Read all sorts of commentaries and tips across a range of racing disciplines on the most popular horse racing blog in Britain, from staff and guest writers.

Royal Ascot 2026: Must Know Betting Angles

Royal Ascot – Exploring a variety of angles

Royal Ascot 2026 is less than a week away, writes Dave Renham. It's obviously one of the biggest meetings of the year and it is one of my favourites, in my top three along with Cheltenham and Goodwood. In this article I will delve into Royal Ascot results data going back ten years (2016-2025) in preparation for the upcoming five days of the festival. I will be looking at some areas I have not previously publicly examined in depth, so I'm excited to get cracking. Profit/ loss figures have been calculated to Betfair Starting Price (BSP) less 2% commission.

Last year For Royal Ascot I looked at Group 1 races and in 2024 I focused on the mile handicaps. In this piece, as the title indicates, I am going to look at a variety of angles. Let’s get started.

Royal Ascot Draw Bias

Straight Track Drawn Bias (up to a mile)

Where horses are berthed in the stalls often has a big say in certain big field races on the straight track. Below are some recent examples, starting with the 2023 Sandringham Handicap run over a mile. The first nine runners home, along with their post positions, were:

There was a clear high to middle draw bias in this race with eight of the first nine home, and all of the first seven, racing stands’ side. Not only that several of these runners were big prices with a 33/1 second, a 66/1 third and a 50/1 in fifth.

The next example occurred in 2024:

This renewal of the Buckingham Palace Handicap, run over a furlong less than the Sandringham, again witnessed a very substantial bias in favour of high to middle berthed runners. The first ten home were drawn 18 or higher and all raced stands’ side. And the second and third placed horses were 28/1 and 25/1.

Last year's edition of the same race saw a near carbon copy occur as the result below shows:

The first four home exited from the highest five stalls. Indeed, it should also be noted that the 2023 renewal of this contest also favoured high to middle drawn runners (best finishing position of a horse drawn in single figures was ninth). Based on these recent races, when they line up in the Buckingham Palace Stakes this year it will be tempting to completely ignore those runners drawn low.

However, although we get some handicap races on the straight course that show a significant draw bias, when we look at all such races over the past ten years, the draw breakdown by ‘thirds’ are probably more even than might have been expected.

Lowish draws have won the smallest percentage, but I must admit I had expected a figure at least five percentage points lower. Middle draws have been the most successful in terms of wins at least, perhaps because plenty of the big field races are contested down the centre of the track thus meaning no lost ground manoeuvring for position.

Of course, we can view this draw data in a different way by looking at Percentage of Rivals Beaten (PRB). This potentially gives us a more accurate picture as it considers all runners in all races, not just the winners. Here were the splits across the 59 races:

This is more the type of pattern I was expecting with high edging it over middle and low a few points behind. 46% of rivals beaten on a sample this size is material: it's quite tough for the low drawn horses.

Royal Ascot Round course Draw Bias (1m4f)

If you were thinking draw bias only has the potential to impact straight course races, think again. Over 1m 4f we have seen a strong draw bias, albeit from a smallish sample of 20 handicaps run over this trip over the past ten meetings. Let me share the win splits by third of the draw first:

Low drawn runners have struggled, winning just three of the 20 races even though they ostensibly have the shortest distance to travel having been drawn closer to the inside running rail. Meanwhile, high draws won half of the sample races, with seven wins for the middle third. If we focus on the four lowest drawn horses versus the four highest drawn horses, we get this dichotomy:

These numbers are quite powerful and are at least partially corroborated by the PRB figures:

Based on these stats, it is a challenge to be berthed in draws one to four, perhaps because one either has to use petrol to hold a position or else take back and ride for luck buried in the ruck. Middle to high draws hold sway with 13 of the 20 winners coming from the top half of the draw.

OK, moving on from the draw let’s now look at...

Odds Movement at Royal Ascot

Early Morning odds compared with Opening Show odds

One would assume market movements at Royal Ascot differ slightly compared with your average meeting. I was expecting the early morning odds (EMO) for most runners to be more accurate than usual, for example. Below are the percentages for horses that lengthened/drifted in price from EMO to Opening Show (OS), those that shortened, and those that stayed the same price. For the record, the EMO prices were taken from around 9.30am and I have used William Hill odds. The OS odds are based on when the market became ‘live’ so usually around 15 minutes before the start of the race.

These figures are very different from the figures for all flat races. The control group of 'all UK flat races' saw 52.6% of horses lengthen in price, 36.4% shorten and 11% stayed the same. Hence, at Royal Ascot the market sees far fewer horses lengthen in price with their overall numbers similar to those that have shortened. In addition, far more horses have remained at the same price. Ultimately, I guess this is what we should expect – more accurate morning markets meaning less fluctuations during the day; and, perhaps, fewer horses defensively priced early in the day.

Opening Show odds compared with Starting Price

What about the price shifts in the minutes before the ‘off’? What type of changes do we see from the Opening Show on course to the final SP?

More horses remain at the same price than those that either shorten or lengthen/drift in price. Again, these figures differ markedly from the norm – in flat races as a whole, around 42% of runners drift in price, 24% remain the same price, while around 34% shorten. For those punters who bet close to the ‘off’, these stats will be useful to know.

There is one more comparison I would like to share before moving on. In all flat races horses that were clear favourite at early prices remained favourite at the off around 63% of the time. At Royal Ascot, more early morning favourites have retained favouritism at the ‘off’ than has been the norm with their figure standing at 73%.

Royal Ascot: Exchange Markets

BSP prices

I wanted to take a quick look at Betfair SP (BSP) to see if there has been a price band that offered some value. In Class 1 races the sweet spot seems to have been between BSP 5.0 and 10.0. This price grouping has seen 79 winners from 493 (SR 16%) for a profit of £60.67 (ROI +12.3%). Narrowing these Class 1 races down to the cream of the crop, the Group 1s, horses priced BSP 9.0 or lower has been the area to totally focus on. Backing all these runners blind would have seen us make a 16p in the £ on investment. Quite incredible, really.

In handicaps, the 5.0 to 10.0 band which was positive for Class 1 races was far from optimal here, producing just an 11.1% strike rate (27 winners from 243) for losses of £40.38 (ROI -20.3%). The best value in the handicaps was with longer priced horses – primarily those between 17.0 and 60.0. However, the strike rate is down at 4.5% across this huge cohort and hence finding the right horses within this odds bracket would have been tricky to say the least.

In-running betting/trading

Roughly 20% of all money bet on a horse race happens in running. At Royal Ascot, with competitive races, this percentage may edge up a point or two. I analysed some Royal Ascot in-running data in relation to ‘dobbing’. Dobbing or ‘DOB’ means ‘double or bust’. Essentially, dobbing is an in-play trading strategy employed by some traders where they are looking to double their original stake if their trade succeeds. Conversely, if the trade/DOB is unsuccessful they ‘bust’ or lose their stake.

I have written about dobbing before but for those who have not heard of it, I will offer a quick worked example. Let us imagine we back a horse at 10.0 for £10; in order to create a potential DOB we try and lay the horse at half the odds for double the stake – so we set a lay at 5.0 for £20. If the horse hits 5.0 or lower in running, our lay bet will be matched and regardless of the result we will win £10 (less commission).

The basic mathematics behind it are shown in the table below:

For dobbing to be profitable long term, we are probably looking to have a success rate of around 53% or more. This figure has to be a bit higher than a 50.1% baseline as we need to take commission into account.

Scene set, here are some Royal Ascot dobbing data. Mainly, I wanted to see if the price of the horse made a difference. Below is a graph that shows the dobbing percentages for different BSP price bands:

Horses priced under BSP 2.02 cannot ‘DOB’ hence why the lowest price band starts at 2.02. Horses priced between 2.02 and 4.25 have got close to a 50% dob rate, but the rest have been well below the type of figures we would be looking for to make a profit.

What about the distance of the race? Can that make a difference?

The graph clearly shows that the longer the race at Royal Ascot the more chance a horse has of dobbing. The longest distances of 2 miles or more have hit over 45% but still some way short of that 53% figure we would be looking for to edge towards profit.

If we combine the best BSP price band of 2.02 to 4.25 with races 2 miles or further, we would have hit a 65% DOB rate. However, before we get too excited this comes from a small sample of 23 runners.

Finally, on the in-play front, it should be noted that 80% of all winners traded higher than their BSP in running. So, if as a punter your preference is betting BSP, it may be worth considering setting pre-race a slightly higher figure than the expected BSP for a small proportion of your overall stake. For the record 39 of the 40 winners of 1-mile non-handicaps traded higher in running than their BSP.

Royal Ascot Trainer Form

Top Trainers by Win Strike Rate

Before closing, I wanted to review some Royal Ascot trainer data. With the level of racing being so competitive it is difficult for even the very best trainers to be consistently successful, and the highest win strike rate for any trainer who has had at least 50 runners in the past ten years is just 13.5% - not surprisingly it’s Aidan O’Brien. He has saddled an impressive 48 winners but from 355 runners.

John Gosden, and now with son Thady on the licence, has been the best of the British with 32 winners at a strike rate of 11.5%. No other trainer has saddled more than 20 winners and only three have hit double figures, namely Charlie Appleby (15), Andrew Balding (12) and Roger Varian (11).

To avoid big odds winners skewing bottom lines, let me share the trainer results for horses priced BSP 24.0 or less. To be included a trainer must have had at least 25 qualifying runners:

Seven of the 19 managed a profit but for some - notably Appleby, Beckett, Cox, Hannon and Joseph O’Brien - it has been hard going in terms of returns. Even Aidan O’Brien would have lost us more than 15p in the £.

Top Trainers by Percentage of Rivals Beaten (PRB)

It is also worth sharing the PRBs for these trainers with BSP 24.0 or lower priced runners and these were as follows:

One trainer in particular who we can say has been unlucky is Clive Cox. He has by far the best PRB of any of the trainers at 0.73, but has managed just three winners from 32. That PRB figure, though, does nod to the fact that Cox saddled ten placed runners as well as the trio of winners, and backing all of his Royal Ascot runners to place would have yielded a 25p in the £ profit on the Betfair Place market.

Specific Royal Ascot Trainer Angles

There are some additional trainer stats I wish to share based on the BSP price cap of 24.0.

The Gosdens in Group 1s have secured a near 30% strike rate thanks to 13 winners from 44. Backing all runners blind would have yielded a return of 64 pence in the £.
Meanwhile backing all Aidan O’Brien runners priced 24.0 or less would have seen significant losses of over 34p in the £.
Charlie Appleby has a poor record when saddling the favourite at Royal Ascot with just three winners from 21 (SR 14.3%) for hefty losses of £13.49 (ROI -64.3%).
Roger Varian has had an outstanding record when his horses have started favourite, winning 61.5% of the time thanks to eight winners from 13. Backing all Varian favourites to BSP would have seen an excellent profit of £20.31 (ROI +156.3%).
Another poor Charlie Appleby stat is that in handicaps he has had just one win from 43 with losses of 84 pence in the £.
Keep an eye on NH guru Willie Mullins when he sends a runner here that raced in a NH race last time out. Of the 23 such entries, six have won (SR 26.1%) for a profit of £11.94 (ROI +51.9%). Backing these types to place on Betfair would have yielded a further 20p in the £ return.

Royal Ascot 2026 promises to be an absolute treat for us racing and betting fans. Hopefully there is something in this piece to help you get your nose in front whether you're a backer, a layer or a trader. Good luck to those who will be punting during this meeting. I'll be sharing the race previews with a strong panel of experts next week before returning with my regular column the following week.

Until then...

- DR

Monday Musings: Money Back!

8 June 2026/in Monday Musings/by Tony Stafford

How many races do you think have been started from stalls in the UK since the obscure rule change which caused such havoc in the Epsom betting ring after Christmas Day won the Betfred Derby on Saturday, writes Tony Stafford.

I would suggest thousands, but that woke alteration allowed the Epsom stewards to declare never-in-the-hunt Betfred Derby favourite Benvenuto Cellini a non-runner for getting his leg over (rather stuck in) the stalls. No doubt he’ll be getting his leg over in the proscribed way later in life. Yes, this weekend we saw the first running of the Woke Derby.

Imperfect starts have always been a part of racing. While on this very public occasion the finicky stewards decided to intervene after the fact, multiple examples of slow starts historically have been ignored.

Often on the flat, starters let the fields go, not noticing when one or more horses might be in various states of discomfort in the stalls, their jockeys imploring “wait sir, wait!” Either they do or they don’t, tough! How many times have we seen hoods coming off too late? What an unseemly dish to set before the King!

Then while jumping starts at the workaday meetings are allowed to go off where the jockeys want to be placed, at the big very public and most important meetings like Cheltenham and Aintree, again fussy officialdom often ruins the race. Multiple false starts and unsatisfactory standing still departures immediately end many horses’ chances before they go a yard.

Ahead of Saturday’s controversy, Christmas Day continued the theme that you can never ignore Aidan O’Brien’s “other runners” in the Derby. It proved a truism once more, the 7/1 winner attracting far more interest in the market than the favourite and even trumping presumed second choice Pierre Bonnard, a laboured seventh under Christophe Soumillon.

The key to finding the Derby winner is 1) with now ten of the last 15 winners (67%) of the race, it must be an Aidan horse. 2) if you ignore Ryan Moore who now has missed out on five of the last seven Coolmore winners, find a jockey that’s never got near winning it before, often one that’s never ridden in the race!

Step up Ronan Whelan. Like so many, Aidan included, Whelan spent plenty of time in his younger days with Jim Bolger. This is his second year as back up to Moore and super stand-in Wayne Lordan, and Epsom on Saturday was his ultimate reward.

It happened for Lordan with Lambourn last year and Lordan it was on the fourth O’Brien runner Action, who set the pace on Saturday with Christmas Day at his elbow. The other two Coolmore runners were held behind the nice even pace that Lordan excels at.

Into the straight it wasn’t long before Christmas Day took the lead, edging into the middle of the rain-softened ground and drawing away much as Lambourn and that other surprise O’Brien winner of the modern era, Serpentine, did in 2020. The difference this time was the ground. It had completely obliterated Calandagan in the £1 million Coolmore Coronation Cup earlier, won in spectacular fashion by George Scott’s Bay City Roller, and several in the Derby field were similarly inconvenienced.

Not Christmas Day though. His sire Camelot was an 8/13 shot when winning the race in 2012, the first of that run of ten in 15, with Joseph O’Brien in the saddle. Having beaten French Fifteen at Newmarket, it just needed the St Leger for him to emulate Nijinsky 42 years earlier. Encke has his name on the historical record but nobody believes him the moral winner.

With 14 runners contesting the prizes which went down from £1 million for the winner to £20k for tenth, there wasn’t much room for horses’ being eased, apart that was for the toiling Benvenuto Cellini who passed the post miles behind all bar last home Poker.

Though nothing ever seemed likely to catch the winner, with Maltese Cross, Joseph’s James J Braddock, and Bay Of Brilliance the next three home, I enjoyed seeing Julie Wood’s colours flashing home in fifth. Alderman earned his owner £80k, not bad for a horse rated only 83. Saturday’s 100/1 shot is in for a big hike tomorrow, but the thrill that the Richard Hannon colt gave her a day or so after her birthday is irreplaceable.

Very few owners stick as much to their principles and methods as Julie. While others wait until the yearling sales. Julie always buys foals on her own judgment. This one, a son of Study Of Man, cost 42,000gns at the foal sale in 2023 and has been well worth the wait. Many observers feel the lower limit of 80 for horses qualifying to run in the Derby should be raised. Mrs Wood, Hannon and Alderman are eloquent advocates of why it is fine as it is.

Sixth was another outsider, the Faye Bramey-trained Rebel Rocker, a 66/1 shot, although at 99, he was rated a full 16lb higher than the horse that ran past him in the closing stages. Faye has worked closely for a long time with A P McCoy and she is sure to have more success with Jennifer Dorey’s home bred.

Memories in horse racing are very short and I hadn’t remembered that Christmas Day started the 11/4 favourite for what many regard as the prime Derby trial, the Dante Stakes at York last month. He was comfortably put in his place in third by Item and, for a long time, that Andrew Balding-trained Juddmonte-owned colt was the biggest market threat to Saturday's favourite, winner of the Chester Vase as his trial.

But the ground was clearly a worry for Item as he drifted out to 11/2 before finishing a remote ninth. Christmas Day moved the other way in the market. Priced at 14/1 in the Racing Post forecast in the morning he started at half those odds and with the 25p in the pound deduction bookmakers could (although some did not) apply, that equates to nearer 5/1.

Camelot joins Galileo (four wins) and Australia, with Lambourn last year, as O’Brien Derby winners that then sired winners of the Classic. We always wondered which of the array of new stallions that would fill that area of Galileo’s brilliance. Camelot seems the most likely.

Friday’s Oaks was another O’Brien tour-de-force, but in this case it was son Joseph and the Frankel filly Thundering On that exploded past and away from the Gosdens’ well-supported Legacy Link by almost four lengths.

Until Thundering On appeared on the scene, victory seemed assured for Legacy Link as that Dubawi filly had taken it up from Sugar Island, least fancied of the three Aidan O’Brien runners at 25/1 and another daughter of Dubawi. I watched at close hand as Aidan saddled his three Oaks contenders in the paddock beforehand and had to smile when the first girth tried on the strapping Sugar Island failed to go around her by a good few inches. She is some physical specimen!

She looks one that will take her races going forward even though Thundering On was ten lengths ahead of her by the line. Sadly, my role as chief cheerleader fell flat. The boss’s 100/1 bet on favourite Amelia Earhart never looked like materialising. There’s aways next year, Matt!

If you were a trainer with a Derby (Motivator) and Oaks winner (Sariska) to your name, where would you prefer to have been on Saturday? Michael Bell found himself watching maybe 45 minutes of cricket al Lord’s on an awful day which not only spoilt the Test match for spectators on the worst pitch ever at the Headquarters of cricket, but also ruined hopes of a big attendance on the imaginatively improved Hill at Epsom.

At least Michael’s viewing of the Derby wasn’t interrupted, neither was his winner of a £51k race, £25k to the winner, that Blues And Royals won with a last-stride dip of the head at Musselburgh. Blues And Royals is in triple ownership, but I was delighted that the white colours, dark blue cap of Jonathan Barnett passed the line in front.

That’s three nice wins so far. Could he sneak into the Britannia, probably not, but that sort of win keeps owners happy. At least I had something to cheer on Saturday!

- TS

Analysing Racing Post Ratings (UK Flat)

2 June 2026/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

An Analysis of the Racing Post Ratings in UK Turf flat racing

An excellent addition to the Query Tool back in December 2025 was the ability to query Racing Post Ratings (RPR), writes Dave Renham. Hence, I, along with other Geegeez Gold members, can now delve into past stats for this long-established rating method.

In this article I plan to dig into RPRs to try and unearth some positive or negative angles that hopefully we can employ successfully this year and into the future. It is not for me discuss the pros and cons of how the RPR figure we see in the racecard is calculated. Ultimately, this is a formula or method that the Racing Post have been using for many years, so we need to assume they are happy with their product.

Introduction

My focus for this piece is UK turf flat racing and I will be analysing the RPR figures for this specific race code. The time frame studied runs from the start of 2020 through to the end of 2025, six full turf seasons. All profit/loss figures have been calculated to BSP less 2% commission.

In the past I have had conversations with respected racing analysts who have compiled ratings, be they speed or ability ratings, and, for them, to judge the effectiveness of their ratings the win strike rate is very important. The top-rated runner should have the highest win percentage, gradually reducing for the other ranking positions.

Obviously, it is hoped the top-rated runner is going to be the best performer in terms of returns as well; however, it is important to point out that regardless of how good a set of ratings is, speed or form-based, we cannot expect the top-rated runner to secure a blind profit over thousands of races.

Overall Performance by RPR Ranking

Let’s start with looking at the win percentages (strike rates) for different rated runners. This covers all races on the turf over the period of study. The horizontal axis is labelled from 1 which stands for the top-rated runner, 2 the second rated and so on:

The strike rate for top-rated runners has been better than one win in every five races which is excellent for any set of ratings. More importantly perhaps, the win percentages have correlated positively with the rated positions producing the sliding scale I was talking about earlier. It is interesting, though, to see quite a big gap between the top two rated.

If we look at the Each Way (win & placed) strike rates, we have seen a similar pattern:

The top-rated runner has the highest percentage once more, and the sliding scale is replicated showing positive correlation with the win only figures.

Finally, in terms of the individual rating positions, let me share the Percentage of Rivals Beaten (PRB) figures. Being able to share these is down to another of the recent Geegeez additions of having PRB figures available in the Query Tool Results Summary. The splits were as follows:

The same type of graph has appeared a third time. Therefore, the RPR ratings have conformed well to the pattern we would expect for a good set of ratings.

RPR Top Rated

Overview

From here, it made sense to me to focus on the RPR top-rated horses to see if there were any positive or indeed negative angles. Hence let me look at the record of every single RPR top-rated runner since 2020:

Despite the excellent strike rate, losses have been steeper than perhaps might have been expected. As a general rule I am guessing these runners have been notably overbet. It is now time to dig a bit deeper.

RPR top-rated runners - Yearly strike rates

Let me start the digging process by comparing the yearly figures.

All years have shown a loss for the top-rated runner although the last two years have been the best, or least worst, in terms of returns.

RPR top-rated runners – Record by Month

A look now to see whether the time of year has made any difference to the returns. The graph below shows the splits:

Based on these data, the top-rated runners have performed far better in the Autumn than at any other time of the year. In the height of summer (July & August) top-rated RPR runners produced quite poor returns. I wonder if this has been a case of the top-rated runners being overbet even more than normal?

RPR top-rated runners - Market Rank

I would now like to share the performance of the top-rated runners in terms of market position / rank. The splits over the period of study were as follows:

Overall, the RPR top-rated runners would have lost us far less money when most closely aligned with market sentiment, specifically when starting either favourite or second favourite.

RPR top-rated runners - Handicaps versus non-handicaps

The table below illustrates the difference between handicaps and non-handicaps in terms of RPR top-rated horses.

As we should expected, top-rated non-handicap runners had the better win rate; but returns for each were very similar with an ROI difference between the two of just 0.58%.

RPR top-rated runners - Age of horse

Onto the age breakdown now.

There is a strong correlation between relative youth and win strike rate: younger top-rated RPR runners won a lot more than older ones. This is also true if we look at handicaps and non-handicaps separately.

One interesting age stat is for top-rated RPR 3yo runners in non-handicaps. They have had 902 winners from 2406 runners (SR 37.5%) for a very small loss of £22.04 (ROI -0.9%). This is the strongest cohort in terms of top-rated runners to date.

At the other end of the spectrum, older horses, those nine or above, have struggled in all races and they look best avoided.

RPR top-rated runners - Run style

Finally for top-rated runners I want to share performance by run style – possibly my favourite area of research. Firstly, a look at the win strike rates (within their specific run style groups):

We see an extremely familiar pattern when it comes to run style stats where early leaders/front runners have comfortably attained the best win percentage within their group while hold up horses endured the lowest.

Of course, we do not know pre-race what the run style of each horse will be and hence any profit/loss data shared is essentially hypothetical. However, I always like to show the splits to help emphasise the run style bias:

Essentially, if the RPR top-rated runner leads early then we have a huge value selection.

2nd Top Rated RPR

Overall, the performance of the top-rated RPR runner has been a little disappointing and, as I alluded to earlier, my feeling is that they have tended to be overbet. However, if the top-rated runner performance has been modest, horses second in the RPR Ratings have performed much better in terms of returns. Here are their overall figures:

Losses to £1 level stakes at BSP very close to break even over the period of study.

Let me drill deeper into the second rated runner to see whether we can find a positive angle or two.

RPR 2^nd rated runners - Handicaps versus non-handicaps

I want to start with handicaps versus ‘nons’ as we immediately ‘hit’ our first positive.

Horses second in the ratings have made a steady profit in non-handicaps which is impressive considering this is every single qualifier. All of this profit came from younger horses, those aged two to four. This cohort hit a win rate of 19% thanks to 1186 wins from 6253 producing a profit of £438.40 (ROI +7%).

RPR 2^nd rated runners – Horses with an ISP of 12/1 or less

As we know, some bottom lines can be skewed by big priced winners, so I narrowed down the group to those that had an Industry SP of 12/1 or less. Again, I have split handicaps and non-handicaps:

Handicap runners made a very small loss, while non-handicap runners within this price bracket enjoyed returns of 2p in the £.

Let me now share three further positive angles I found for those second top in the RPR Ratings. I am going to keep the price restriction of 12/1 or shorter in place for all three:

Second rated runners ridden by a claiming jockey produced 558 wins from 3420 (SR 16.3%) for a profit of £137.24 (ROI +4%).
Fillies and mares when second in the ratings secured a strike rate of 18.2% (1145 wins from 6289) for a profit of £227.50 (ROI +3.6%).
Sticking with mares, those aged five or six and second in the ratings enjoyed a great record, with 170 wins from 874 runners (SR 19.5%) for a decent profit of £233.71 (ROI +26.7%). It should be noted that five- and six-year-old mares would also have secured a small profit if focusing on horses priced over 12/1.

RPR 2^nd rated runners – Run Style

Finally, let me share the run style figures for those second in the RPR Ratings. To allow the best comparison against the top-rated RPR stats shared earlier these results will cover all races and all prices:

We'd expect lower strike rates for each group compared with the top-rated stats, but what about returns?

The front running (led) stats have been off the chart in terms of potential returns. In contrast, the losses for mid div and held up runners were quite significant.

The Racing Post Ratings have been around since the late eighties when they were known as ‘Postmark’ and are long established. Based on the recent evidence shared in this piece, the better value has been with those runners rated second in the ratings. I think that top-rated runners have been consistently overbet, thus making the second rated runners better value generally speaking.

I have yet to dig into the performance of the Racing Post Ratings in terms of either All Weather or National Hunt codes; so it will be interesting to see what I find. That research will be done some time in the Autumn with hopefully enlightening articles to follow.

Until next time...

- DR

Monday Musings: Now I’ve Seen Everything

1 June 2026/in Monday Musings/by Tony Stafford

Finally, after more than 70 years of watching horse racing, I can honestly say I’ve seen everything, writes Tony Stafford.

We’ve been used to witnessing Aidan O’Brien horses filling the first three positions in Classic races maybe not that frequently. It happens enough not to be a total surprise when it does. Never, though, I venture, have we seen anything to match the stage management that led to yesterday’s clean sweep in the Prix du Jockey-Club (French Derby) at Chantilly.

Aidan’s trio finished the right way round in the end as favourite Constitution River, yes over there rather than at Epsom on Saturday in the “real” Derby, under a sublime Ryan Moore, edged out Hawk Mountain and Christophe Soumillon, with outsider Montreal, on their heels in third under an inspired ride from the front by reliable number two Wayne Lordan.

I wonder how many of the Ballydoyle entourage bothered or even thought to risk a little on the Tricast on the Pari-Mutuel. It paid €167.55 for a €1 stake!

Sixteen horses turned out for this 10.5 furlongs with Ryan drawn widest bar-one in 15, a position reckoned by many experts impossible from which to win. Those experts, including the extremely experienced Sky Sports Racing team on scene, reckoned Ryan would have to “drop in” to overcome the disadvantageous position.

Instead, he “dropped out” widest of all in clear isolation in the early running as Lordan from the middle aimed and effected a fast break to get to the inside. Soumillon was soon at the head of the big group up the middle, and you could understand the enormity of the favourite’s task as Constitution River was needing plenty of encouragement throughout the entire race as he was so wide as the turns unfolded.

By the time they had straightened for home, the Ballydoyle trio had worked their way into the podium places as Karl Burke’s Hankelow, echoing his prominent role in the French 2,000 Guineas, started to flag. He had finished a close third over the mile at Longchamp behind St James’s Palace-bound Rayif and yesterday’s rival Komorebi.

The stock of that race took a dive yesterday, Komorebi finishing only tenth and Burke’s horse fading away to 13^th.

Winding up for the final thrust a furlong from home, the three Coolmore colts were in a line. If anything, you were wondering, certainly I was, whether Montreal was going to spring the shock. Hawk Mountain, winner of last year’s Futurity at Doncaster where he beat next Saturday’s Epsom race favourite Benvenuto Cellini, was also fully extended, but Ryan was the one with the most resources at his disposal.

It wasn’t until the last 75 yards that the result was etched on the trophy with Michael Tabor’s blue edging out Derrick Smith’s purple, Sue Magnier’s second pink silks gracing the third home. That the final margin had stretched to threequarters of a length at the line suggested strongly that Constitution River would have had a favourite’s chance over another furlong and a half at Epsom had he been sent there.

For years, we’ve had the supreme hurdler turned nine-year-old embryo flat performer Constitution Hill as the most popular racehorse. Maybe Constitution River will do enough in his career to give pause for thought. The world as they say, is his – you know what.

And as if the O’Brien family didn’t have enough to celebrate yesterday, out of the pack into fourth came A Boy Named Susie. His trainer? None other than Aidan and Anne-Marie O’Brien’s younger son Donnacha and owned by his (Donnacha’s) sister Ana, no mean jockey herself until injury curtailed her career.

Yesterday’s winner and runner-up were among the 22 left in the Betfred Derby at the latest stage. The already humbled French – don’t fret mes chers, the English team were similarly blown away – do not have a single horse standing in the Classic unless connections wish to put up the requisite supplementary fee of £90,000 by noon today.

To recoup that, your horse would have to finish in the first four of the £1 million to the winner, and £2 million total, contest. Prizes for the Betfred Derby dribble down to tenth, almost in the way of the sales races for two-year-olds, but from a fittingly more handsome starting point.

The best that the home team could muster yesterday was the 37 grand picked up by fifth-home Alam. Aidan will be credited with £1.2 million in the French trainers’ prizemoney list or rather €1.37 million and the winner’s €857k (or if you prefer £745,000) will swell by another €282k as he is French-bred, while his stablemates are not. I wondered why they decided to go there!

Ana O’Brien’s 74 grand is likely to be swamped by what she can expect to field in offers for her colt from the ever-ravenous Australian stables who have so much money to spend.

As my old pal Lew Day told me the other week, he retained a half-share in his horse Raheen House when he went to race in Australia, there were maybe a hundred joint-owners sharing the other half, a worthwhile punt if you have the prizemoney to offer as they do.

I guess it’s possible there might be a supplementary entry or two, although whether anyone will be daring enough after this O’Brien 1-2-3 is debatable.

Suppose the bare 20 all stay in, that would mean ten for the home team including smart pair Item (Andrew Balding) and Maltese Cross (William Haggas) and again ten from Ireland, eight from Aidan and two trained by his elder son Joseph, including James J Braddock which got up late to beat Aidan’s Pierre Bonnard in the Cashel Palace Hotel Derby Trial at Leopardstown last time.

James J Braddock already has part Australian ownership, a group having acquired a share from noted Irish media expert (and Joseph advisor) Kevin Blake. Joseph bought the son of Zarak as a yearling for 40,000gns. His stud fee in France this year was €80k, so some bargain, never mind what he has already collected for his now part-owner. A share of the £1 million would still do nicely.

Benvenuto Cellini is now 2/1 best to make it 12 Derby wins for O’Brien and 13 for Michael Tabor. Item is only 4/1 now after that smooth Dante win at York, with Pierre Bonnard and Lingfield trial winner Maltese Cross coming next.

With the money after the winner standing at £400k; £200k; £130k; £80k; £50k; £35k; £30k; £25k and £20k, I wonder if we will see a Michael Dickinson-type domination on Saturday? Could the Famous Five of the 1983 Cheltenham Gold Cup be usurped by a Superb Six, a Superlative Seven of even an Extraordinary Eight? Probably not, and for the home trainers with hopes of winning the most important prize in the calendar, let’s hope it doesn’t happen.

I’m sure that Saturday’s revelation of the 16 six-day acceptors (four supplementary) for Friday’s Oaks at Epsom brought the chill of dread to the Editor with Precise poised to line up with/against Amelia Earhart depending on your point of view.

Does the stretching-out to 1m4f for the first time of an ultra-impressive Guineas-winning filly trump the emphatic Cheshire Oaks-winning form at just a half-furlong or so short of the Classic trip of her stablemate?

It might not even be a case of whether Ryan Moore or Wayne Lordan rides which of the pair. Lordan rode True Love to win the 1,000 Guineas as Moore on Precise was a sleepy seventh. At the Curragh, a rejuvenated, if you can call it that after one run off a setback, Precise with Lordan up, slaughtered her old rival, now under Ryan, with the finishing speed of a true champion.

He’s done it successfully before, but will Aidan want to test his belief that Precise will stay another four furlongs so soon after the Curragh against the certainty of knowing she would be the one to beat if turning up for the Coronation Stakes at Royal Ascot? Nervy times – as I said, depending on your point of view.

What yesterday in Chantilly told us, is that even after all this time, Aidan O’Brien is getting better every year in his role as custodian of the Coolmore breeding operation. I’ll never again subscribe to the view that anything he attempts is unlikely to happen.

- TS

Analysis of 3yo and 3yo+ Maiden Races

27 May 2026/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

3yo and 3yo+ maidens – a deep dive

As I have mentioned before my preference from a betting perspective is flat racing and, within the flat sphere, I primarily bet in handicaps, writes Dave Renham. In this article however, I will be looking 3yo only and 3yo+ non-handicap maiden races. I have researched eight full years of data spanning from 2018 to 2025 for UK flat and AW racing. All profits and losses have been calculated to Betfair Starting Price (BSP) less 2% commission on any winning bets.

Market Rank

Let me start with the betting market and, specifically, the Betfair market (BSP). I want to share the stats by market position:

Favourites have made the tiniest of profits to BSP, while those third in market rank have proved to be the best value. Once we hit fourth or bigger in the betting, we see a severe drop off in terms of returns. For the record, favourites returned a profit in both 3yo only and 3yo+ races. Betting all of the top three market ranked horses would have been a marginally profitable endeavour.

The focus clearly should be on horses near the top of the betting, then. This race type is market friendly - more market friendly than the norm. Indeed, if we compare the percentage of races won for horses priced BSP 10.0 or less in 3yo/3yo+ maidens compared with ALL races, we see quite a contrast:

As we can see the difference is more than 10%.

Moving on, for virtually all articles I write these days I implement a BSP price cap to try and avoid any huge priced winners skewing the figures. I will do that here, too, and, looking at the overall results, a price cap of BSP 14.0 or less makes sense. The remaining stats shared therefore are based only on horses within the stipulated price cap.

Sex of horse

My first port of call away from the betting market is to look at the record of male horses versus female ones. The breakdown below is based on the results of races open to both sexes. It makes no sense to include male or female only races in any such comparison:

As is usually the case, we see far more male runners than females, but the females have provided the value, and by far the best returns of the two when focusing on runners priced BSP 14.0 or less.

Sticking with this theme, I wanted to compare the results of male runners – colts versus geldings. I assumed that the colts would outperform geldings, but I have been known to be wrong in the past. Let me start by comparing the win percentages or win strike rate for each:

Colts have had a better win percentage by around 5% in absolute terms and a noteworthy 20% relatively; but has this equated to better value? The A/E index, based on BSP data, should be instructive:

According to these numbers, colts have been much better value than geldings, and if we now compare the returns, we can see that this has been the case:

In terms of returns to BSP, geldings would have lost us over 8 pence in the £ more than colts, when priced BSP 14.0 or less. However, there is one positive gelding stat to share and that is the record of horses having their very first run after being gelded. This subset of runners won 69 races from 242 runners (SR 28.5%) for a profit of £17.22 (ROI +7.1%).

Age

In terms of age it only makes sense to share the data for races open to more than one age group so the table below includes only 3yo+ maidens over the past eight years.

All bar 187 runners have been aged three. As it turns out 4yos have provided the best value but, on average, we saw fewer than 20 qualifiers per year over the period of study. 5yos and up have the worst record from a small sample. It should be noted that this older age group have really struggled when priced above BSP 14.0 – that cohort won just three races from 357 runners. Even backing them to a Betfair place would have lost £161.88, almost half of stakes!

Career starts

Let's now look at exposure, in terms of career starts, to see what that has told us with the price cap in place.

Horses making their racecourse debut had the lowest strike rate, as we would expect, but they edged into profit (just). It seems that horses that are making their second start (1 career run) have been overbet, based on the fact that they lost nearly 10p in the £.

Horses with two prior starts have produced the best returns and, if we focus on those that were in the top three in the betting, their figures improve further to 277 wins from 869 (SR 31.9%) for a profit of £97.75 (ROI +11.3%). Maybe slightly surprisingly, horses with four or more career runs also edged into profit.

Position Last Time Out (LTO)

A look now at where the horse finished LTO. Firstly, a look at the win strike rates:

Horses that finished runner-up LTO recorded an excellent strike rate and, as we can see, the win rate reduced as the finishing position gets worse. The table below adds more colour:

As the table shows, runners up have not only a good strike rate, but they have delivered decent profits, too. I am not sure why LTO 4ths have far better returns than those that finished third. My guess is that this is probably an anomaly, though looking at the similar win percentages it could be that they're a touch underbet in relation to third placed finishers.

Days since last run (DSLR)

There are two types of layoff abour which I would like to share some data, because both have shown a profit with runners BSP priced 14.0 or shorter. They are horses returning to the track quickly (within 10 days), and those absent for around 6 months or more (180 days+ to be precise). The table shows the two cohorts:

So, either end of the spectrum has proved to be the value.

Trainer Angles

I will finish with some trainer stats. The table below includes those trainers who saddled at least 60 runners at a BSP of 14.0 or shorter during the eight-year review period:

It is somewhat surprising that only six of the 18 trainers recorded a profit considering what has been shared to date. Indeed, two of the six (bin Suroor and Watson) were only marginally in profit. The performances of Kevin Ryan and the Charlton stable have been especially poor in terms of their returns (worse than 40p in the £). Both look worth avoiding generally in these contests.

On the plus side the three ‘B’s - Balding, Boughey and Burke - all performed well with good strike rates and decent profits to boot.

Let me now share some of the strongest trainer stats (BSP 14.0 or less) I could find in these maiden races and that aforementioned trio own a few, as does the Gosden yard:

Andrew Balding debutants have fared extremely well winning 13 races from 41 starts (SR 31.7%) for a healthy profit of £25.84 (ROI +63%).
Balding with second and third favourites combined has won 25% of races (30 wins from 120) for a profit of £37.90 (ROI +31.6%).
Any runner at Kempton from the Balding stable should be noted based on the past eight years of results. In this timeframe 10 of the 27 runners have won (SR 37%) for a profit of £20.04 (ROI +74.2%).
Balding runners that finished second LTO won 27 races from 69 runners (SR 39.1%) for a profit of £19.28 (ROI +27.9%).
When Oisin Murphy has been on board for Balding, their combined record reads 25 winners from 69 rides (SR 36.2%) for a profit of £32.44 (ROI +47%).
Horses having their second career run for the Gosden stable did well hitting a one in three win rate thanks to 42 wins from 125 with profits of £22.01 (ROI +17.6%).
The Gosdens also performed well with their market leaders thanks to 72 wins from 140 (SR 51.4%) for a profit of £22.92 (ROI +16.4%).
Team Gosden’s second and third favs combined won 41 from 169 (SR 24.3%) for a tidy profit of £38.51 (ROI +22.8%).
George Boughey runners when starting favourite won an amazing 75% of the time (15 wins from 20) for a profit of £12.19 (ROI +61%).
Boughey debutants did well from a small sample, winning 7 races from 16 starts (SR 43.8%) for a profit of 7.20 (ROI +45%).
Boughey’s runners were far better on the turf than the AW. His AW runners made a loss while the turf runners won 14 from 27 (SR 51.9%) for a profit of £32.15 (ROI +119.1%).
Karl Burke-trained favourites scored 12 wins from 18 (SR 66.7%) for a profit of £7.26 (ROI +40.3%).
Burke’s female runners underperformed but his male runners had an exceptional record. They won 16 races from 31, with colts winning 8 from 14 (SR 57.1%) for a profit of £15.06 (ROI +107.6%), and geldings 8 from 17 (SR 47.1%) for a profit of £13.83 (ROI +81.4%).

There are some extremely playable trainer stats there, and it will be interesting to see how many continue to prove profitable in the coming months and years.

These three-year-old and 3yo+ maidens have presented some surprisingly positive angles over the past few seasons and I will certainly be looking at more such races in the future with a view to potentially have a bet based on the research shared above. I hope there are some takeaways for you, too.

Until next time...

- DR

Monday Musings: Perfectly Precise

25 May 2026/in Monday Musings/by Tony Stafford

You can routinely analyse form as pounds for lengths, but as yesterday’s Irish 1,000 Guineas proved, expecting past form to be repeated is not always as Precise as experts might think it to be, writes Tony Stafford.

On a weekend where Aidan O’Brien and Ryan Moore had previously got everything right in tandem, including Saturday’s Irish 2,000 Guineas with Gstaad, along came Precise to make a monkey of Coolmore’s number one for the second time in less than a month.

Precise, a filly Ryan had never previously ridden owing to last autumn’s lengthy injury spell, was his mount as the 9/5 favourite in the 1,000 Guineas at Newmarket. She finished only seventh as stable-companion True Love, for one race at least, dispelled any doubts about her stamina for a Classic mile.

True Love, as did Precise, had experience at the top level on her side but also proven fitness with a run this year. Ryan instead partnered the filly that O’Brien had referred to in the most glowing of terms as she went through the grades last autumn. Precise’s preparation for the Rowley Mile had been interrupted this spring, but despite this, confidence in her remained strong.

The Coolmore team never shrinks from giving a back-up to their number one contender in the big races and now at the Curragh Precise was the perceived number two. The reasoning is, if one can’t win it, maybe the other one can. As somebody very wise used to say, it’s not what you lose, it’s what you win, and Coolmore has not been for many years over-protective of its top horses.

The race split into two groups, and Ryan on the far side on True Love sat close to Godolphin’s Abashiri, who had been ahead of Precise in fifth at Newmarket. When Moore asked for her effort, she smoothly got to William Buick’s mount but took a while to settle the issue. Then, from the back of the stands-side sextet, Wayne Lordan, as on True Love at Newmarket, upset the expected Ballydoyle order.

Precise was regarded by O’Brien last year as one of the best juvenile fillies he had ever trained. It must be a source of great pride that she is a product of his family’s Whisperview Trading Ltd breeding operation. The speed she showed here to cut back the front two in half a furlong and then power two-and-a half lengths clear was truly exhilarating. Aidan’s estimate of her ability and potential clearly wasn’t misguided.

At Newmarket, many were surprised that True Love, who with the precocity of being a five-furlong Queen Mary Royal Ascot winner hardly had the profile of a Guineas filly, lasted as well up the hill at HQ as she did. Here, it was Precise with extravagant acceleration that quickly made up the ground and burst clear. Now they have two more Classic winning fillies to grace their pedigrees for the coming years.

I know one person who will now be quaking in his boots as he awaits news of which of the Oaks, French Oaks or the Coronation Stakes over a mile at Royal Ascot will be the next option for Precise. How about the Oaks followed by the Coronation? And Aidan still has the facile French 1,000 winner Diamond Necklace to sort out a programme for. Most people seem to think it will be back to France for the Prix de Diane (French Oaks). You can’t make it up, as a pal of mine was saying at Yarmouth the other night.

He (no, not my friend at Yarmouth) has a decent bet at 100/1 about the existing Oaks favourite Amelia Earhart, but he must be in trepidation whether the Cheshire Oaks winner will have to contend with Precise. It will not be unprecedented for a dyed in the wool mile and a half filly to be usurped at Epsom by a speedier animal, even though you must have stayed if you win an Oaks - or a Derby for that matter. After all, they thought City Of Troy wouldn’t stay, but class and acceleration were his weapons.

The generations of Galileo colts and fillies have finally gone while probably his most potent successor as a stallion of potential champions, Wootton Bassett, is also no longer with us. His progeny will be available for a year or two more.

Market moves are always instructive at this time of year and the flow of money that has brought Wootton Bassett’s son Constitution River to the head of the Derby betting at 5/2, replacing his fellow Chester winner (Vase) Benvenuto Cellini at the head of some books has to be significant. Oath (Henry Cecil) in 1999 and Kris Kin, Michael Stoute, four years later, were the most recent Dee Stakes winners that went on to Epsom glory.

Constitution River had a concrete boost to what had seemed a bloodless seven-length margin in the ten-furlong test when the third horse home, Golden Story, won Saturday’s Cocked Hat Stakes at Goodwood for Karl Burke.

I know the ground can be soft at Chester, but it was still no mean feat on quick going for Constitution River to record comfortably the fastest-ever time for the race since its reduction to the present distance in the 1970s. Considering the strength of either homebreds from Coolmore with its colossal stock of top-class mares, or such as Whisperview Trading and other close, long-standing associates, it has become an unequal task for stables with the odd top class horse to stave off their power.

It is something of a surprise, then, that Constitution River comes from a French nursery and M V Magnier was able to buy him at €400k. It’s not that they are merely clever with producing and improving stallions – they also know how to work the sales.

Aidan’s love for Chester – he’s won the Vase 12 times and the Dee Stakes 13, including eight of the last nine – is well documented, and I’ve enjoyed seeing quite a few of them at close hand apart from missing the last two or three.

The winners haven’t always gone on to be stars at the top end of racing, but the 2024 scorer Capulet did take part in quite a momentous race in Sha Tin yesterday. Romantic Warrior, the eight-year-old who vies with sprinter Ka Ying Rising as the favourite horse in Hong Kong even though his younger rival deservedly had the edge on ratings as the top international horse of 2025, won the 24^th race of his 31-run career.

It took him a long time to win the 1m4f turf event, James McDonald having to make up ground on two leaders turning for home. One of these, the former Capulet, now named Romantic Thor in Hong Kong, finished fourth as Romantic Warrior took his world leading career earnings beyond £28 million.

What Aidan didn’t win over the two days at the Curragh, sons Joseph and Donnacha filled in with three victories between them. Last month Donnacha took the four-year-old sprinter Comanche Brave on a speculative trip to Hong Kong to take on Ka Ying Rising. He finished fifth, eight lengths behind the home champion, a project which brought a handsome £80k reward for his first run of the year.

To show just how adaptable a stallion Wootton Bassett is, he is the sire of Comanche Brave, now the easy winner of the Group 3 Greenlands Stakes over six furlongs on Saturday. Good stallions get winners at all distances, subject to the quality of the mares. While it’s never a Precise rule of breeding, Coolmore seems always to have the bases covered. We’ll see just how well, when they collect the Derby and Oaks double. Mr Editor, I hope Precise stays away!

- TS

Instant Expert for 5f Handicaps: An Analysis

18 May 2026/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

An investigation into the Geegeez Instant Expert, Part 2

This is the second of a two-parter in which I take a look at the Instant Expert feature in more detail, writes Dave Renham. Last week, I shared some initial findings connected with 575 British 5f handicap races run in 2024. It would make sense to read that piece first here, if you have already not done so. This week I continue my digging and. as I did last time, sharing my findings as I dig! So, at this juncture, I am unsure whether the findings this week will be as interesting or indeed as positive as that first half.

Recap

To recap quickly, the 5f handicaps I am looking at exclude 2yo handicaps (known as nurseries), but include all other age classifications. Any profit/loss quoted will be calculated to Betfair SP (BSP) less 2% commission on any winners.

As I mentioned last week, the Instant Expert tab can be found on the top of the Geegeez Racecards, between the Profiler and Pace tabs.

Instant Expert provides the Geegeez Gold community with some useful, and quickly digestible, horse information. It has a unique ability to summarise the form profile of every runner in the race into this single view. Instant Expert covers the form of each horse in terms of wins (or places), runs, and win (or place) percentage for each of five key areas namely going, class, course, distance, and field size. This can be seen in the screenshot below where I have clicked the tab for the 2.52 at Beverley run on the 23^rd April of this year:

The parameters I am using in terms of generating the percentages for each horse in each category are:

2-year placed form (see top left above the grid), all races and all codes (see top right above the grid).

These parameters are the same as I used in last week’s article because clearly the data across both articles needs to be consistent. The display is colour coded to help us see things more clearly at a glance: green for a higher percentage rate, amber for a middling percentage, and red for a low percentage. Horses with no form under a certain condition have grey figures.

In the above example I have ranked the runners by their scores which are based on The Shortlist scoring system (The ‘Sh’ column). Green percentages score three points, amber percentages score one, grey percentages zero and red percentages minus one. Hence across the five areas a horse can obtain a top score 15 (five greens), whereas the lowest score would be -5 (five reds). Users may change the parameters and dropdowns so, for example, if you prefer to look at 5-year win only form just click the relevant circles. Once this is done, the Shortlist scores will change.

In the illustrated race above I’m Next had the maximum score of 15, while Novello Lad and Ventura Express were joint second on nine, with Trilby ranked fourth scoring seven points. For the record, the result of the race was as follows:

The top ranked horse I’m Next went onto win this race, priced at 11/8. Trilby, the fourth ranked runner, was second at 9/2 while one of the joint second ranked runners Novello Lad came third at 10/1. Based on what we found out last week in terms of the performance of the rankings, this type of result will occur much more than say three horses ranked near the bottom coming first, second and third.

A line on ranking methodology

Before getting into the meat and bones of this second piece, let me briefly discuss ranking or rating methods for a few lines. The key to a good set of ratings/rankings is not whether the top-rated/ranked runners make a long-term profit. Of course, that would be an added bonus but, essentially, to measure the effectiveness of a rating set we need to look at the win strike rate and the percentages of rivals beaten (PRBs).

The top-rated/ranked runner should have the highest win percentage, the second highest should win next most often, and so on, gradually reducing for the other runners. Ideally there would be a significant difference in strike rate between say the top-rated with the fourth rated, and likewise with the fourth rated and the tenth rated, and so on. This type of finding would ideally be mirrored in the PRB stats.

It was noted in my first article that the PRBs produced the perfect graph when assessing Instant Expert Shortlist score rankings with the PRBs decreasing from highest ranked to lowest. The win strike rates also showed the right type of pattern although the seventh and eight ranked were marginally out of kilter scoring maybe 1 to 1.5% higher than would be expected. Overall, the rankings had the right 'feel' based on all the stats I uncovered.

Instant Expert Rank #1 by Betfair Starting Price

Having set the scene, coupled with some key recaps, let me start to crunch the numbers once more. Last time, I looked into the combined performance of the top two ranked runners in terms of their Instant Expert (IE) Shortlist scores across different areas. To start with here, I want to focus solely on the top ranked runner starting with...

Instant Expert (IE) top ranked runner by Price

I want to see whether the BSP prices of the top ranked horses make any difference to returns. I have split qualifiers into different price band groupings and here are the splits:

We would expect higher win rates for shorter priced runners, but it is interesting that the performance of the bigger priced top ranked runners, those BSP 15.0 or bigger, has been very poor. Overall, these qualifiers have managed just three wins from 111 runs (SR 2.7%) for a loss of £57.07 (ROI -51.4%). From this sample, it is clear that top ranked runners based on their Instant Expert Shortlist scores give the best value if priced under BSP 15.0.

Instant Expert (IE) top ranked runner by Price (4yo+ hcaps only)

Last week it was noted that the top two ranked runners combined performed far better when contesting 4yo+ handicaps compared with other race classifications. Therefore, I want to look at the top-ranked runners in 4yo+ handicaps using the same price band analysis. Here are the splits:

There were no wins at all for those priced BSP 15.0 or bigger – 0 from 37 to be precise. The well fancied runners, those under BSP 6.0, produced very solid looking results albeit from a modest sample size of 98 qualifiers. The overall results for horses priced under BSP 15.0 are 43 wins from 200 runs (SR 21.5%) for a profit of £41.83 (ROI +20.9%).

Instant Expert top ranked runner by Age (4yo+ hcaps only)

Sticking with 4yo+ handicaps for a minute, I want to see if the age of the horse has made any difference when it comes to the top ranked runner.

Based on these findings it does seem that once we get to horses aged seven or older, performance of the top ranked runner tails off notably. This older age group produced just two wins from 41 starts with losses of close to 81p in the £. Yes, it is small sample but comparing the PRBs, five- and six-yrear-olds combined had a PRB of 0.64, while those aged seven and up were significantly lower on 0.54.

Of course, finding value selections is the key to successful betting and looking for positive angles helps us in this regard. However, it is also important to try and find negative angles in order that we can discard (or at least downgrade) certain runners from our shortlisting process. If we can narrow down the field it will implicitly improve our chances of finding value selections. It needs to be said that we can never be 100% confident that discarded selections won’t win, because a handful always will; but if these runners represent very poor value, then in general they are worth discarding. We know we can't back every winner!

In the first article we saw that those ranked ninth and tenth produced significant losses of nearly 46p and 30p in the £ respectively. Combining their two records they delivered just 33 wins from 754 runners (SR 4.4%) for losses of £272.75 (ROI -36.2%).

Instant Expert rank of 9 or lower by Class

Now I appreciate that these runners ranked ninth or lower will only be relevant in races of at least nine runners, but I still want to share a few stats I have found for this group.

A look at these lower ranked runners by Class of Race. Here are the splits:

As expected, we see losses across the board. However, there is no clear pattern in terms of whether lower ranked runners have struggled more in higher or lower classes. The Class 5 returns are somewhat out of kilter, but a BSP 50.0 winner is responsible for making the ROI% lower than perhaps what it should be. What the stats from different classes do tell us is that these runners struggle when racing in all class levels.

IE rank of 9 or lower by Race Classification

I am now going to split the races by 3yo only, 3yo+ and 4yo+ races to see what effect this has had on these lower ranked horses:

We see a lower strike rate in both the 3yo only and the 3yo+ group. These two also endured substantial losses to BSP. The 4yo+ group produced the best strike rate and almost broke even. However, all is not what it seems, as two of the 4yo+ winners were priced at BSP 50.0. Taking those two out and losses for the remaining 258 qualifiers would have been substantial, equating to around 38 pence in the £.

Digging a bit deeper, here are the numbers when we restrict all nine and lower ranked runners to those that were priced under BSP 15.0.

So even as we move towards the more fancied end of the betting market losses remained steep, although the 3yo only data set is small.

One final stat I wish to share before moving on is the performance of these lower ranked runners (9+) when aged three. If we look at all 3yo qualifiers that had a BSP of 10.0 or bigger, just one of these runners won from 192 qualifiers. Losses were £166.50 (ROI -86.7%).

Individual Instant Expert Shortlist scores by PRB

Having looked at a plethora of Instant Expert Shortlist ranking stats across both articles, let's now consider the performance of individual scores. As noted earlier, these scores range from the highest, 15, to the lowest, -5. I am going to examine PRBs first and, in order for them to fit within the graph, I have combined next door positions. Hence the highest two possible scores have been combined (15 and 13), followed by the next two (12 and 11), all the way down to the two lowest scores of -4 and -5. Remember, it's not possible to achieve a Shortlist score of 14.

We see a very similar graph to the one I published in the first article which I referenced earlier – the one that examined the PRBs for different ranked runners. The higher ranked runners had higher PRBs, and we see the same pattern here. The very lowest scores have commensurately low PRBs so, on this evidence at least, horses with a score of minus two or less can generally be safely ignored. Even those scoring 0 or -1 have a note of caution about them with a PRB of just 0.45. For the record, the top score of 15 produced the highest PRB, at 0.62, with a score 13 achieving a PRB of 0.58, while 11 and 12 both scored 0.56, and 9 and 10 both hit 0.55: that's very pleasing linearity indeed.

Instant Expert individual scores

Let me now share the strike rates, profit/loss, and ROI percentages for each individual Instant Expert (IE) Shortlist Score.

Some of the sample sizes are relatively small such as for the scores of 10 or 12, which is one of three reasons why we cannot necessarily be seduced by bottom lines for these individual scores. The second reason is that some individual scores will have been skewed somewhat by a big priced winner or two. One such example is a BSP 80.0 winner for the -5 group. If we weed that winner out and examine the other 237 runners which scored -5, the ROI% drops to -35% and correlating far better with all the other horses whose Shortlist score was a negative value. The third reason is that a score of 1 or 2, or indeed even smaller, could actually be the highest Shortlist score in the race. One such example of this can be found from a Yarmouth race in July 2024 which is shown below:

Merrimack was top ranked with a Shortlist score of just 2. For the record, he went on to win the race.

When looking at the strike rates for individual Shortlist scores there was not perfect correlation in terms of the strike rates always dropping as the scores decreased. However, when looking more generally the right strike rate pattern emerged and this can be seen to best effect when we group the highest IE scores together (11, 12, 13 and 15) and compare them to the lowest (-1, -2, -3, -4, -5).

Grouping like this does help to create more robust sample sizes and also smooths the data. This is further evidence of the potential effectiveness of Instant Expert, although I appreciate I have only looked at 575 UK handicap races, all run over 5f and from a single year, 2024. However, for this sample the correlation between ranking results and individual scores is primarily positive and makes me more hopeful that other result sets will produce similar results.

Instant Expert individual scores (4yo+ hcaps only)

It makes sense next to look at the 4yo+ handicap only data as these races to date have shown the most positive findings. Due to modest sample sizes, I have grouped the individual Instant Expert (IE) Shortlist scores into bands:

More positive correlation with both win rates and returns. This is replicated once more when we compare the PRBs:

For the record, horses scoring between 11 and 15 in 3yo only and 3yo+ handicaps had a lower PRB of 0.56. As with my first Instant Expert research offering, it seems 4yo+ handicaps see the Instant Expert at its most effective, when there is generally more data available from which to populate the scores and colour codings that the view thrives on.

Summary

In this article horses with negative IE Shortlist scores have performed very poorly across the board and are horses I believe we should be ignoring nine times out of ten. This type of performance is similar to what we noted with horses ranked ninth or lower in the first article. The same pattern is occurring – the higher ranked runners have totally outperformed lower ranked runners; higher individual Shortlist scores have outperformed lower scores.

Clearly, these two articles have only scratched the surface as far as the Geegeez Instant Expert is concerned. However, the early findings have shown that this tool has real potential to help pinpoint runners which should offer good value and others which likely represent poor value. Making money over the longer term when betting is about finding value. If we can do this regularly enough, we will come out in front. And, crucially, using tools like Instant Expert means we'll have fun in the process!

The Instant Expert tab is something I always look at when analysing races for potential betting opportunities and, I hope via these two articles, I have converted more Gold members to do likewise.

Until next time...

- DR

Monday Musings: A Laurel Crown

18 May 2026/in Monday Musings/by Tony Stafford

York was fun, thanks again Jim and Mary, writes Tony Stafford. I did offer something in return for their amazing hospitality. Believing the expansive knowledge and judgment of friend and Ray Tooth sidekick Steve Gilbey, I guided my hosts to Thompsons Famous (yes that’s what they call themselves) Fish and Chip restaurant around ten miles along the A64 Malton Road.

Steve was right. Next time you are anywhere near, see if I am. No doubt all the Malton trainers know about it. Then on Friday, forsaking the pleasures of day three on the Knavesmire, it was down to London (at a snail’s pace thanks to traffic on the A1) for Ray’s annual birthday bash in the Mandarin Kitchen in Queensway.

Every time we go there – I think we were ten- or eleven-handed – it seems to get better. Probably eighty per cent of the tables are peopled by Chinese: that’s always the give-away. But enough of the food editorial. What about the racing? I’ll get back to the Dante meeting later.

On Sunday morning I watched the rerun of the Preakness Stakes, second leg of the American Triple Crown. I would happily have made the mistake of assuming it was staged in its usual (since 1873) spot at Pimlico racecourse, Maryland, but no, it was at another once-famous track in that state, Laurel Park, Pimlico temporarily closed for a $250 million makeover.

In the far-off distant days before I wrote for a living – is it a living? – I was always entranced at the end of each year when the best riders and horses from Europe made their pioneering trip across the Atlantic. Their target, the Washington DC Invitational, run at Laurel Park initially over 1m4f from its inception in 1952.

By 1994, the glamour had long evaporated and the race as we knew it was halted for ten years. They tried 1m2f, a more American-friendly distance, after which fewer horses of note were enticed over. The latest incarnation coincided with Laurel’s being consigned to a lesser status in the US rollcall of racetracks.

I was oblivious to the first two runnings, but the ill-fated Manny Mercer won that initial 1952 instalment. Joe’s brother wasn’t far off the awful fatal fall before the start of a race at Ascot which halted his probably championship-winning career. Manny’s daughter, Caroline, an infant at the time, married Pat Eddery and they were together for many years until after Pat’s retirement.

The next winner was a jockey riding at the end of his career, Charlie Smirke. Charlie was famed for his comment after winning the 1952 Derby: “What did I Tulyar?”, surely a fitting epitaph. The year after his Derby triumph he rode future top stallion Worden, for French handler Georges Bridgeland. Smirke was 47 and rode on for six more years after a career that began as a 14-year-old in 1920.

Of all the “invaders”, or more accurately “invitees”, surely the greatest of them was 1968 Derby winner, the Vincent O’Brien-trained Sir Ivor, the first of three victors in the race for Lester Piggott and the most spectacular of his Epsom nine. That was in 1968, his Derby year, at the time when many Americans ridiculed Lester’s riding style. He followed that with Karabas (Bernard van Cutsem) the next year. In 1980 he rode Argument for Maurice Zilber, an Egyptian who trained with great success in France, notably for Nelson Bunker Hunt, whose empire crashed when he tried to control the world’s silver market.

Of the home team in that glorious era, names such as evergreen Kelso in 1964 and before that dual winner Bald Eagle stand out. Among the fillies to have won it, the French-trained trio Dahlia (Zilber, Bunker Hunt), April Run and All Along were at the top of their respective generations. All Along was one of Walter Swinburn’s earlier international winners in his meteoric career.

Saturday’s Preakness harked back to the 1960’s TV show – four series 1964 to 1968 – The Man From U.N.C.L.E. I know I’m being pedantic with the full stops, but the Editor will be impressed that I can be when necessary. [Indeed I am! – Ed.]

In that show, Robert Vaughn played Napoleon Solo, and British actor David McCallum the Russian Ilya Kuryakin, as the pair toiled, largely successfully, to put the world to rights. How we could do with them at this time of ridiculous instability domestically and internationally!

Napoleon Solo also happens to be the name of Saturday’s winner, by just over a length. He didn’t run in the Kentucky Derby, while the first two in that initial Triple Crown race sidestepped Laurel. So, no Triple Crown winner again this year.

While American Pharoah and Justify have achieved that feat in recent times, the nearest miss during the post-Affirmed 1968 (Steve Cauthen) period was the Thoroughbred Corporation pair of Prince Ahmed bin Salman.

In 2001, the Corporation’s Point Given flopped in the Derby, but rallied to win the Preakness and Belmont Stakes, surprising many that he would stay the tough 1m4f around the biggest dirt circuit in North America. The following year, the shrewdly bought Arkansas Derby winner War Emblem made it four Triple Crown races in a row for the green and white stripes.

War Emblem, a 20/1 shot, made all to win the Derby – I was in the entourage cheering him on at Churchill Downs! – and the Preakness. Sadly, he didn’t get the trip in New York, so no Triple Crown. Even more sadly, Prince Ahmed died later that summer.

We saw some nice performances at York, notably and fittingly from two three-year-olds sporting the Juddmonte colours on a track where the farm’s founder, the late Khalid Abdullah, enjoyed so much success.

On Wednesday in the Musidora, Legacy Link was a gritty winner, rallying under Colin Keane to stave off Ed Walker’s previously unbeaten filly Felicitas. The following day, the Dante was a much more clear-cut win for Item from a couple of Coolmore/O’Brien “sighters” for the Andrew Balding/Oisin Murphy combination.

Both the filly and colt are by Frankel, Juddmonte’s own homebred stallion and the world’s best horse of all time, most people believe. Each is a 5/1 chance to intrude on what might otherwise be a Ballydoyle Epsom hegemony. Benvenuto Cellini remains a firm 5/2 shot to make it 12 Derby successes for Aidan after his fluent performance at Chester.

To say Brian Meehan has made a slow start to the season is an understatement, but the Manton-based handler struck in the Listed Childwickbury Fillies’ Listed Trial at Newbury, his Esna comfortably holding off Sacred Ground, thus turning around form from the Pretty Polly Stakes at Newmarket two weeks earlier.

Sam Sangster signed the ticket on the daughter of first-season sire Starman at 50k. While this half-sister to five winners might on that basis be an unlikely candidate for a 1m4f Classic, her siblings generally take more after their maternal grandsire, the peerless Galileo, sire of Frankel. In any, she's reportedly aiming at the Prix de Diane.

Meehan was also involved in the story of an owner who was introduced to me by a mutual friend. Lew Day, who had been an owner with Eric Wheeler for many years, was intending to upgrade his racing experience. Around Royal Ascot time in 2013, we met and he said he would like to buy a nice two-year-old. Anything any good, I reasoned privately, would be unbuyable at that stage, but I had seen a possible candidate in my regular Thursday jaunts to gallops morning at Manton where Ray Tooth had a few horses in training.

By this time Brian had still not sold one youngster, and I asked if it was for sale, as he had impressed me in his work. He was, and I suggested him to Lew. He balked at the price, but on St Leger Day, while I was up with a few friends representing Raymond as his Great Hall ran (unplaced) in the St Leger, said Spark Plug was making his debut at Bath.

I was busy in the pre-parade ring - I remember chatting to John Magnier who won the race with Aidan’s Leading Light. I hadn’t noticed my pals, brothers Kevin and Steve Howard, had sloped off without telling me and backed him – and he won at 12/1! That’s what friends are for it appears.

Lew got straight on the phone to Brian on the Monday and secured the colt, “at a higher price”, says Lew. Still, six wins, 11 places and a stonking victory as a five-year-old in the Cambridgeshire wasn’t a bad return on that investment.

Then Sam bought a nice youngster for 35k and the future Raheen House (named for Lew’s hotel in Ireland – no he’s a Londoner, not Irish) became a Group 3 winner for Brian, before a late switch to William Haggas. That involved the sale of a half-share to Australian interests. “I’d kept a half and there might have been 100 owners sharing the other bit,” recalls Lew. “He did win once over there, but I don’t think he took to racing in Australia. He’s now enjoying his retirement with a nice lady in Queensland”.

We lost contact probably five years ago and then on Friday morning, I noticed his name as the owner of a filly called Rossa Raheen, running in a handicap at Newbury. I speak regularly to Ollie Sangster, also based at Manton, who trains her and he reckoned she had an each-way chance, second time out for him.

I checked to see if I still had Lew’s number. I did and called. He was hopeful, so I napped Rossa Raheen that day and she flew home after a troubled run to finish a neck second – at 22/1! We won’t get anything like that next time I’m afraid, Lew, but it won’t get beat either.

In the intervening period, Lew has gone more seriously into breeding, concentrating at the upper end with such stallions as Kingman and Sea The Stars on one or other side of his three mares’ pedigrees. His covering stallions for the three this year are Baaeed (two) and St Mark’s Basilica, already responsible for one Classic winner from his first crop. Now with a total of ten horses, he retains all the enthusiasm he had when we first met, and I aim to keep in touch. You can’t forget your mates, even if at my age you forget who they are!

Parish Notices, May 2026

14 May 2026/in Horse Racing Blog/by Matt Bisogno

It's Dante day, and I'm on the iron horse headed north to the Knavesmire. While I've a moment I wanted to share a few notices about various things, some of them even related to horse racing...

HBF Survey

As longer suffering readers will know, I used to be Chair of the Horseracing Bettors Forum, a group of racing punters trying to lobby for the interests of all punters. It's a pretty thankless task, I can tell you, often because we - they - don't really know exactly what's vexing other bettors.

Well, with that in mind, HBF has released its one question survey, which asks respondents to order some items from most to least important. On the basis of the replies they get, that will inform their agenda for the coming year.

It will take you literally a minute or so to respond, please do if you want to contribute to the direction of travel for HBF.

Here's the link to the one minute HBF survey (and thanks) >>

Footy bet hedge

Again, those who have been around a while know that each July/August I offer my thoughts on the upcoming footy season with a little multiple bet. They're the proverbial curate's egg - good in places - and are shared as a footy/betting fan rather than any kind of expert.

Anyway, this season's play has done OK - here's the original post - and last night PSG sealed the French title while Stockport County booked their place at Wembley. To the stakes I played, that's £168.92 of £240 returned, with three tickets still live on County.

The current cash out offer is £391 or so, which will go up or down a little depending on whether Bolton finish the job away at Bradford.

If Stockport win the play off final, those three tickets return around £930 - or of you played for £2 stakes, £93. So it's worth thinking about hedging a little. I'm going to take one team out of the equation by waiting for the result of tonight's match, and will then lock in a bit of profit - most likely by backing Stockport's final opponent (though I haven't fully decided yet).

Of course, you may have already elected to cash your tickets for a profit of £320 after stakes are accounted for (or £32 for £2's)... entirely up to you. I'm just wanting to highlight that if you followed me in, we're in a strong position and should be pondering getting a bit of jam...

Geegeez

A couple of things on geegeez development. We've moved our development server this past fortnight, and it's not been straightforward. It doesn't affect live operations, but it has slowed down a couple of things I was hoping to have released this week. They're just about ready so with a following wind the first - new sectional results - will land next week.

I'm also conscious that for some users the report suite is slower than you'd like. It's also slower than I'd like. We're looking at a candidate solution for that and will be working up a 'proof of concept' in the coming weeks. If it flies, we'll be making some fairly major changes - all invisible to you, except for the speed uplift - in the background in coming months.

QT 2.0 is almost ready, featuring a raft of new variables across current run, last run and second last run... but I want to freshen the interface as well as upgrade the query options. That pushes the timeline out, too, I'm afraid... but it is happening!

So, there's a lot going on even though it may not appear to be the case. Bear with us for just a little longer.

Mindset

Apropos of nothing... actually, it popped up on my x feed because it got auto-posted on our geegeez account on that platform (give us a follow)... I re-watched for the umpteenth time a webinar I recorded a few years ago about 'setting up to succeed'.

I appreciate how narcissistic that probably sounds, but it's actually - and quite surprisingly, to my ear/eye at least - full of good sense that I value being reminded of twice every three years or so. If you've not seen it, or even if you have, it's one of the best things I've done and you can (re-)view it below if you'd like.

French Open tennis

And finally, or enfin if you prefer (you probably don't), the French Open tennis - the second Grand Slam of the season - gets underway on Monday at Roland Garros in Paris. There will be no Carlos Alcaraz, injured, so it's a reasonable opportunity for Novak to chase that elusive record-breaking Slam title. Alas, Sinner is currently in imperious form... Meanwhile, the women's draw looks more open, but the slower surface makes all matches more watchable - and more bettable!

One of my other projects is a website called tennisprofits.com, and for the next couple of days there's a special discounted Triple Slam ticket available. It covers the hottest four months of the calendar, taking in the clay in Paris, the grass is London and the hard blue courts in New York - and everything alongside and in between.

Four months' access for the price of three... and we're close to releasing a system builder there, too, which I think is just about the first of its kind. I made a little video which you can watch here if that sort of thing interests you, or might do.

TennisProfits.com is a very cool site where I get to look after the tech side and leave Paul Shires, our resident full-time pro trader, to be the subject matter expert. Dave Renham also chips in with some typically thought-provoking articles on his other wagering love. Oh, the link for the Triple Slam ticket is here.

That's all, we're done...

Right, back to trying to find a winner at York. Low was strongly favoured in the sprints yesterday, but my guess is they'll over-water to compensate. I'll be having a close look at how Persian Spring goes, drawn 10 and likely getting a late late show steer from Jamie Spencer, before deciding whether to play low in the two ensuing five furlong dashes. On the front is normally the way over the minimum here... but high or low remains to be seen.

Good luck,

Matt

Monday Musings: Ryan’s Choice

11 May 2026/in Monday Musings/by Tony Stafford

And now the thinking starts, writes Tony Stafford. Ryan Moore has won two of the last nine editions of the Derby at Epsom for the Aidan O’Brien/Coolmore juggernaut, on Auguste Rodin in 2023 and City Of Troy the following year.

O’Brien has won six of the last nine. That means Ryan missed out on Wings Of Eagles (Padraig Beggy) in 2017; Anthony Van Dyck (Seamus Heffernan), two years later; Serpentine in a deserted Epsom in Covid year 2020 (Emmet McNamara) and Lambourn (Wayne Lordan) last year.

If you think one in three is bad luck, imagine Ryan’s conundrum this time around. Ballydoyle has the first five in the betting (or did before Pierre Bonnard’s defeat at Leopardstown yesterday) as O’Brien aims to make it 12 wins in the race, extending his own record. As previous history shows, he can win with any of them.

Victory for the stable will inevitably extend Michael Tabor and Sue Magnier’s tally to an eye-boggling 13 - Pour Moi won it for them from the Andre Fabre yard in 2011. Long-time associate Derrick Smith came on board after the initial two victories for the stable, first for legendary stallion Galileo (2001), and High Chaparral the following year.

The two winners that Ryan did ride in that period (he also has two more earlier) both have their first foals on the ground this year, so there’s a chance some might be seen at the foal sales in the autumn. It’s likely though that many will be retained for racing. Those that do come on the market will be almost as eagerly sought as the initial progeny of Frankel following his unblemished racing career which gave such credit to Galileo, his sire.

Of the other quartet, Wings Of Eagles was a 40/1 shot when winning his Derby and then broke down within sight of the winning post at The Curragh, never to race again. He’s standing for €4k at one of Coolmore’s NH stud farms and is already getting some nice jumpers to his name.

Anthony Van Dyck was fatally injured during the running of the 2020 Melbourne Cup, won by Aidan O’Brien’s son Joseph with Australian-owned seven-year-old Twilight Payment.

Serpentine’s story deserves re-telling. In the Derby he was one of six O’Brien runners, the most fancied being Moore’s mount, Mogul. He was never to get into the race, like many others, while McNamara immediately sent Serpentine to the lead. He was a dozen lengths clear of the field at the three-furlong pole and held on to win unchallenged by five lengths with a strong tailwind blowing him home.

McNamara, who didn’t record a single race ride in his native Ireland that year, was immediately replaced on the horse, Christophe Soumillon taking over as Mogul and Moore gained their revenge in the Grand Prix de Paris that September. Mogul, a 3.4 million guinea yearling, won two more big races later that year. Coolmore originally stood him as a NH stallion. Now, along with fellow former O’Brien trainee Capri, he remains in Coolmore ownership, both horses having relocated to Wood Hall Stud in Shropshire, fee £2,500.

Serpentine, having collected the Derby on only his fourth race following a wide margin maiden victory at the third time of asking, never approached those heights in his career for Aidan, even trying 2m4f for the Gold Cup at Ascot the following season.

In all, Serpentine, who was gelded and then sent to Australia, has now raced 31 times and managed only one more success – over 1m2f. His latest effort on New Year’s Day 2026 was in a Group 2 handicap in which he finished 14^th of 15! I doubt we’ll see much more of the nine-year-old, but in Australia anything goes.

Lambourn might have been demonstrating something of a Serpentine manoeuvre last year when making all while Ryan on favourite Delacroix got stuck in traffic some way behind and finished only ninth. That Delacroix could return to the track as soon as the Coral-Eclipse a month later and beat Ombudsman revealed his true merit. He stands at €40k at Coolmore.

Lambourn’s successful return in the ten-furlong Huxley Stakes at Chester last week confirmed him as more than just a one-pacer. It took plenty of pluck to hold off Bay City Roller but whether he’ll beat stablemate Jan Bruegel, not to mention Calandagan, in the £1 million Coolmore Coronation Cup at Epsom next month is another matter.

Until Isaac Newton showed his limitations in the Lingfield Derby Trial, won by William Haggas’s Maltese Cross narrowly from Ralph Beckett’s Bay Of Brilliance, O’Brien had mopped up all the colts’ – and for that matter fillies’ – Epsom trials.

As a result we have Benvenuto Cellini as 5/2 favourite after sluicing home in the Chester Vase; Constitution River next at 5/1 after winning a no-contest Dee Stakes following a long layoff; while Christmas Day, due to run in the Dante on Thursday at York, is a 12/1 shot along with Futurity winner Hawk Mountain, who reappeared with a smooth win at Longchamp in the Prix de Guiche a week yesterday.

In between we had Pierre Bonnard, smart last year but behind Christmas Day when they both returned to action last month. His effort in the five-runner trial at Leopardstown yesterday when beaten in a tight finish by son Joseph’s James J Braddock would seem to have diminished this one-time strong candidate’s chance on June 6.

And it doesn’t necessarily end there. After Aidan’s big five, there were another 11 still in the Betfred-sponsored Classic at the latest stage, from 37 entered all told. There’s still time for a Wings Of Eagles to emerge, although he did win the Dee Stakes, or a Serpentine to come from nowhere.

It won’t be an easy choice for Ryan – let’s hope the best jockey of his time gets it right. He certainly has come back from last year’s long spell on the sidelines with renewed vigour and possibly his best-ever standard, and that’s saying a lot!

Among the fillies, Amelia Earhart (5/2) supplanted the Gosdens’ I’m The One (5/1) as Oaks favourite with a comfortable success over that rival in the Cheshire Oaks, and it’s big odds bar the pair with the exception of Diamond Necklace, more likely heading back to Paris for the Prix de Diane. That Chester race felt beforehand like a re-match between the two big Oaks contending stables on a par with when Enable (John Gosden) easily beat O’Brien’s very smart filly Alluringly in the Vase before trouncing Rhododendron, Auguste Rodin’s mother, by five lengths at Epsom on her way to glory.

Over at Longchamp yesterday, under awful weather conditions and rapidly deteriorating going, the O’Brien team were expecting more success in the two French mile Classics. In the Poulains, for colts, late switch Puerto Rico, who was initially regarded as Coolmore’s 2,000 Guineas choice instead leaving that race to its runner-up Gstaad, started the 11/10 favourite. Disappointingly, he could finish only fourth behind the Francis-Henri Graffard, Mickael Barzalona, Aga Khan Studs horse Rayif.

The winner, drawn ideally on the inside, raced just behind the sole UK runner, Karl Burke’s Hankelow, then quickened off the last slight bend and won smoothly from a challenging pack. They were led home by the Andre Fabre/Godolphin runner Komorebi and William Buick, who finished strongly to pip Hankelow for second. Puerto Rico was a one-paced fourth and stablemate Dorset sixth.

In the fillies race, the Pouliches, O’Brien had the favourite in Diamond Necklace. Unbeaten in three starts at two, including in the Marcel Boussac on Arc Day, she and Ryan followed the Barzalona route up the inside and strode away majestically for an extremely easy success.

A filly from the first crop of the very smart St Mark’s Basilica, Diamond Necklace has the look of a potential champion. She was not inconvenienced by the soft ground and already it’s shaping up as a battle between her and 1,000 Guineas winner True Love, not to mention Precise, as to which is the best and where they might all be going next time out.

This was surprisingly only a second win for O’Brien in the race after Rose Gypsy as long ago as 2001, when she was a contemporary of Galileo. A lot of water has flown under Coolmore’s bridge since then.

Just one oddity from Saturday’s racing. When William Knight’s homebred five-year-old mare Royal Velvet made a successful step up to Pattern racing with a smooth success in the Group 3 Chartwell Stakes at Lingfield, that was her ninth win from only 21 starts. Of her 12 defeats, none has been in second place and she has recorded only one third placing.

That shows as she has gone from a rating of 69 to 99, when a race gets serious there is usually only one winner. Congratulations to Suzie Hartley, her owner, recently the subject of open-heart surgery but there to see her pride and joy give her a recuperative boost. It won’t be the last time either. Ascot here they come!

- TS

A First Look Under the Instant Expert Bonnet

10 May 2026/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

An initial investigation into Geegeez Instant Expert

I wonder how many people who read my weekly articles here are Geegeez Gold members? If you are, I think you're going to like this one... and if not, maybe it will give a gentle nudge to try things out, writes Dave Renham.

Introduction

One of the many benefits of being a Gold member are the daily racecards. These give far more ‘bang for our buck’ compared with other racing sites. Below is a screenshot of the racecard for a contest at Wolverhampton on Tuesday 5^th May of this year:

As we can see, there is the usual type of information we would see on most racecards such as the draw, recent form figures, name of the horse, age of the horse, weight carried, the trainer, jockey and official rating. However, we also get to have the Racing Post Rating (RPR) for each horse, the Racing Post Topspeed figure (TS), and Peter May’s excellent ratings (SR).

These extras are just the start, as if we cast our eyes to the top of the Racecard we can see some tabs: Full Form, Profiler, Instant Expert, Pace, Draw, Trends and Odds. Clicking on these tabs presents a wealth of further information and data in order to assist with our race analysis. There are also some icons just below these tabs (between the word ‘Horse’ and ‘Age’) with breeding data, jockey and trainer form etc, etc. So, to coin a phrase, these racecards are literally gold!

In this article I want to focus on the Instant Expert tab in a little more detail. This tab is exclusive to Geegeez, and the tab lets us see a variety of key data for horses as shown below using the same race as above:

Instant Expert gives us punters key horse information. It has a unique ability to summarise the form profile of every runner in the race into a single easily digestible view. It covers the form of each horse in terms of wins (or places), runs, and win (or place) percentage for each of five key areas namely going, class, course, distance, and field size. It also compares today’s official rating for each horse with their last winning official rating. The display is colour coded to help see things more clearly at a glance: green for a higher percentage rate, amber for a middling percentage, and red for a low percentage. Horses with no form under a certain condition have grey figures. It should be noted that the past data is taken from UK and Irish racing only so will not include overseas form.

Users have the ability to change parameters easily. In the above example I am using placed form over two years. This is my favoured combination, but at the touch of a button we can change this to one or five years, or even look beyond that for older horses using the ‘All’ tab. We can look at win data only if preferred over any of the four-time frame options. Also, we can expand individual areas if required; so for example when I look at All Weather races, after looking at the stats for the specific going, I will click the going tab, so it includes both standard going and standard to slow to give me extra data. Clearly, we can do the same with all other variables should we wish and I will often do this for longer distances on the distance dropdown. For example, if a National Hunt race is being run over 2 miles 1 furlong, I will expand a little by including past results from any race from 2 miles to 2 miles 2 furlongs.

In addition to drilling into each horse within the five key areas, we are able to look at sires, trainers and jockeys within those areas too should we wish. Sire data is particularly useful for 2yo races for example, when the majority of runners have little or no past form to speak of. Trainer data is something most punters like to look at, and I will always look at the trainer data when analysing any race. This Instant Expert tool is exceptionally useful, and we can crunch so much data within a matter of a few seconds.

In the last few months there has been a new addition to the Instant Expert template, namely a new column with scores based on The Shortlist scoring system. Green percentages score three points, one point for amber, none for grey, and minus one for red. Hence across the five areas horses can obtain a top score of 15 (five greens) and the lowest score is -5 (five reds). The scores update when you change the variables and dropdowns above the main data grid. In the screenshot I shared above, the Shortlist column has the heading ‘Sh’ and is highlighted in the green box.

In this race, we can see Kento had the highest Shortlist score of 11, whereas Tomarlo had the lowest figure of -3.

Having set the scene, I am now going to share some research I have undertaken connected with these Shortlist scores. I have used a data set that I used for run style / pace articles a year ago, in May 2025. I will be looking at 5f handicap data from the whole of 2024 with the exception of 2yo handicaps, or nurseries, due to limited past horse form.

This sample covers 575 races and over 5000 horses with their individual Instant Expert Shortlist totals. This, therefore, is a reasonable sized sample, and I must say that adding over 5000 Shortlist scores to my Excel sheet was not the quickest process! [We're very grateful! - Ed.]

After all the leg work to input these individual scores, I hoped that I would find something worth sharing! Let’s see…

I am going to write this research up while crunching the numbers so, at this point, I do not know which way this will go. Normally, I do all the research, then crunch the numbers and then write it up. Therefore, it will read more in the present tense than usual.

So, to recap, the highest possible Shortlist score is 15 and the lowest -5 so one area I plan to look into will be the performance of different individual Shortlist scores. I guess the hope is that the higher scores, 12, 13 and 15, (14 is not a score that can be achieved), would certainly win more often and hopefully prove better value, than the lowest scores such as negative values of -1 to -5. However, there is a slight caveat to this because there will be plenty of races that are contested by horses with modest or poor long-term records and hence a Shortlist score of 3 or 4 could in fact be the highest Shortlist score in the race; so I will also need to rank the Shortlist scores in each race. One would hope and indeed expect that the higher ranked positions would win more often than the lower ranked ones and, assuming that is the case, does that lead to a difference in returns?

In terms of these ranked positions, there will be some horses in most races who have the same Shortlist score and therefore they will be treated as ‘joints’. In other words, if we have a five-runner race and the Shortlist scores are 13, 11, 8, 8 and 0 then the horses scoring ‘8’ with be ranked both ranked third, there will be no fourth ranked horse, with the horse with ‘0’ being ranked fifth. Fairly obviously I hope the 13 score would be ranked one or top, with the ‘11’ second.

In this article I will start by looking at the results with no price cap as I just want to examine the raw data first. Obviously, the odd big priced winner could skew the bottom lines, but I will mention it when that happens. I will probably use a price cap at various junctures, I’m just not sure exactly when as yet.

Instant Expert Shortlist (Sh) – Performance by Rank

My starting point is to look at the ranked positions of the Shortlist scores across all the handicap races in my sample. I began by comparing their win percentages / win strike rate. The graph below shows the breakdown:

The hope was that we would see the usual sliding scale from left to right as we normally do when we look at any type of ‘ranking’. Generally, that has been the case here, although those ranked seven and eight are slightly out of kilter. I think because there were a good number of ‘joint’ positions we should expect slightly more overlap than normal. The good news though is when we look at either end of the graph we see the top ranked runners winning the most often and those ninth or worse winning the least. Not only that but the top ranked have by far the best win rate and likewise those ninth or lower have by far the worst.

To build the picture further I want to look at the PRBs (Percentage of Rivals) for each rank. This metric essentially creates much bigger sample sizes as the figures are affected by all the runners in every race. Hence, I am hoping this graph will have the near perfect left to right sliding scale:

0.58 is a strong PRB for the top ranked and we essentially see our ‘normal’ type of graph when analysing the performance of ratings or in this case rankings.

So, how does all this equate then into profit and loss returns? As I tend to do in all my pieces, I will use Betfair SP (BSP) less 2% commission on any winning bets for these calculations. Here are the splits:

As far as I am concerned, it makes excellent reading if focusing solely on either end of the table. The top ranked runners have by far the best win strike rate, while the top two ranked runners combined have seen very small losses overall. Meanwhile those ranked ninth and tenth have produced significant losses of nearly 46p and 30p in the £ respectively. These definitely look to be horses to avoid.

However, we can see that those horses ranked seventh and eighth both made decent overall profits. At first glance this is not ideal as I would have preferred to see any profitable figures at, or near the top of, the table. However, both of their profit figures have been skewed by one big priced winner in each case. A horse called Rainyniteingeorgia won at Lingfield on 22^nd December 2024 at the odds of 127.21 when ranked seventh. Take that winner out, and the remaining 427 horses ranked in seventh place would have made an overall loss. In terms of the eighth ranked winners Big Nut won at Musselburgh in August ‘24 at odds of 80.0 which wipes out a huge chunk of the eighth ranked runners’ profits.

Instant Expert Shortlist (Sh) – top two ranked runners

I want now to dig into the top two ranked runners in a bit more detail as when combined together they have not been that far from breaking even (losses of just under 2.5 pence in the £). With these combined results I am going to see if they have performed better or worse within different areas. To begin with, I am going to look at Class of Race. Here are the splits for each Class level combining the results of the top two ranked runners:

The figures do not fluctuate massively. Lower win rates in Class 2 and 3 races is what I would expect as these races tend not only to be very competitive but have bigger fields. Bigger fields mean lower win percentages. Also, the data sets for both of these class brackets are relatively small. Returns are similar across the different classes, although in Class 4 races the losses were a tad above the rest.

How about if we split the top two ranked runners by the Race Age Classification? There are three main types being 3yo only races, 3yo+ (races for horses 3 years old and older), and 4yo+ (4 years old and older races). There was one 6yo+ race in the sample which is obviously too small to worry about!

Before digging into the stats for each I am hoping to find slightly better results for the more exposed runners, namely the 4yo+ races. I am also expecting that the 3yo+ races would be the least predictable with less exposed 3yos running against more exposed rivals. However, I have been known to be wrong before! Right, let's see how the top two ranked runners have fared across the three different age classification types:

The 3yo only results are interesting; definitely better than I would have expected. The results for the 3yo+ and 4yo+ races seem to match my initial hypothesis which is pleasing. There is a significant difference in the strike rates between 4yo+ and 3yo+ races for these top two ranked runners. Also, the 4yo+ results for these runners see very decent returns of close to 16p in the £, compared with losses of over 17p in the £ in 3yo+ races.

However, before we get too carried away, the 4yo+ figures did have a BSP winner of 55.0 which accounts for a decent chunk of the overall profit figure. Therefore, it makes sense to implement a price cap when comparing these 3yo+ and 4yo+ results to avoid bigger priced runners potentially skewing bottom lines. Thus, for the next dataset I will include only horses that were priced under 15.0 BSP. Let's see if this changes things or not. I will build up the tension by first comparing the win and each way (win & placed) percentages for each:

We see positive correlation with the 4yo+ top two ranked runners having outperformed their 3yo+ counterparts in both the win percentage and the EW percentage. This also correlates so far with what saw before I introduced a price cap. What about the profit/loss returns? The table below shows the splits and does the 4yo+ group come out on top as before?

They have indeed, and comfortably so. Based on this sample, and I appreciate it is just one sample of races, it seems that the top two rated runners from the Instant Expert Shortlist scores should be considered a strong positive in 4yo+ handicaps.

Sticking with 4yo+ handicaps, how have the top two rated performed when they finished first, second or third LTO? Let’s find out:

These figures are very impressive with each one showing a profit. I should add a caveat that each individual LTO position sample is fairly modest. However, to create a bigger sample, if we combine the results to include any horse that finished in the top three LTO we get 50 wins from 195 (SR 25.6%) for a healthy BSP profit of £54.17 (ROI +27.8%). Based on these findings, horses that finished in the first three LTO require close scrutiny if racing next time in a 4yo+ handicap when in the top two of the Instant Expert Shortlist scores.

Shortlist Rank Comparison: 3yo+ Handicaps vs 4yo+ Handicaps

Before finishing I want to share the PRBs for all individual Instant Expert Shortlist ranks for both 4yo+ handicaps and 3yo+ handicaps. We have seen already that the top two ranked runners have performed much better in 4yo+ races. How about using a PRB comparison across the board? The chart below gives us a neat graphical comparison:

This graph perfectly illustrates why, for this sample of races, the ranking of Instant Expert Shortlist scores would have worked better in 4yo+ handicaps compared with their 3yo+ counterparts. The graph highlights the edge to higher ranked runners in 4yo+ handicaps coupled with the fact that the lower ranked runners perform less well when compared to the lower ranked 3yo+ groupings.

It is important to reiterate that what the graph shows is what we should expect from drilling into each horse in terms of their record on the going, in the specific race class, at the course, over the distance, and within a specific field size grouping. Handicappers aged four or older, as a rule, would have raced more often than 3yo handicappers over a full 2-year period. This would be especially true in the first half of the year, as 3yos only have two full years of races once they reach the end of their 3yo year, and that's assuming they started racing early on as juveniles.

More data for each of the five areas should be expected to be more robust and reliable.

When I started this research, I was heading into the dark somewhat. I assumed I would have enough decent material for an article and, as it turns out, I have plenty more to delve into. And I haven’t even started to look at the individual Shortlist scores from 15 to -5 yet. All in good time!.

Based on my findings so far, the Instant Expert tab is one that is not only unique to Geegeez, but it really might have the potential to almost single-handedly improve our bottom line. That certainly seems the case for the data analysed to date.

Next week I will continue my research and share the rest of my findings.

Until then...

- DR

Making Sense of 3yo Class 2 Turf Handicaps

5 May 2026/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

Class 2 turf handicaps for 3yos only – a study

In this article I am going to take an in depth look at three-year-old (3yo) only Class 2 handicaps run on the turf, writes Dave Renham. These are the highest level of handicap, so they tend to be very competitive. We often hear pundits saying something like "this horse could be a Group horse in a handicap", and there will be some of these 3yos which prove them right by going on to tackle Listed and Group level in the future.

The data have been taken from UK flat races (turf only) spanning eight seasons, from 2018 to 2025. The profit/loss figures have been calculated to Betfair SP (BSP) less 2% commission. It should also be noted that 65% of all qualifying races were staged at one of four tracks: Ascot, Goodwood, Newmarket and York. Plenty of top-quality handicaps held at top-quality venues, and we should expect around 35-40 qualifying races from this point in time this season.

Market Factors

Let me kick off by looking at market factors. In the table below I have split the results by BSP:

Horses at the shorter end of the price range (BSP 4.5 or less) performed well, while there was not a single winner priced above BSP 70.0 which is slightly surprising. The 28.01 to 70.0 group have edged into profit but this often happens if we get two or three more big-priced winners than the norm across a specific time frame.

Based on the earlier evidence, it will probably come as no surprise to hear that favourites have made a blind profit over the past eight seasons. The favourite stats have been thus:

Considering the competitiveness of these races, for favourites to return close to 16p in the £ ‘blind’ has been rather impressive. Favourites also did well at two courses in particular, Ascot and Newmarket, as can be seen in the following table:

Favourites also excelled from a small sample at Newbury with nine of the 14 winning (SR 64.3%) for a healthy profit of £23.50 (ROI +167.9%).

In terms of negative stats for favourites, market leaders struggled when racing up in the North or Scotland. In these contests their record reads 28 wins from 113 favs (SR 24.8%) for a loss of £14.67 to £1 level stakes, equating to losses of 13p in the £.

One final set of data for favourites that I will share looks at different distance bands. I have split the races distances into five groups in order to provide better sample sizes. The groups are 5f to 6.5f, 7f to 1m.5f, 1m 1f to 1m 2.5f, 1m 3f to 1m 4.5f and 1m 5f or longer. The BSP ROI percentages for each group have been as follows:

All five groups proved profitable during the review period suggesting real consistency across the board when it comes to market leaders.

Having looked at the market, it is time to look into other areas. For the remainder of this piece, I will be using a BSP price cap of 18.0 to avoid any winners especially from the BSP 28.01 to 70.0 bracket potentially skewing individual bottom lines.

Sex of horse

Let me share some data now in terms of the sex of the horse running. It should be noted that there are far more male runners contesting these races than females. However, when female runners have competed against their male counterparts, they have struggled somewhat. So, below I have considered only mixed sex races to get a fair comparison between the two. I want to share the A/E indices for each group first – these are based on BSP prices so are the most accurate:

Males have offered far better value than females in these races and, when we look at the win rates / returns, we see positive correlation with that finding:

Male runners delivered a better strike rate and in terms of returns would have lost us around 22p in the £ less than females. Female runners have been relatively rare, but they have not been good investments.

It is also worth splitting male horse data to review the performance of colts versus geldings. These results include male only races as well as the mixed sex ones. The splits were thus:

As we can see, colts have comfortably outperformed geldings so that is another useful nugget of information we could potentially utilise in the future in these contests.

Weight carried

A look at weight carried now. These splits do not include any jockey claim, so the chart displays the actual weights each horse was allotted for the race. In terms of win rate, we witnessed the following:

This pattern, where horses carrying more weight win more often, tends to be the case in all types of flat handicaps. However, prices are generally well adjusted for this so that there is no clear edge to those horses that win more often. Time to see how the splits pan out here in terms of profit/loss/returns:

Returns wise, the highest weighted runners only lost a small amount. There has been no clear pattern, although I would be a little wary of backing lower weighted runners (8st 7lb or less) without a very good reason. It should be noted that if we dropped to 8st 4lb or less this cohort would have lost about 8p in the £ more tipping the scales at a little over 24p in the £.

Previous Career wins

Has the number of wins a horse has previously achieved made a difference over the past eight years? Let’s take a look:

One or two prior wins seems to have been the optimum. Horses that have won three or more times were very poor value – I guess why this has been the case is because these runners have become more exposed and, therefore, open to less improvement. Indeed, horses that won at least three times and had raced at least six times had an even worse record, winning just 39 times from 340 (SR 11.5%) for losses of £85.07 (ROI -25%).

Considering briefly the number of previous runs in handicaps a horse has had, if we concentrate on runners that had at least six runs previously in handicaps they have scored just 9.6% of the time (21 wins from 219) for losses of £63.54 (ROI -29%).

Again, I am guessing some of these animals were just less open to improvement. Compare this to horses which had previously run just once in a handicap, such types enjoyin a positive record of 77 wins from 511 runners (SR 15.1%) for a profit of £26.54 (ROI +5.2%). These runners were far less exposed, with more scope for improvement, from their current handicap mark.

Finishing position LTO

Normally with last time out (LTO) finishing position we see LTO winners following up more often than runners-up, who in turn win more often than LTO thirds, and so on. We tend to see a sloping graph with the bars getting lower, the further down the field the horse finished last time. However, that pattern has not occurred for these races as the graph below shows:

The left-hand side of the graph starts in a familiar fashion, but then we see the bar rising on the right-hand side. Hence it seems that LTO position has not quite been as important as it can be for other types of races. The full splits were as follows:

The value clearly has been with horses that finished fifth or worse LTO. They produced very strong profit figures as well as a decent win strike rate. These numbers for the 5th or worse cohort can be improved if restricting last time out runs to handicaps only. The figures then read 62 wins from 402 (SR 15.4%) for a profit of £117.08 (ROI +29.1%).

Course LTO

A quick look to see if the LTO course data has given us any past positives. Well, there have been four LTO courses that would have produced a profit. These have been:

Four of the top tracks in the country which I guess should come as no surprise, three of them representing 75% of the major 3yo Class 2 turf handicap hosts. The LTO York figures have been particularly eye-catching.

Trainer Angles

The final area to look at is trainers. Good individual trainer datasets have been hard to come by for most handlers but nine have had at least 50 horses run in these events (with the 18.0 BSP price cap) and their stats are shown in the table below. The trainers have been ordered alphabetically:

Charlie Appleby, Andrew Balding, Clive Cox, the Gosden stable and Richard Hannon all performed well and made fair profits. In contrast, Ralph Beckett and Richard Fahey have both struggled, posting significant losses.

Appleby, Balding, the Gosdens and Hannon also fared notably well when saddling the favourite.

Summary

This piece of research has highlighted plenty of positives as well as negatives in these handicaps. Here is a quick ready reckoner for us:

Until next time...

- DR

Monday Musings: Bright Lights in Newmarket

4 May 2026/in Monday Musings/by Tony Stafford

Irritatingly, I couldn’t make it to the two big races over the weekend, but watching from home didn’t diminish the experience of seeing three bright lights dominate the first Classic of the European season, writes Tony Stafford. Bow Echo, his young trainer George Boughey and barely-out-of-his-teens rider Billy Loughnane, treated Newmarket to its finest hour since Frankel slaughtered his opposition back in the 2000 Guineas of 2011.

Both Boughey and Loughnane have sprinted through the normal gestation period in their respective careers. Boughey went from a handful of horses and two wins in 2019, having left his role as assistant to Hugo Palmer in Newmarket, to the first of four successive centuries in 2022.

Loughnane’s rise has been even more meteoric. The son of trainer Mark had his first rides in 2022 on the all-weather yet by the end of that winter had 41 successes, winning the apprentices’ AW season award just beyond his 17^th birthday.

Comparisons with Lester Piggott are inevitable, but Lester was able to start riding at age 12 whereas the earliest allowed nowadays is 16. At 20, Loughnane has what will prove the first of many Classic wins, I’m sure, and he will be a major threat to Oisin Murphy’s hold on the jockeys’ championship starting now.

Last year Loughnane rode 223 winners and was on 65 for this year after Saturday’s exploits. Of course, the jockeys’ championship, oddly, only includes racing between mid-April and October, but it isn’t far-fetched to suggest he might have a little more hunger than Murphy. The champion will need to keep his own well-publicised demons at bay in face of what will be the most serious human challenge yet to his pre-eminence.

Comparisons with horses of previous generations are often meaningless, but Bow Echo, who won by almost three lengths from Coolmore’s hastily re-entered Gstaad after a costly glitch from the Ballydoyle office computer, looks very much in the Frankel range of ability on their comparable Guineas runs.

Tom Queally allowed Frankel to run his rivals into submission a long way from home, winning by ten lengths on the way to a blemish-free lifetime tally of 14 from 14. Bow Echo is thus ten away from that after this exceptional performance. Had Gstaad not been included as the sole Aidan O’Brien runner, the margin theoretically could have been ten lengths, thus firmly in the Frankel range.

Had Bow Echo not been in the field or not lived fully up to Boughey’s expectations – a friend told me in the week that the trainer thought him a certainty – Gstaad would have won by eight, just the job to keep the Coolmore machine in full flow. Their PR department would have been Frankelising the performance.

Saturday’s winner, along with the third home, Distant Storm, the eventual joint-favourite with the runner-up, are both sons of the 2014 2000 Guineas winner Night Of Thunder. His Guineas success was notable in that he came right across the track in the closing stages yet still had enough under Kieren Fallon to catch market leaders Kingman and Australia as a 40/1 chance for Richard Hannon.

Night Of Thunder was hardly over-trumpeted in his first season as a stallion at Darley’s Kildangan Stud when his opening fee was €30k. Success breeds excess in terms of stud fees though and he is up to €200k as a result of his being champion stallion in the UK and Ireland last year.

In the 14-horse field on Saturday, he had four representatives – the others being Billecart in 12^th and Needle Match in 13^th. Three more 2000 Guineas winners were also represented. Apart from Frankel, they were Sea The Stars (2009), who went on to win the Derby and the Arc, and Saxon Warrior (2018).

The latter’s son Padraig Dawn is trained by 24-year-old Charlie Pike, who is in his first season with a licence. That horse gave him his first and, so far, sole winner at Southwell in February from 35 starters, although in finishing eighth only three lengths behind the third horse, he deserves a big mention.

So too, Coolmore-based and raced Saxon Warrior, result of a trip to Japan for his smart mother Maybe to be mated with Deep Impact. He won the Classic eight years ago and is still on Coolmore’s books but very much at the basement end. His 2026 fee is only €10k, as against £350k for Frankel and €300k for Sea The Stars. Two Coolmore stallions were doubly represented with Starspangledbanner and St Mark’s Basilica, so eight of the 14 were sired by only three stallions.

In yesterday’s 1,000 Guineas, looking from far away on the screen, as the fillies went into the stalls, you had to be impressed with how True Love looked: big, strong and also well found in the market. There had been doubts about whether Ryan Moore’s mount Precise would get to the race but as she shortened to 7/4 favouritism those had seemingly been dispelled.

Meanwhile, True Love, winner of the Cheveley Park last year and a returning winner this spring, had the time-honoured Classic profile and she won in fine style, making it an eighth 1000 for Aidan O’Brien, this time with Wayne Lordan in the saddle. She might not be an exact equivalent of Bow Echo, but she looks the type to progress through the year.

Most of the sires represented on Saturday are either at Coolmore or under Godolphin/Darley management. That is vastly at odds with the 18-strong line-up from Churchill Downs for the Kentucky Derby, first leg of the US Triple Crown, staged late on Saturday evening.

Only one stallion had more than a single runner and that was champion sire Into Mischief, whose fee is $250k. But only one stallion represented in the field had won the Kentucky Derby, the 2016 hero Nyquist, and as the line-up says, competitors in the Run For The Roses come from all directions.

Only Gun Runner of the other 16, at $250k matches Into Mischief’s covering fee, while the winner of the race Golden Tempo, was sired by Curlin, now a 22-year-old, most remembered for winning the 2008 Dubai World Cup. His fee is $225k.

Golden Tempo came from 'downtown', as they say, his jockey Jose Ortiz 18 lengths off the lead after half a mile, and deploying similarly exaggerated waiting tactics to brother Irad, on Renegade, who ran on for a close second. And this was a first Kentucky Derby win by a female trainer, Cherie DeVaux adding to her growing haul of records.

Gun Runner had a better day on Friday when he supplied the one-two with Always A Runner (Chad Brown) and Meaning (Michael McCarthy) as well as two of the backmarkers in a 13-strong field for the Kentucky Oaks. Brown was further cementing his reputation as a supreme trainer of fillies, on dirt as in the Oaks, but also on turf.

I would have made this my lead today had it not been for the excellence of Saturday’s big race winner and to a slightly lesser extent the runner-up. I remember when Sea The Stars was going along, Aidan used to have a pop at him with different horses trying to find chinks in his impregnable armour without ever managing to do so. The rest of the season among the milers will be fascinating.

What wasn’t fascinating was the treatment meted out to the three-year-old King’s Courtier, trained by Julia and Shelley Birkett at Exning, near Newmarket.

Three, I must say, talentless runs at two brought the son of Bated Breath an initial mark of 30. In the past, horses so far out of the handicap were allowed to run, but off what is the nominally bottom-weighted mark of 45. Now, the Rules state you cannot run and must find a maiden to try to improve the rating.

So, four months after his feeble 12^th of 13 at Chelmsford, he was loaded into the horsebox for the 250-mile round trip to Wolverhampton. Mindful to get the best possible placing, unlike a few less in need of such an urgent situation, the three-year-old started 66/1 and got within eight lengths of the winner.

The misfortune was that the horse immediately ahead of him was rated 53, questionable in that only once in three had he run anything remotely worth that mark.

Result, the BHA handicapper raised him 27lb – that’s near enough two stone for finishing fourth in a modest at best race.

Now Julia, an experienced and well-respected trainer since 2000, who joined forces with daughter Shelley last year, was in a right pickle. Recently, the rule which enabled horses 1lb and 2lb above the ceiling mark in handicaps to run, was taken away in Class 5 and Class 6. That meant King’s Courtier could not run in a 0-55 and would have to go to 0-60. “There aren’t any for him,” says Julia, so she had to go up to 0-65 for his first handicap run. “There’s no way he’s that class,” she lamented.

So, it was a shorter road and a bit easier on the diesel, trip last Thursday that was undertaken for King’s Courtier for a seven-runner race at Yarmouth. Julia/Shelley’s horse started 50/1 and finished 18 lengths behind the penultimate runner in the race. We all know that handicappers do not like dropping horses – except for certain top trainers it sometimes seems! – so Julia is anxiously waiting on tomorrow’s revised mark.

Unless they drop him to 45 it will be a travesty of justice, but they won’t. Indeed, it wouldn’t be a surprise if the Civil Service types that seem to fill the job nowadays, say: “He couldn’t have run anything like to form, so let’s leave him where he is.”

Make no mistake this is a massive scandal, and I would suggest to Dominic Gardner-Hill (if he’s still the man?) that he has a serious look at the reasoning whereby life has been made so difficult for an honest, hard-working stable and the man who has been paying the bills for the past 20 months! Not no mention the ever-spiralling administration charges.

- TS

The WORST Draw / Run Style Tracks in 2026

28 April 2026/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

The draw and run style combinations we need to avoid

The inspiration for this piece was the recent Form Hacker’s Guide researched and compiled by Matt, and I suggest readers to take a look if not done so already, writes Dave Renham. In those two excellent pieces (which you can read here and here), Matt started by focusing on 10-runner handicaps on turning tracks, expanding later to 8- to 12-runner handicaps.

His research noted that the wider drawn runners generally struggled, as did those drawn 1 (those closest to the inside rail) if they did not get away well. He also noted that races of 1 mile or less were best as they tend to be run at a true gallop. My aim for this article is to build on those initial Form Hacker findings.

Approach

So, this was my plan. I wanted to highlight the worst course and distance (C&D) draw/run style combinations in the UK. I decided to look at handicap races only but expanded the remit to 8+ runner handicaps from 5 furlongs to 1 mile: the majority of these were 8 to 12 runner affairs. Unlike Matt's research, I also included races run on straight courses. Data has been taken from between 2021 to 2025, so five full years/seasons.

Being able to consistently find horses that represent poor value is extremely useful when it comes to improving your bottom line. The more horses we can (reasonably) confidently put a line through the better. If we can ignore, say, three horses in a 12-runner field due to the chance of any of them winning being considerably lower than their prices suggest, then we suddenly turn the betting market in our favour.

For example, imagine this hypothetical market on Betfair for a 12-runner handicap:

This market gives a book percentage of 102.3% (that is, an overround of 2.3%), so the type of market we will find on Betfair for this sort of race. Let us imagine that the horses ranked 4, 6 and 10 in the betting can be as good as ignored due to their draw and likely run style. That takes out just under 21% from the market book and turns the odds well in our favour.

Now, I appreciate that one of those horses we eliminated could win, but if we are right with our research then this will happen sufficiently rarely that the method will still give us a decent edge over the longer term. It’s time to crack on.

Mechanics

On geegeez.co.uk, we are able to look at draw and run style combinations through the Draw Analyser. Below is a 'heat map' screenshot taken from Chepstow over 6f for this recent five-year time frame in 8+ runner handicaps:

The numbers in this heat map image are PRBs (Percentage of Rivals Beaten). To refresh, Percentage of Rivals Beaten (PRB) is a calculation based on a horse's finishing position in relation to field size. It makes key distinctions between a horse finishing, say, third in a five-horse race (PRB 50%, two rivals beaten, beaten by two rivals) and finishing third in an eleven-horse race (PRB 80%, eight rivals beaten, beaten by two).

PRB is beneficial for researchers like me because it helps to make datasets bigger. In racing we are often blighted by small datasets, relative to what general statistics would consider so at any rate. And when we then try to discern knowledge from the data by looking only at wins, we ignore nine-tenths of the information we have (assuming an average field size of ten, one winner, nine losers).

The Draw Analyser also gives us more extensive data for each draw/run style group, and this is shown for the same Chepstow example below:

We are able to see in this one table the sample sizes in more detail. They include win and placed percentages, profits/losses (SP and Betfair SP), A/E indices, Impact Values and the PRBs.

On geegeez.co.uk, we express PRB as a number in decimal form between 0 and 1 rather than a percentage. So 0.69 for example, the PRB for the low drawn led group (see table above), equates to 69% while the low drawn held up figure of 0.39 equates to 39%, and so on. The key thing to remember about PRB figures is that a par score is 50% of rivals beaten, or 0.50, so better than 0.55 is positive and worse than 0.45 is a fair negative.

To qualify as a ‘poor’ C&D draw/run style combination I am looking for groups of runners with draw/run style PRBs below 0.40, as this indicates these horses have really struggled. In addition, there must have been at least 40 horses within each specific C&D draw/run style combination which will give us a decent PRB sample size from which to work from.

Below are the worst 20 draw/run style C&Ds starting with those with PRBs of 0.38. The C&Ds are not strictly in order of poorness culminating with the ‘worst’, but in general the later C&Ds will show a slightly stronger negative bias.

Let's get to it!

The Worst 20 Course/Distance Draw/Run Style Combinations in UK Flat Racing

Carlisle 6f – draw third LOW; run style – HELD UP

We start with Carlisle over 6f. This C&D sees runners turn right roughly 150 yards after the start and then take a further shallow right turn just after two furlongs, with a final slight turn between the two- and three-furlong pole. Let’s look at the splits for low drawn held up runners:

The win rate was higher than both the placed% and the PRB of 0.38 suggests it should be. An extra win or two over 71 races can change the win percentage considerably. I surmise though, that over a longer period the win rate would be nearer 5 or 6% based on the PRB. All in all, low drawn held up runners over this C&D have been horses that have generally found it tough.

Chester 7f – draw third MIDDLE; run style – HELD UP

Chester is the tightest track in the country, so I had expected to see it make the list somewhere. Over 7f, horses positioned in the middle third of the draw have been at a significant disadvantage as the figures below show:

These runners lost a little over 70p in the £ over the past five years. I am guessing that some of the runners get squeezed somewhat from both lower and higher drawn runners starting more quickly and, on this tight track, being behind a wall of horses makes life very tricky. For the record low drawn hold up horses have also struggled with a PRB of 0.42.

Leicester 6f – draw third HIGH; run style – HELD UP

To the Midlands and Leicester. The 6f trip at Leicester is run over on a straight course and high drawn held up types have had a poor time of it as the stats show:

Just the three wins from 64 qualifiers, and when we look at the stall position rather than simply highest third of the draw, horses drawn 10 or higher that were held up won no races from 40 runners. Indeed, horses that raced in mid-division when drawn 10 or higher over 6f here also failed to score, this time from 34 runners. Thus, high drawn runners that raced mid div or were held up have seen 74 consecutive losers over this 6f trip at Leicester.

York 1 mile – draw third HIGH; run style – HELD UP

I have always been a fan of this C&D as low draws have enjoyed a strong edge in such races for many years. York's mile handicaps are run around a bend and the horses drawn in the top third (high), when held up, have struggled as the numbers below illustrate:

This C&D witnessed extremely low win and placed percentages for the high/held up cohort, especially considering the very decent sample size. Also, if we concentrate on handicaps with bigger fields, horses drawn 13 or higher when held up won just once from 61 (SR 1.6%) with only 3 horses placing (SR 4.9%). This is the strongest bias seen to date and clearly we should steer clear of habitual hold up horses drawn high over this C&D.

Windsor 1 mile – draw third LOW; run style – HELD UP

Windsor is a unique flat track as the racecourse is a figure of eight, although over a mile it is effectively like a round course. Horses drawn low that were held up really struggled since 2021 as these numbers indicate:

As we can see, not only has the PRB figure been very poor, but all other metrics have followed suit. Both the win and placed rates were extremely low and if backing all 115 runners we would have lost just over two-thirds of stakes. It should also be noted that horses drawn in the lowest stall (1) have performed dreadfully with 0 wins and just one placed effort from 26 runs; the PRB stands at a dismal 0.30. This backs up Matt’s findings in his Form Hacker’s Guide where he noted that slow starting horses drawn 1 tended to really struggle.

We can also see that the runners drawn in the bottom third of the draw struggled year on year when viewing the win percentages for each year. The graph below shows the splits:

In addition, the yearly PRBs correlate positively with the win percentages with four of the five years seeing PRBs of 0.39 or lower.

Musselburgh 1 mile – draw third LOW; run style – HELD UP

Musselburgh is a course I like from a punting perspective as over 7f and 1 mile there is a very strong front running bias. Hence, it comes as no surprise that we see hold up horses struggling over the mile trip when drawn low. Here are the splits:

As can be seen these low drawn runners have really found it tough going. They have the same PRB as the other C&Ds shared to date, but the lowest win rate, lowest A/E index and lowest IV value. If we had backed all 44 runners we would have lost over 85p in the £. Hold up horses drawn either 1 or 2 went 0 from 21 with just two placing in the five year review period. Low drawn hold ups are a ‘no no’ from a backing perspective.

Chepstow 7f – draw third LOW; run style – HELD UP

Chepstow’s 7f races are run on a straight track and hold up horses have struggled generally (we will see more evidence of this in a minute). Those hold up types drawn low produced the following stats:

Just a single win and, although the place% is one of the highest we have seen so far, when we compare it to the ‘LED’ place% over this C&D (all draw thirds combined) we see that this stands at 44.4%. There is quite a difference between the two percentages.

The next C&D on the list is the first where the PRB drops to 0.37 and it happens to be the same C&D as this one!

Chepstow 7f – draw third MIDDLE; run style – HELD UP

It is the middle third of the draw this time combined once again with held up runners. Here are their splits:

We see similar figures for most metrics, although the place% is lower than the high drawn figure previously shared. It should be noted that hold ups from the highest third also struggled and almost made the list as well but their PRB of 0.41 was just above the cut-off point.

It should also be noted that when we look at ALL hold up horses over this C&D (all draw thirds combined) that started in the top three of the betting, only two of 32 won for hefty losses of over 77p in the £.

Ayr 6f – draw third HIGH; run style – HELD UP

Back up to Scotland and one of the sprint trips at Ayr next. Here are the stats:

The win rate looks slightly inflated based on the PRB and Place% but, having said that, backing all runners would have still incurred losses of £74.75 (ROI -65%). The bias against high drawn held up horses seems to have been accentuated on softer ground. On going described as good to soft or softer the PRB was just 0.32 over the past five years with a win percentage of under 5%.

Nottingham 6f – draw third LOW; run style – HELD UP

Over to Nottingham now and low drawn runners when held up off the pace performed poorly between 2021 and 2025. Their stats were as follows:

Just the two wins from the 50 hold up horses and the PRB as with Ayr 6f stands at 0.37. It may be that this bias is stronger on slower ground because for the 19 qualifiers who ran on good to soft or slower their PRB was a measly 0.31. They did manage one win from those 19 runners, but no other horse managed to place. Also, when we look at the other hold up horses from middle and high draws their performance on easier ground was much worse also. Hence this gives extra confidence that slower ground here makes it even harder for hold up horses.

Lingfield AW 5f – draw third HIGH; run style – HELD UP

Lingfield's all-weather (AW) track next. The 5f trip is slightly unusual as round course 5-furlong tracks go because the stalls are placed on the outside, rather than next to the inside rail. I wonder if this is why high drawn hold up horses have struggled, especially when factoring in that the first turn at Lingfield occurs before a furlong of the race has been completed.

Hold up horses are either going to be trapped very wide having to go the longest route or, if they dive to the inside, they are likely to encounter significant traffic. We have a decent sample size supporting these assertions:

Such hold up horses over Lingfield's all-weather five incurred losses of 55p in the £ if backing all blind to £1 level stakes. Focusing on horses from the top three in the betting that were held up from one of the three highest draws, this cohort won just four of the 36 races (SR 11.1%) for a loss of £17.54 (ROI -48.7%).

Windsor 5f – draw third LOW; run style – HELD UP

5f at Windsor sees horses essentially race over a straight five though there is a slight kink at halfway, so horses on the inside (low) can get squeezed if racing off the pace and close to the rail. I am guessing this has been a contributing factor to the poor figures for this combination. The stats were as follows:

One win, and a placed rate of just one in seven. Compare this place% with that of early leaders here (any draw) which stands at 58%! Hence, front runners have been four times more likely to place than low drawn hold up horses over this 5f trip.

Backing all low drawn hold up horses over this 5-year period would have lost £50.22 (ROI -89.7%), and one additional finding is that on firmer ground (good to firm or firmer), the bias against hold ups seems to have strengthened still more. Under these conditions hold up runners were 0 from 33 with just three placed efforts; PRB 0.34.

This makes sense because, on firmer ground, the horses tend to congregate near the stands’ rail (low) meaning real traffic problems for hold up horses close to the rail. Conversely, on softer ground horses often fan out in the final two furlongs, racing middle to far side more, meaning that low drawn hold ups are not faced by a wall of horses sticking to the stands’ rail.

Wolverhampton 5f – draw third HIGH; run style – HELD UP

Our second AW C&D, again over 5f, this time at Wolverhampton. Here the stalls are positioned, as we would expect, on the inside and higher draws are at disadvantage regardless of run style. However, the disadvantage is made worse if they are held up as these stats show:

This is the biggest sample of the 20 C&Ds in this article so we can be very confident in the findings. Backing all high drawn hold up runners would generated eye-watering losses of £193.48 which equates to just under 58p in the £. Horses drawn high that raced midfield also performed poorly with a win rate of under 4% and a PRB of 0.42.

York 6f – draw third MIDDLE; run style – HELD UP

Coming from behind at York over 5f or 6f has always been difficult and middle drawn held up runners over 6f have had a particularly poor record in recent times:

The draw, as well as run style, has often been key here over the past few seasons with lower draws definitely enjoying an edge. Hence, middle and higher draws have tended to be at a disadvantage at most meetings. As well as the middle, high drawn hold up runners have also found it tough over 6f here winning just five races from 126 runners; PRB 0.41.

Catterick 7f – draw third LOW; run style – HELD UP

A look at 7f at Catterick now. This is a round course 7f where the stats have been as follows:

We see a very low win rate from a decent sample of over 100 runners. I mentioned earlier about Matt’s findings regarding horses drawn 1 struggling when running around a bend. This has definitely been the case here as hold up horses drawn 1 have won zero races from 26. It has not been any better for those drawn 2 either, that group going 0 from 21. Nine of those losers (both draws combined) started either favourite or second favourite.

Catterick 5f – draw third HIGH; run style – HELD UP

Over to the 5f trip at Catterick which is well known for favouring early speed. Hence, one would expect horses that have been held up to struggle and that has been the case. Those drawn high have produced the following stats:

Hold up horses have struggled regardless of post position here. Low drawn hold ups have a PRB of 0.41, while hold up horses drawn in the middle third of the draw appear next on this list...

Catterick 5f – draw third MIDDLE; run style – HELD UP

Horses drawn in the middle have also struggled over this C&D when being held up. As with the high drawn runners their PRB has ended up at 0.37. Here are all the relevant metrics:

We see a slightly lower win rate, coupled with a marginally higher placed rate. The A/E index though has been much lower as has the Impact Value (IV). I should also share that horses which raced mid-division from either a high or middle draw also performed poorly, winning just twice from 50 combined qualifiers (SR 4%).

It will come as no real surprise that there is a significant run style bias over this C&D as the graph below shows:

The graph combines all early leaders / front runners comparing their record to all hold up horses regardless of post position over this course and distance. This type of difference occurs at numerous courses over 5f.

Musselburgh 7f – draw third HIGH; run style – HELD UP

Back to Musselburgh over 7f this time where high drawn held up runners have produced a poor set of figures:

This is the lowest PRB so far standing at just 0.35 suggesting it has been a huge disadvantage to be held up here when drawn high. Indeed, stall 8 seems to be where the trouble has started, as horses drawn 8 or higher when held up won just one of 70 races (SR 1.43%) over the five years with a place% of just 7.1% and a PRB of 0.33.

Musselburgh 5f – draw third LOW; run style – HELD UP

Sticking with Musselburgh we now look at the stats for low drawn runners when held up over the minimum trip of 5f:

Low drawn runners are stuck out wide at Musselburgh over five furlongs and it seems if they start slowly their chances of success are very low indeed. The lowest drawn runner (drawn 1) has a quite dreadful record when being held up managing no wins and also no placed efforts from 36 runs! The PRB for this cohort has been... wait for it... just 0.20. Runners berthed in stall 2 also drew a blank from a win perspective when held up (0 from 28 with just 2 placed efforts). There is an argument to suggest that this C&D has shown the strongest bias in the list.

Leicester 1 mile – draw third HIGH; run style – HELD UP

We come to the final C&D and the one with the lowest PRB in the list, at just 0.34. Leicester’s 1 mile trip has seen the following stats for high drawn hold up horses:

15 of the 44 races over this C&D over the past five years were won by the horse taking the early lead. Higher draws were at a disadvantage so knowing these two facts helps explain the poor figures for hold up horses drawn high. Finally, horses drawn 9 or higher when held up over C&D were 0 from 28 over the period of study.

Summary

Before I finish this table shows the combined results from all 20 C&Ds including the Betfair profit and loss - well, just loss! - figures:

It makes fairly damning reading. Roughly one win in 25 and for every £100 staked a loss of £47.50. Ouch!

It is not an accident that all twenty draw/run style combinations were draw third/held up.

Horses that race at the back of the field early do not win very often in flat handicaps at a mile or shorter.

Here's a handy 'cut out and keep' guide to the 20, listed alphabetically:

How to spot a hold up horse...

The million dollar question, of course, is how do you spot a hold up horse? Well, that's not straightforward to answer, but I can tell you this: in the five year study period, across UK flat handicaps, horses that were held up in their two previous races led on their next start just 4.2% of the time... and they were held up again 56.5% of the time. 27% of this 30,000+ sample size raced in midfield, meaning that five out of every six horses that were held up in their previous two races raced in the latter part of the field on their next start.

It's not a crystal ball by any means, but it's a pretty good start. Being able to eliminate horses confidently from races we are analysing means we start to move the odds in our favour. As Matt also indicated in his ‘hacks’ there are not just negative angles which will help us but positive ones too.

Combining positive draws with positive run styles moves the odds even further in our favour. From there, it should be easier (note, easier not easy!) to find value selections which is the route to long term profit.

I guess I should plan another article in the near future looking at the C&Ds with the highest draw/run style combo PRBs. Until next time...

- DR

Monday Musings: Dan and dusted

27 April 2026/in Monday Musings/by Tony Stafford

Careful. By the time you read next week’s words here the 2026/27 jumps season will already be four days old, we’ll be 40 per cent through the 2026 UK Classics, and only seven weeks short of the longest day of the year, writes Tony Stafford.

And what of the 2025/26 season? Well, that was pretty much Dan and dusted before Cheltenham, and Mr Skelton duly got over the £5million mark with his Sandown exploits – which were not without their difficulties.

Now he wants to beat Martin Pipe’s record number of 243 winners in a single season, while second-time champion jockey Sean Bowen reckons 300 wins will be within his reach – he finished off with 241, so 48 behind A P McCoy’s best of 289 in the 2001/02 campaign.

But let’s forget the jumping for a while – the boys will have had almost a full week off, bar a single Friday meeting at Warwick’s temporary hosting of Cheltenham’s hunter chase fixture. Last week’s meeting there, also replacing unfit Cheltenham, was pretty turgid apart from the money.

No, I’m not planning to relive my 1992 2000 Guineas Day when I waited until Lester returned to unsaddle on Rodrigo De Triano for Robert Sangster and trainer Peter Chapple-Hyam before setting off to keep an appointment with a potential client 266 miles away at Hexham racecourse. That fixture is joined by Uttoxeter, so the counting starts again then.

Meanwhile we have the small matter of five days at Punchestown starting tomorrow. As with Dan Skelton for the past two years – largely abandoned this time round as he had no chance of catching the new champion – Willie Mullins has now a target on the back of Gordon Elliott, something we’ve seen more than once in the past.

Elliott goes into Punchestown on €4,710,170, €160k ahead of his nemesis. He’s having a proper go, starting with 15 runners including his Aintree heroine Brighterdaysahead tomorrow, and a possible 61 in the following four days.

Mullins kicks off with 22 tomorrow and has at least 33 on each of the following days, with a preponderance as ever in the non-handicaps and championship events. It’s more than an uphill struggle for Elliott, even though he has had 323 individual horses to call on this season against Mullins’ modest team of just 290!

When talking numbers, you cannot get away from those two superstars from Hong Kong, Ka Ying Rising and Romantic Warrior. Both turned out at Sha Tin’s big day yesterday and thrilled their legion of followers in their respective races. I doubt there’s ever been a plus £1 million to the winner prize with eight runners, contested (and obviously won) by a horse starting at 100/1 on.

That was the price of Ka Ying Rising as he made it 20 wins in a row with only two narrow second places the blemishes on the six-year-old’s card. There was never a moment’s doubt that he would duly outclass the opposition in the Chairman’s Sprint Cup. How connections must wish that the year-younger Wunderbar hadn’t turned up for his second and third starts.

Each time it went to a close-run thing, first by a nose and then a short head. The two horses’ fortunes have veered apart since then, Ka Ying Rising cantering to a four and a bit length win from second-favourite Satano Reve (89/1!), a winner of a Group 1 sprint last time out at Chukyo racecourse, Japan. Wunderbar’s last run was in a handicap this year off a mark of 100. He was ridden by Richard Kingscote and finished eighth of twelve. Ka Ying Rising is rated 128.

Donnacha O’Brien’s useful Comanche Brave was fifth yesterday under Oisin Murphy, having started at 350/1. Connections copped a handy £80k against the £1.281 million collected by the Zac Purton-ridden winner. He had started at 1/20 for each of his previous eight wins around Sha Tin, a sequence only interrupted by a smooth success at Randwick racecourse in Sydney last year where he was an even-money shot.

I doubt many Hong Kong racegoers with winning tickets will have bothered cashing them in, basically to get their money back. As when Deep Impact came over to Longchamp from Japan, the legion of his supporters that forced his price down on the Pari-mutuel on that Arc would not have cashed them either.

Even if they had backed him for a place – he finished third over the line to Rail Link and Pride, ahead of Hurricane Run – they will have been found a spot on many a Tokyo trophy cabinet. I had forgotten – it was 20 years ago after all – that Deep Impact was subsequently disqualified for having a banned substance in his post-race test. That doesn’t alter the fact that he was one of the greatest in Japan and sired the 2023 Derby winner for Coolmore in Auguste Rodin from the mating with their top filly Rhododendron.

Hong Kong’s other great equine hero, the eight-year-old Romantic Warrior, did the business once more in the QE II Cup, his fourth win in the race, starting as a four-year-old in 2022. James McDonald’s mount missed out last year, I recall injured following his narrow defeat at Meydan the previous month, but has returned as good as ever, making his tally 22 wins from 29 starts.

His prizemoney tally now tops £25 million and he is ahead of Forever Young after that Japanese champion’s failure to secure as expected the Dubai World Cup at Meydan last month. The difference between second and first that day was more than £3 million, but you get the feeling that Romantic Warrior can only go on for so long and it’s merely a matter of time.

That said, he was the 30/100 favourite and had to beat three smart overseas performers to send the locals home happy that another of their heroes had seen off the visiting opposition. He had a length to spare over runner-up Masquerade Ball, last seen running the world’s highest-rated horse Calandagan close at Meydan; third was Sosie, in the same place as when he was behind Daryz in the Arc last October.

Next came another eight-year-old, Karl Burke’s Royal Champion, a close up fourth under Oisin adding £171k to his Middle East earnings at Bahrain and Riyadh at the beginning of the year. Burke is becoming adept at identifying winning targets overseas for his charges and that can only develop further as the returns continue to accumulate for his owners.

Talking of owners, so many older horses, some entire and more often geldings, are benefiting from staying in training for longer, especially at middle distances and above. While there are always plenty of new stallions every year, the fashion is for the precocious sprinting type that can get its progeny on the track early and maybe even have a shot at Royal Ascot.

Tony O’Callaghan, wife Anne and son Roger have been ultra-successful in that regard, and their Tally-Ho Stud had another day in the sun when a colt by their stallion Mehmas sold for £880,000 at the Doncaster breeze-up sale last week.

Mehmas never ran beyond age two but did plenty in those eight runs for Richard Hannon and Al Shaqab, winning four times including the Group 2 July Stakes, beating Blue Point. The only time Hannon stretched him beyond six furlongs he was second to Churchill in the National Stakes over seven at the Curragh.

The O’Callaghans bought him and he began his stud career with a fee of £12,500 at Tally-Ho. By the time the first runners appeared on the track it was down to £7,500 but his progeny soon showed speed, precocity and class and he was set. Now his fee is €70k.

Like Romantic Warrior, Mehmas is a son of Acclamation, and it isn’t hard to estimate that with say 150 mares visiting him each year at that fee, he will be rapidly approaching the sort of figures that his paternal relative has amassed on the track. That has been the Coolmore method for decades and one that other top stud operations like Godolphin, Shadwell, Juddmonte, and no doubt in their long-term planning, Amo Racing also aspire to.

One of Mehmas’s classiest sons, Minzaal, is now finding his feet as a stallion and my friend Maurice Manasseh was shrewd and maybe lucky enough to buy a lovely colt by him at Doncaster for £60k last week. Minzaal won the Gimcrack at two and the Haydock Sprint Cup on his final career start as a four-year-old.

Bred by Shadwell, from a Juddmonte family, I’m sure this very stylish-looking colt will give Maurice plenty of fun with the Crisfords.

If you feel I’ve been procrastinating a bit when talking about the Guineas this weekend, you may well be right. I’ve not missed either the 2000 or the 1000 since 2002 (and for at least another 25 years before that) but I’m ashamed to say I won’t be at Newmarket on either day owing to unforeseen domestic duties.

The last absence happened when I was off to Louisville for my one and only visit to the Kentucky Derby, in the entourage of Prince Ahmed Salman’s Thoroughbred Corporation. I watched mesmerised as the green and white stripes on War Emblem won the race in all-the-way fashion under Victor Espinoza for the Bob Baffert stable. We were in Paris by late that evening and saw the 1000 from there the following day at the George V Hotel.

Anyway, what’s going to win this time? With so little encouragement coming from the original ante-post fancies and with Bow Echo looking very short, I’ll take a chance with Roger Varian’s Avicenna, each-way at 16’s for the 2000 on Saturday.

As to the 1000, Aidan O’Brien could hardly have been more complimentary as Precise made her way through and out of the grades last year. I can picture Ryan Moore, convalescing from injury and denied a ride on any of her four wins, standing next to the paddock on his own admiring her in the middle distance as she went round before the Fillies’ Mile last September. He won’t relinquish that mount once he gets on her, so Christophe Soumillon, you can merely watch as she wins on Sunday.

- TS

Membership Login

Royal Ascot – Exploring a variety of angles

Royal Ascot Draw Bias

Straight Track Drawn Bias (up to a mile)

Royal Ascot Round course Draw Bias (1m4f)

Odds Movement at Royal Ascot

Early Morning odds compared with Opening Show odds

Opening Show odds compared with Starting Price

Royal Ascot: Exchange Markets

BSP prices

In-running betting/trading

Royal Ascot Trainer Form

Top Trainers by Win Strike Rate

Top Trainers by Percentage of Rivals Beaten (PRB)

Specific Royal Ascot Trainer Angles

An Analysis of the Racing Post Ratings in UK Turf flat racing

Introduction

Overall Performance by RPR Ranking

RPR Top Rated

Overview

RPR top-rated runners - Yearly strike rates

RPR top-rated runners – Record by Month

RPR top-rated runners - Market Rank

RPR top-rated runners - Handicaps versus non-handicaps

RPR top-rated runners - Age of horse

RPR top-rated runners - Run style

2nd Top Rated RPR

RPR 2nd rated runners - Handicaps versus non-handicaps

RPR 2nd rated runners – Horses with an ISP of 12/1 or less

RPR 2nd rated runners – Run Style

3yo and 3yo+ maidens – a deep dive

Market Rank

Sex of horse

Age

Career starts

Position Last Time Out (LTO)

Days since last run (DSLR)

Trainer Angles

An investigation into the Geegeez Instant Expert, Part 2

Recap

A line on ranking methodology

Instant Expert Rank #1 by Betfair Starting Price

Instant Expert (IE) top ranked runner by Price

Instant Expert (IE) top ranked runner by Price (4yo+ hcaps only)

Instant Expert top ranked runner by Age (4yo+ hcaps only)

Instant Expert rank of 9 or lower by Class

IE rank of 9 or lower by Race Classification

Individual Instant Expert Shortlist scores by PRB

Instant Expert individual scores

Instant Expert individual scores (4yo+ hcaps only)

Summary

HBF Survey

Footy bet hedge

Geegeez

Mindset

French Open tennis

That's all, we're done...

An initial investigation into Geegeez Instant Expert

Introduction

Instant Expert Shortlist (Sh) – Performance by Rank

Instant Expert Shortlist (Sh) – top two ranked runners

Shortlist Rank Comparison: 3yo+ Handicaps vs 4yo+ Handicaps

Class 2 turf handicaps for 3yos only – a study

Market Factors

Sex of horse

Weight carried

Previous Career wins

Finishing position LTO

Course LTO

Trainer Angles

Summary

The draw and run style combinations we need to avoid

Approach

Mechanics

The Worst 20 Course/Distance Draw/Run Style Combinations in UK Flat Racing

Carlisle 6f – draw third LOW; run style – HELD UP

Chester 7f – draw third MIDDLE; run style – HELD UP

Leicester 6f – draw third HIGH; run style – HELD UP

York 1 mile – draw third HIGH; run style – HELD UP

Windsor 1 mile – draw third LOW; run style – HELD UP

RPR 2^nd rated runners - Handicaps versus non-handicaps

RPR 2^nd rated runners – Horses with an ISP of 12/1 or less

RPR 2^nd rated runners – Run Style