their own. You
also need methods that guide you towards specific groups of horses
that regularly and consistently produce many more short-priced
losers than winners. In the next couple of issues I'll be showing
you a few specific methods which will increase the number of short-
priced sprinters you lay for a profit on the exchanges

Until next time, be lucky.

Nick Pullen
www.HorseRacingFocus.co.uk

P.S. To be a successful layer it's essential that you have a
sufficient betting bank to comfortably accommodate the inevitable
losing runs you'll encounter and keep you in the game until the
winning sequences come round again. Given the current economic
climate a betting bank might prove difficult to find or generate.
But stay tuned... because I'll be back in the next couple of days
with some information that might make this tough task a lot easier
than you think!

26th July 2009

Good afternoon, friends,

In today's Horse Racing Focus...

• Looking forward to Goodwood...
  
• Goodwood draw biases you can capitalize on...
  
• Download my complete Glorious Goodwood briefing...

Looking forward to Glorious Goodwood...

The last week of July running into the first week of August means
just one thing to the racing punter - its Glorious Goodwood week.

From Tuesday 28th July through to Saturday 1st August the Sussex
racecourse, sitting atop the picturesque South Downs, hosts 35
races including 12 Group contests (2 x Group 1, 4 x Group 2 and 6 x
Group 3 races) and the race that represents the Saturday showpiece
for most punters - the Stewards Cup, a cavalry charge of a handicap
over 6 furlongs that never fails to produce a big, competitive
field and a red-hot betting heat.

For thousands of race goers who will attend the course at some
point over the five days, the Festival offers a great opportunity
to get out in the sunshine, knock the head off a few glasses of
Pimms and rub shoulders with the South Coast movers and shakers.

But for punters like me the Festival is all about making a profit.
Swigging Pimms in the sunshine is not a bad way to while away an
afternoon or drown your sorrows, but it will go down considerably
better with a couple of winning bets under the belt.
 
At one time Goodwood was my local course - just a few miles away
from the City of Chichester. As such, I spent a lot of time there
and had plenty of opportunity to study the various idiosyncratic
challenges the course presents, figure out some of the vagaries of
the draw over various distances and familiarise myself with the
jockeys and trainers who excel at the track.

The observations I made back then still form the bedrock of my
approach to betting at Goodwood today. My intention here is to
share with you the preliminary analysis I've conducted and the
conclusions I've formed in advance of this week's Festival - in the
hope this will lead you toward profitable bets or, at the very
least, divert you from bad ones. That's the plan. So without any
further preamble, I'll get down to business... with some Goodwood
draw biases you can capitalize on...

The Draw over 5 furlongs...

The following table refers to 5 furlong races run since 2005 at
Goodwood with more than 10 runners in the field. At the upcoming
Festival there aren't going to be the small fields you can find at
Goodwood at different times of the year (Friday nights in
June, for example) and we don't want those anomalies messing up our
analysis.

By looking at the bigger-field races we can determine a little more
about which stalls - low, middle or high - are likely to be
advantageous this week...

From 2005 to date there have been 27 races with 11 or more runners
contested over the 5 furlong straight and it's clear that the
higher a horse is drawn in a big-field 5 furlong race the more
advantaged it is.

In bigger field races over 5 furlongs the percentage play is to
focus on the highest third of the draw.

And here's something else to bear in mind. I noticed it when I was
looking at the records of individual stalls over 5 furlongs at
Goodwood.

Since 2005 58 runners have broken from Stall 1. Not a single one
has won during that time suggesting that right up against the
stands rail is not the place to be in these races. In 5 furlong
sprints avoid the horse drawn 1. If the horse running from stall 1
is a short-price then consider laying it on the betting exchanges.

The Draw over 6 furlongs...

Looking at 6 furlong races with 11+ runners contested at Goodwood
since 2005 tells us a very similar story.

Goodwood has hosted 64 such races during the period under review
and horses drawn in the highest third of the stalls (closer to the
far rail than the stands rail) have run out winner in 30 of those -
winning almost as many over the same period as those drawn in the
middle and those drawn low combined - at a strike rate of almost
47%.

Mid draw horses win as often as we'd expect - 34% of the time. It's
the horses drawn low on the stands side which seem to be
disadvantaged at Goodwood over 6 furlongs in biggish and big fields
- winning only 12 of the 64 races.

That said, take a look at the following table which shows the
individual records of stalls 20-28 over 6 furlongs since 2005.

What this tells us is that the relatively few runners coming out of
stalls 20 or higher in really big fields have a poor record with
not a single winner from 54 runners. Maybe the extreme high stalls
at Goodwood are not the place to be either in really big 6 furlong
fields like we'll see on Friday in the Rolf Group Stewards Sprint
Stakes and on Saturday for the renewal of the Bluesquare.com
Stewards Cup.

Looking at the two sets of 6 furlong statistics in combination
leads me to believe that the middle of the draw will be the best
place to focus on when it comes time to make a selection or two in
these 6 furlong races.

The Draw over 7 furlongs...

A stall in the highest third of the draw is definitely the place to
be over 7 furlongs at Goodwood.

The 7 furlong start is situated a little distance before the right
hand turn into the straight. As such, the horses drawn high
(closest to the rail) have a real advantage over those which have
to run wide into the home straight. They have the rail to help them
round the turn, they don't have to cover the extra distance the
wide horses do and they also avoid all the buffeting and barging
which takes place wider on the track as poorly drawn horses jostle
for position coming into the straight.

The statistics above - looking at every 11+ field to race at
Goodwood over 7 furlongs since 2005 - certainly confirm just what
an advantage a high draw is. From 54 such races high-drawn horses
have won over 50% of the time and are the definite percentage play
next week in the 8 scheduled races over the 7 furlong trip.

The Draw over 8 furlongs...

For much the same reason (course layout) horses racing from a high
draw over a mile at Goodwood also have a distinct advantage over
their opponents.

High drawn horses have won 44.4% of races over a mile with 11+
runners and are the definite percentage call in the four 8 furlong
races at the Festival next week.

Download my FREE Glorious Goodwood briefing...
     
Today's issue is taken from a Goodwood Briefing I've been working
on and which is now available FREE to any readers who would like to
take a look. There simply wasn't the space to include everything
here.

In addition to the draw analysis I've outlined above, the briefing
also highlights some methods you might want to use for races over
specific distances at Goodwood. There's also a section containing
key facts and stats about certain trainers and their performance at
Goodwood.

Just as a taster, here's what I've got to say about Clive Cox: 'His
overall record looks pretty good with 10 winners from 62 runners at
Goodwood since the beginning of 2007 - at a strike-rate of 16.1%.
However, we can tighten our focus on Cox and highlight the areas
where his string excels and those where it consistently misfires.
Where you don't want to be backing a Cox horse at Goodwood is in a
non-handicap event. His recent record reads 1 winner from 22
efforts. Where he excels are the handicaps for 3-year-olds and
older horses where his record reads 7 winners from 36 at 19.4%.'

You can get your hands on my full Goodwood briefing right now. Just
click on the link below...

Download your Glorious Goodwood Guide now!

• The report will open as a PDF document. Go to 'File' and 'Save
  As' to save a copy to your computer.

Until next time, be lucky.

31st July 2009

Good afternoon, friends,

In today’s Horse Racing Focus….

• A difficult race to call….
  
• Where the competitive horses come from….
  
• One horse definitely in my portfolio of bets….

A difficult race to call….

Tomorrow sees this year’s renewal of the Stewards' Cup – one of the
leading sprint handicap races in Europe. For horses aged 3-years-old and
above the Stewards’ Cup is run over Goodwood’s straight (but undulating)
6 furlong course. 

Peter Bromley commentated on every running of the Stewards’ Cup for 40
years between 1961 and 2000. He described it as the most difficult race
to commentate on. If you’ve ever watched a Stewards’ Cup then you’ll know
why.

It’s a bit like a multi-coloured charge of the Light Brigade as the
horses leave the stalls. The 27+ runners sprint, buffet and barge their
over the Goodwood 6 furlong trip in little more than a minute. During
that time the commentator has got to try and make some sense of events
and provide viewers with a coherent race narrative. Rather him than me.

As punters we’ve got a little more time to try and make sense of the
race. Our handicap is that we have to do it in advance – not as events
are unfolding. With almost 30 runners contesting a sprint race – where
just about anything that goes wrong proves fatal to a horse’s chances –
picking the winner is never going to be a straightforward proposition.

A lot of experts will tell you that this is exactly the type of race the
punter should leave alone – a big field sprint handicap. I get where
they’re coming from. I understand the point of view. I don’t disagree in
many respects. I just don’t listen. I like the big handicaps over the
shorter distances. The races always contain plenty of runners with ‘live’
chances at nice prices – and I like to try and identify these horses and
back them each-way.

Where the competitive Stewards’ Cup horses come from….

This week I’ve been looking at the last 7 runnings of the Stewards’ Cup
and forming some conclusions about where the competitive horses come
from. In the spirit of sharing I offer the following observations which
you might find useful when you come to look at the race yourself:

• Age – Stick to 4 and 5 year-olds

I noted the first 6 horses home in the Stewards’ Cup in every running of
the race from 2002 onwards – working on the basis that a horse finishing
6th or higher in the 27+ field was ‘competitive’. The table below details
the age of the horses that filled those positions in each renewal.

What’s immediately obvious is that the bulk of competitive horses come
from the 4-year-old to 5-year-old group – 69% of top 6 runners in the
last 7 years have come from that group. That in itself is a conclusion of
no great shakes.

There are many more 4 and 5-year-old runners in the race than any other
age group – so we’d expect them to fill a bigger proportion of the
principle places. But the figures help focus the mind. Horses aged 4 or 5
are the percentage play when it comes to pinpointing competitive animals.

The figures also focus the mind on what to avoid. 3-year-olds, for
example. In the last 7 years horses of that age have provided two top 6
finishers from 10 runners – One Putra (100/1) was 6th in 2005 and Two
Step Kid (9/1) took 4th in 2004. The other three-year-olds finished well
down the field. As a percentage play I’d rather be against the 3-year-
olds.

I’d be against horses 6 or older too. Sure, a few older horses have run
into top 6 places. Horses older than 6 have proven competitive 5 times
since 2002 – but the other 33 runners have finished down the field.

• The Draw – I’m staying high

Looking at where in the draw the competitive runners have come from is
pretty confusing. Last year 4 of the top 6 finishers came from stalls 1
to 9. And in 2007 the top 6 finishers were spread equally through each
third of the draw.

But going back further it’s clear that high numbers have enjoyed the
advantage overall in this race. Since 2002, 22 of the top 6 finishers
have run from stalls 18 or higher – just over 50% of top 6 finishers over
the period under review. During that period the high-third of the draw
has not failed to produce a top 6 finisher – as opposed to the bottom-
third which failed to produce a competitive horse in 2005 and 2006 or the
middle-third which failed in 2006.

I’m minded to stick with the percentages and focus my attention on horses
drawn higher than 18. Especially after watching this afternoon’s running
of the Rolf Group Stewards' Sprint Handicap (2.45). 22 runners went to
post for this race over the same 6f course tomorrow’s runners will run
over.

The first 3 home – Johannes (12/1), Northern Dare (7/1) and Jaconet
(33/1) were drawn 22, 19 and 24 respectively. Low numbers look like the
place you don’t want to be. Harrison George ran 5th from stall 3 – and
has to be commended. But the majority of single-figure stall runners ran
well down the field. 

• Stewards’ Cup Specialists

It’s not uncommon for horses to do well in one renewal of the Stewards’
Cup and then come back and run equally well in a subsequent renewal.
There are plenty of recent examples – and the market often undervalues
the horse concerned.

Halmahera was 2nd in 2002 at 20/1 and 6th in 2004 at 40/1.
Simianna was 6th in 2003 at 66/1 and 5th in 2004 at 40/1.
Fantasy Believer was 2nd in 2004 at 10/1 and 3rd in 2005 at 16/1.
Borderlescott was 1st in 2006 at 10/1, 2nd in 2007 at 12/1 and 3rd last
year at 7/1.
Knot In Wood was 3rd in 2007 at 7/1 and 6th in 2008 at 9/1.

Goodwood’s undulations don’t suit every horse, nor does a big field.
Those horses that have already shown themselves to be suited by the
conditions this race presents are worthy of consideration.

Knot in Wood is back again for another attempt – but this time off the 9-
11 top weight. He’s failed to win twice carrying lower burdens of 8-13
and 8-12. With more weight on his back and 7 years in his legs my
instinct is to swerve him. Beaver Patrol is another with previous good
form in this – but he’s 7-years-old now too.

Of much more interest is Mac Gille Eoin. He was 5th in last year’s race
and is much better at the weights with Knot in Wood who finished 6th last
year. Mac Gille Eoin is the right age and he won in his other two races
over 6f at Goodwood twice previously. He likes the Sussex Downs.

Okay, he’s in stall 14 – and that’s not ideal – but there’s enough
positives in his profile to suggest the 16/1 about him is a reasonable
each-way price (especially when you consider Knot in Wood is generally
shorter) and Mac Gillie Eoin will definitely be one of my representatives
in the race tomorrow. I think he’ll be shorter than 16/1 at the off.

Until next time, be lucky.

P.S.
If you’re backing each-way in tomorrow’s Stewards’ Cup be sure to take
advantage of the enhanced place terms some of the betting firms are
offering. I’ve just had a scout around the websites and I can tell you
that Paddy Power, Blue Square and 888 Sport are offering ¼ on the 1st 5
places instead of the usual 4. Horses placed 5th have gone off at 20/1,
33/1, 16/1, 14/1 and 40/1 in recent years – so it can be very worthwhile
ensuring you’ve got 5th place running for you.