Dave Renham | geegeez.co.uk

Revisiting All-Weather Draw Biases

18 December 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

It has been a while since I looked at all-weather draw biases so with plenty more racing on those surfaces to come this winter it seemed a good time to revisit the stats, writes Dave Renham.

In this article:

Introduction

When I think about draw biases in turf racing, they tend to be far less predictable or consistent than draw biases on the all-weather (AW). There are a few reasons why this tends to be the case:

1. Some turf courses are increasing the number of meetings and they move rails to alter where the horses run. This can nullify or even change a draw bias.

2. The positioning of the stalls can change at some courses altering the track location that the horses are running from each draw. For example, on a straight track a horse could be drawn 1 when the stalls are positioned far side and be next to the far rail, but if the stalls on are the stands’ side the horse drawn 1 could be out in the middle of the course. Hence, if we hypothetically assume that the ground next to the far rail is quicker than the ground down the centre, then a horse drawn 1 could have a big advantage if the stalls are placed far side. Conversely if the stalls are stands' side, then the horse drawn 1 does not have this advantage. Moreover, running against a rail is generally more of an advantage than running in the middle of the track.

3. Turf courses use watering which potentially can change the going on certain parts of a track: that may then have an impact on any bias.

As far as the AW is concerned, these three reasons are not much of an issue. At AW courses the rails are fixed so moving them is not an option, and the position of the stalls doesn’t change either. Also, the going tends to be very similar on all-weather – the surface they race on is clearly the same each time, and whether it rides ‘standard’ or slower than ‘standard’ depends on the specific course surface, any additional harrowing undertaken and possibly the weather conditions.

The table below shows the percentage of races at each course in the past three years that has ridden either ‘standard’ or ‘standard to slow’. Those are the only two going descriptions we have had since the start of 2022.

As can be seen most of the courses primarily race on ‘standard’ going. At Chelmsford, Lingfield and Wolverhampton they rarely race on slower going. Kempton has raced on ‘standard to slow’ at every meeting over the past three years (indeed every meeting since 11th July 2018 - when does that become the new 'standard'? - Ed.), while Southwell sees slower ground about one meeting in five.

Newcastle is the course where there is the most even split with just under two-thirds of meetings having raced on ‘standard’, the other third on ‘standard to slow’. It should be noted that between the months of June and September around 60% of the Newcastle meetings have been on ‘standard to slow’, so one could logically surmise that either drier or warmer weather has the most impact in terms of the going there. All the course data points to the fact that how an AW course rides is rarely affected by significant changes in going.

In addition to all of the above, four of the six UK AW tracks see all races run around a bend. This can help in terms of consistency when it comes to the draw. Running around a bend means horses running closest to the rail having to run a shorter distance, thus on round courses lower draws tend to have an edge because they are drawn closer to the inside.

This introduction has made the hypothetical case for more consistent draw bias on the artifical surfaces, so let us see if this has actually been the case. The draw data I have collated goes back to the start of 2017 with the focus on 8+ runner handicaps, which are the best races to analyse when it comes to the draw. I will be looking at four course/distance combinations in detail, arguably the four strongest AW draw biases, starting with the minimum trip at Chelmsford.

Chelmsford 5f

The 5f distance at Chelmsford should favour lower draws because the bend they run starts little more than a furlong into the race and then sweeps round for two further furlongs until they turn into the straight. The racecourse map is shown below:

Let us look at the draw splits for the whole-time frame in terms of win percentages within each third of the draw:

As expected, lower draws have an edge over middle drawn runners, who in turn enjoy an advantage over high draw runners. If there was no bias all these figures should be close to the 33.3% mark. The lower the draw the better with horses drawn 1 winning 31 races (18.3% of all races), horses drawn 2 winning 24 (14.2%). Combined, the two lowest draws have won 55 races, compared with the two highest drawn horses in each race who have collectively won 22 between them.

This suggests that horses drawn in the lowest two stalls are 2.5 times more likely to win than those drawn in the highest two stalls. This disparity increases when the number of runners increases, peaking at 4.3 times more likely when the field size is 11 or 12. It should also be noted that horses drawn 1 have made a profit to SP and BSP, as have those drawn 2. The profits are very small to SP, but with 169 runs for each stall position this suggests there is some value backing these two draws.

In terms of Percentage of Rivals Beaten (PRB) there is positive correlation with the win data with low on 0.54, middle 0.52 and high down at 0.45.

If we now look at the record of the lowest third of the draw by individual year we might expect to see big fluctuations, due mainly to small sample sizes and standard variances. To counter that, I have grouped the annual data in a slightly different way using a method I first saw in Nick Mordin’s excellent book, Winning Without Thinking. He looked at data in batches / groups of years, which is a good way to compare things more effectively due to more reliable sample sizes. You can also see patterns changing more easily – if indeed they do change. He used five-year batches; I’m going to look at four-year batches. Below is a graph comparing the win percentage for the lowest third of the draw using the batch/group method:

The bias has remained fairly consistent with all four-year batches showing 40%+ figures. The graph suggests that there may be a slight strengthening of the bias over the last eight years but, regardless of whether that is true, it is clear I hope that this bias is likely to continue for the foreseeable future.

Before moving on, there seems to be a draw bias ‘cut off point’ at stall 7. Specifically, horses drawn 7 or lower have won 144 races from 1183 runners (SR 12.2%). Those drawn 8 or higher have won 25 races from 424 runners (SR 5.9%). In addition, over this track and trip, horses drawn 11 or 12 (the maximum field size is 12) are 1 win from 50 (SR 2%).

My betting strategy as regards the draw over 5f at Chelmsford is to primarily focus on horses drawn 1 and 2, but I am prepared to look at horses drawn as high as 7. Those drawn 8 or higher will get a line through them unless they have several strong factors to bring to the table.

Chelmsford 6f

Remaining at Chelmsford we move up a furlong to six. With the bend being an additional furlong away from the start, one would expect that the low draw bias might be less potent than it is over 5f. Let’s look at the win percentages by third of draw first:

As expected the edge for low draws is less strong and, also, high draws have fared much better at this trip in terms of wins compared with 5f. However, in Percentage of Rivals Beaten (PRB) terms the figures are more akin to the 5f cohort, especially looking at the low third and the high third. The PRB for low draws stands at 0.55 (0.54 over 5f), middle lies on 0.49 (0.52 over 5f) and high at 0.46 (0.45 over 5f). These figures suggest low’s advantage over high is similar to that of the minimum distance. The win & placed figures are also very similar when comparing the draw thirds over the two distances. Essentially, I would say that from a win perspective, the bias is less strong over six furlongs while in terms of getting placed it is similar.

It should also be noted that the maximum field size over 6f is 14, two more than over five furlongs. It is rare that 13 or 14 runners come to post here but, for the record, no horse drawn 13 or 14 won in the eight-year period from 38 runners to try.

Looking through the value lens, however, using A/E indices, higher draws have scored best. Their figure of 0.92 is well above the low figure of 0.81 and middle one of 0.82. Perhaps bookmakers and punters perceive the bias to be stronger than it is at this distance.

My betting strategy as regards the draw over 6f at Chelmsford is to only rule out horses drawn 13 or 14. Hence for most races that means I would not be put off by any draw position. Indeed, as the A/E indices showed there is probably value looking higher than lower. [In fact, run style is arguably much more material at this course and distance - see this article (from late 2021), partially replicated below.

Kempton 6f

Traditionally this range at Kempton has produced the strongest and most consistent draw bias on the AW. For years low draws have held sway. There is a similarly strong bias over 5f, but qualifying races are rare with only three in the past three years (that trio were won by horses drawn 1, 1 and 2). Let us look at the win percentage splits for each third of the draw going back to 2017:

Low draws have won 46.5% of all races which is the biggest percentage for any all-weather course and distance combination using the 8+ runner handicaps condition. Additionally, the number of races during this time frame was 400 so a strong sample size. Backing horses drawn 3 or 4 would have yielded a profit to BSP of 10p in the £. In terms of Percentage of Rivals Beaten (PRB) these figure correlate positively showing that clear edge to lower drawn runners:

The low to high comparison of 0.57 to 0.42 further illustrates the strength of this bias. From a punting perspective low draws offer the best value as well, with an A/E index of 0.93 compared with 0.88 for middle draws and a lowly 0.68 for high.

Earlier I discussed a Nick Mordin idea of grouping data in yearly batches to give more accurate comparisons over different time frames / years. As I did with Chelmsford over 5f earlier, here are the four-year win percentages over 6f at Kempton for the lowest third of the draw using this grouping method:

As can be seen this bias has remained consistently strong over the whole of the eight-year time frame. I also used this idea for the PRBs, across all three sections of the draw, and we see excellent consistency once more.

Before moving on, it should be noted once more that the low draw bias increases as field size increases. The maximum field size is 12 and looking solely at races contested by 11 or 12 runners, the lowest third of the draw won more than half (52.2%) of the races with a PRB of 0.59; the highest third won just a sixth of the time with a PRB of 0.41.

Wolverhampton 5f

The fourth and final course/distance combination takes us to Wolverhampton and their minimum trip. Let's start with a look at the draw splits based on win percentage by third of the draw:

The implication is again of a decent low draw bias, with a repeat of the pattern seen above in terms of the lower the better. The PRB figures correlate positively with the win percentage splits as the graph below illustrates:

All things considered one would much rather be drawn low than high.

Let us now compare 2017-2020 with 2021-2024 rather than the 4-yearly groupings I used earlier. I am doing this for two reasons: one, to mix the article up a bit; and two, to clearly highlight the more recent struggles of higher draws. This would have been shown using the earlier Mordin method, too, just so readers know I’m not moving the goalposts in any way:

The chart illustrates how higher draws have diminished nearly 8% in terms of win success across the two four-yearly time frames. This is quite a steep decline but it is not easy to understand why. One reason may be because the average price of the highest three drawn runners has been slightly higher in the 2021-2024 period compared with 2017-2020. However, the average price difference is negligible really and it could be a 'self-fulfilling prophecy' due to this bias being subsumed in the market, so perhaps something else is going on. Maybe it is down to statistical variance? It is impossible to say.

My final graph this week shows the win success rate of each individual stall / draw position at Wolverhampton over 5f.

This presents a clear indication that stall 4 is probably the cut-off point for top bias. In fact, if you had backed stalls 1, 2, 3 and 4 blind over the eight-year review period you would have ended up with a profit to BSP of £102.79 to £1 level stakes. This equates to a 7p in the £ return.

Summary

To conclude, the draw biases shown have been highly consistent especially in terms of the strongest stall positions which, in each case, has been the lowest drawn third.

Wolverhampton 5f has been less consistent with its high draw data, but overall, the draw biases at these four track/range combos have virtually remained the same throughout the eight-year period. In addition, there is no reason to suggest this might change any time soon (although markets are likely to eventually further cotton on and adjust prices accordingly).

Finally, and the most important thing from a punter’s perspective, low draws continue to offer the best value at each of Chelmsford 5f, Kempton 6f and Wolverhampton 5f, while fielding against the bias with higher draws over 6f at Chelmsford - especially with runners capable of a forward run style - looks the way to go.

Until next week.

- DR

Seeking Future Profit from Last Day P’s

10 December 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

Did you know that over 9% of National Hunt runners in the UK are pulled up? That equates to 15,000 horses when looking at a UK National Hunt data set covering the period from 1st Jan 2019 to 30th November 2024, writes Dave Renham.

In this article I am going to see if any patterns emerge from horses that return to the track in a National Hunt race having been pulled up on their most recent start. Profits/losses will be quoted to Betfair SP (BSP).

In this article:

Pulled Up LTO by Race Code

Firstly, let us look at the race type last time out (LTO) comparing hurdle races with chases. [It should be noted that 93 horses were pulled up in NH flat races (bumpers) LTO of which only three went on to win next time (SR 3.3%). That small subset of runners lost a whopping 75p in the £ to BSP].

Onto the LTO hurdle races versus LTO chases splits:

We need to be careful when looking at raw stats like this, especially if majoring on the profit and loss column. Profits can be easily skewed using BSP as there are occasionally huge prices winning. This can often totally change the bottom line. Hence, I thought it would be prudent to use a price cap on the pulled-up runners LTO to offer a fairer comparison. Specifically, I have chosen to narrow the qualifiers only to horses that were returned at an Industry SP of 8/1 on that last day run. That is, they were expected to run well rather than be pulled up.

The change in the splits now is quite noteworthy:

This is quite a change from the first table. Now there are healthy returns for horses that were pulled up when racing over hurdles LTO having been priced 8/1 or shorter in that pulled up contest. Betting all such runners cleared nearly 22p for every £1 bet.

There were still some big priced winners that helped to create those returns but, when focusing on horses that were priced BSP 5.0 or less in this follow-up run yielded an impressive 35% winners for a profit of £22.49 (ROI +12.4%). Therefore, this group of runners still made a profit with their shorter priced qualifiers.

It seems that horses that were pulled up in a hurdle race LTO when having an ISP of 8/1 or less in that specific contest have been good value on their follow-up start. In fact, if we look at this subset of runners that returned to a hurdle race next time the figures are even better:

Not only that, but five of the six years turned a profit to BSP. The graph below shows the yearly return on investment (ROI%) for this group of runners:

I would not necessarily advocate backing such qualifiers ‘blind’ in future but it seems that over this recent time frame it is likely that many/most of these runners have gone off at higher than their true price. Betting is about getting value, and the stats suggest that these runners have offered good value.

Pulled Up LTO by DSLR

I next want to switch attention to days since that last pulled up run (DSLR). I have adjusted the days off track splits to try and give enough runners in each grouping as well as using sensible periodicities. The table includes all race types/LTO race types:

As you may have noticed, I have added a Place% column. This is just to highlight that the 151+ days group had not only the best win strike rate, but the best win & placed SR% too. Sticking with this group all of which were off for around five months or more, as the table indicates they have secured a big profit.

This figure is badly skewed, however, as there were nine 100/1+ winners on Betfair. That said, it should also be noted that to Industry SP this group of runners lost 19p in the £ less than all the other groups combined, making them the best option by some margin. Indeed, if we avoid the really big BSP prices and look at a BSP of 19.0 (18/1) or lower, the 151+ days off group still secured a steady profit of £111.46 (ROI +8.3%).

The other main finding from ‘days since last run’ is the poor returns of the 10 days or less group. They lost nearly 36p for every £1 wagered during the study period.

Pulled Up LTO by Going

Moving on, I would like to examine what effect, if any, the going LTO had. My perception was that we might expect to see more runners being pulled up on heavy ground, so these runners potentially had a 'better' excuse. I looked first at the A/E indices of LTO pulled up horses based on the going LTO. Here are the figures:

As the graph shows, horses that raced on heavy ground LTO ended up clearly being the best value out of the five groups next time. Their figure of 0.97 is close to the magic A/E index of 1.00. I will now share both the Industry SP and the BSP Return on Investment percentages which follow a similar pattern:

Horses pulled up on heavy ground LTO lost just under 11p in the £ to Industry SP, while the other four going descriptions showed far worse returns. When we look at the BSP figures the ‘LTO heavy group’ made a positive return overall:

All this points to the fact that some horses that were pulled up LTO on heavy ground may be worth another chance.

I am sure you have also noticed on these graphs the poor performance of horses that were pulled up LTO on good to firm ground. As you would expect their win to runs record is poor but to be fair there were only 123 qualifiers so a small sample size in comparison. Having said that only two of those 123 went onto win next time!

Pulled Up LTO by Number of Race Non-Completions

My next port of call was to look at something I have never looked at before and that is the number of horses that failed to complete the course LTO in the race that contained any of our pulled up LTO runners. Hence these ‘non-completers’ would include not just horses that may have been pulled up in that race, but those who fell LTO, unseated LTO, and so on.

To be clear, I was still only looking at the next time out results of horses that had been pulled up LTO. Here is what I found:

To explain this table a little further, the ‘1’ group contains pulled up horses LTO that were the only horse in their specific race that failed to complete. I would have expected those figures to be poor, and they are.

As can be seen, once we get to four or more non-completers in a race, the next time out performance of any LTO pulled up runner improves. This makes sense as the more horses that failed to complete a race, the more likely that there may have been an underlying reason why so many failed to finish. Examples I can think of include particularly testing conditions (which correlates with the LTO heavy stats seen earlier), or possibly the race was run too quickly from the start and therefore tiring horses either made late mistakes or just ran out of gas. There will be other reasons but both of the above are logical to me and I’m confident both are valid.

Pulled Up LTO by Trainer

The last main area I want to examine is trainer performance with horses that were pulled up LTO. Trainers with more than 100 qualifiers have been put in the table and I have ordered it alphabetically:

15 trainers in the list made a profit with their LTO pulled up runners to BSP, of which seven almost managed a profit to Industry SP. There are some weird and wonderful profit figures for some – again mainly down to the odd huge price going in.

Of all in the list, Paul Nicholls caught my eye most, mainly due to his excellent strike rate of nearly 19%. He has proved profitable, too, returning just over 13p in the £. If a runner from the Nicholls stable had been pulled up on soft or heavy ground LTO they bounced back well scoring 18 times from 93 (SR 19.4%) for a profit on 'the machine' of £48.67 (ROI +52.3%).

Nicky Henderson’s profit figure has been skewed somewhat by a BSP 84.91 winner, but nevertheless his overall record is very solid. There a couple of Henderson stats worth sharing. Firstly, LTO pulled up Hendo horses running in a chase next time have won 19% of the time compared with a 10.2%-win rate for his hurdlers. Secondly, horses from his yard that were raced on good ground when they were pulled up LTO have gone on to win just four races next time from 69 starts (SR 5.8%).

There are several trainers to avoid it seems including Charlie Longsdon, Sue Smith and Tim Vaughan to name but three.

-------------

Summary

Horses that were pulled up last time out do not win very often on their next start, but this article has highlighted some situations which are better value than most. They include:

1. Horses that were pulled up in a hurdle race LTO when priced 8/1 or shorter next time, again in a hurdle race.

2. Horses returning to the track that were pulled up LTO more than 150 days previously.

3. Horses that were pulled up LTO on heavy ground.

4. Horses that were pulled up LTO when at least three other competitors failed to finish that race (meaning 4+ non-completions in total).

Before closing, I do have a couple of additional stats to share – both strong negatives.

Firstly, horses aged 3 or 4 that were pulled up LTO have a dreadful record when returning to the track. They have won just 3.1% of the time (18 wins from 599 runners) for BSP losses of £261.60 (ROI -43.7%); A/E 0.68.

Secondly, horses that were pulled up over a short NH distance LTO (2m 2f or shorter) have gone on to win just 136 times from 2897 runners (SR 4.7%) for BSP losses of £1006.57 (ROI -34.8%). In fact, the LTO distance does seem to have some relevance because those that were pulled up LTO in races of three miles or more had a SR% of 7.6% and broke even to BSP. Also, if we compare the win & placed % figures we see a marked difference – those pulled up over 2m2f or less LTO have an 'each way' strike rate of 13.8%, whereas those who raced over three miles-plus hit 20.5%.

It's time now for myself to get pulled up; the next piece of research is calling!

- DR

Top Ten All-Weather Front-Running Biases

4 December 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

A few weeks back I looked at some recent run style data in National Hunt racing, writes Dave Renham. You can view part one here and part two here. It has been three years since I last looked at all-weather run style biases so, in this article, I will re-visit that topic and share the top ten front-running biases in terms of course and distance (CD) combinations. Well, my top ten anyway.

Data has been taken from 1st January 2020 to the present day with the focus on UK courses. I have concentrated on handicaps with seven or more runners which gives us a decent sample size for each CD. It should be noted that the surface at Southwell changed at the end of 2021 so for this course I have taken data from that later point.

In this article:

Introduction

Regular readers may skip the next couple of paragraphs to the dashed line, as I explain the terminology and methodology. What we mean by run style is the position a horse takes up early on in the race, normally within the first furlong, which often defines its running preference. geegeez.co.uk has created some powerful resources to look at run style in the Tools tab, as well as an individual race view within the 'Pace' tab on each racecard. The research tools are the Pace Analyser and the Query Tool which Gold subscribers can use to undertake this type of research. Running style is often linked with the word ‘pace’ because the early pace shown by horses in a race determines what position they take up within that first furlong or so. Hence, for many, the words run style and pace are interchangeable.

The stats I am sharing here are based on this site’s pace / run style data. The data on Geegeez is split into four brackets – Led (4), Prominent (3), Mid Division (2) and Held Up (1). The number in brackets is the run style score that is assigned to each bracket.

The numbers are really helpful as they enable us to drill down into them to build a better picture and understanding of how important run style can be. Below is a basic breakdown of which type of horse fits which type of run style profile:

Led – horses that lead early, horses that dispute the early lead. I refer to the early leader as the front-runner.

Prominent – horses that lie up close to the pace just behind the leader(s).

Mid Division – horses that race mid pack or just behind the mid-point.

Held up – horses that are held up at, or near the back of the field.

-----------------

Top Ten All-Weather Run Style Biases

It is time to start the countdown:

10. Kempton 7f

Over 7f at the Sunbury-on-Thames track front-runners have won 56 of the 289 races which equates to 19.4% of the sample. Hold up horses have won one more, giving them a total of 57 winning races (19.7%). However, on average there have been three to four hold up horses in each race (actual average for Kempton 7f = 3.54), whereas front-runners have (led or contested the lead) averaged 1.23 runners per race. This means that an individual front-runner has been nearly three times as likely to win as an individual hold up horse.

Looking at the A/E indices for all four run styles helps to demonstrate the front-running edge:

An A/E index of over 1.00 indicates ‘value’, so 1.25 means front-runners are good value. Hold Up horses, however, at a lowly A/E index of 0.6 have offered very poor value to bettors.

9. Lingfield 6f

Staying in the south we move to Lingfield. Splitting the run style results by A/E indices again, we see similar figures for front-runners and hold up horses at the 6f trip there to those we saw for Kempton’s 7f trip:

Here we have the more traditional run style graph sloping down from left to right when there is a front-running bias ‘in play’. In the graph for Kempton’s 7f, the 'mid-division' figure was higher than the 'prominent' one, which is slightly unusual.

At Lingfield over six furlongs, just over 20% of all races have been won by the front-runner(s). If, pre-race, you had predicted the early leader(s) in every qualifying 6f handicap you would have made a profit to SP of £65.05 to £1 level stakes. This equates to returns of just over 25 pence in the £. Of course, it's not always that simple.

8. Chelmsford 1m

This is only time a mile race distance makes the list. Generally, the shorter the distance the stronger the front-running bias. Chelmsford is the only course to have four different distances in the top ten and is a very strong contender for the most front-runner favouring circuit. Below is a table comparing the wins to runs ratio within each run style group, as well as their each way stats, A/E indices and Impact Values (IVs):

As the table shows, front-runners are clearly best across all metrics. They have won over 16% within their group, which due to the occasional race where two horses vie for the early lead, actually means that 20.6% of all races have been won by these pace setters. The A/E index of 1.30 is the highest we have seen so far.

7. Kempton 6f

Back to Kempton now and the slightly shorter 6f trip. 21.2% of all races over this track and range have been won by the front-runner(s), and if you had backed them pre-race at £1 level stakes using your crystal ball, this would have turned a profit of £99.05 (ROI +30.6%). Compare that with backing all mid-division runners (ROI -36.7%) and/or all hold up performers (ROI -38.7%). If we look at the Impact Values, we see how strong the bias has been.

Front-runners have secured the highest IV to date, winning roughly 1.7 times more often than the average, while prominent runners have also performed well. Indeed, backing all horses that raced prominently would have returned a small 5p in the £ profit. In terms of A/E indices the front-running figure is high again at 1.25, prominent stands at 0.98, with mid div at 0.70 and hold ups at 0.73.

6. Chelmsford 6f

The second Chelmsford distance to hit the top ten is the 6f trip. Below is a graph showing both the A/E indices and the Impact Values for each run style group:

These are the highest figures seen so far for front-runners on both of these two metrics. Also, the hold-up numbers are extremely low in comparison. Front-runners have a significant edge at this trip winning a quarter (25%) of all races. Essentially an individual front-runner has been 3.6 times more likely to win than an individual hold up horse.

Not only are the win stats powerful for front-runners but the each way stats are extremely strong for this CD as well. If able to predict all front-runners’ pre-race one would have made a profit of £80.75 to £1 win bets, equating to returns of just under 30p in the £. Betting front-runners each way, the profit would have stood at a highly impressive £150.93.

5. Wolverhampton 5f

The first and last appearance for Wolverhampton in the top ten is over the minimum trip of five furlongs. Here are the A/E indices over this CD:

This front-running bias is similar to the last two CD combinations but when we look at the potential returns, we will see why I have put it above those two:

Front-runners would have returned close to 50p in the £ to £1 win bets, while prominent runners were close to breaking even. Backing all hold up horses would have lost you a whopping 72p in the £. Going back to front-runners, they have been able to win from any draw position and middle to higher drawn front-runners have been much better value than low drawn front-runners.

In terms of other distances at Wolves, front-runners do have an edge over 6f here at the Midlands track (A/E index 1.19), while over 7f prominent runners have the edge and hold up horses really struggle.

4. Chelmsford 7f

The third entry for Chelmsford, this time over 7f. I have graphed both the A/E indices and the Impact Values for each run style group to help illustrate the strength of the bias:

Strong positive correlation with both lines virtually mirroring each other. Front-runners have provided excellent value, while prominent racers too have edged above the magic 1.00 A/E figure. It is hard to win over this CD when taking up an early position in midfield or further back.

It is also worth sharing some data for Chelmsford 7f when combining the draw with run style. Below is the heat map which was generated from the Draw Analyser on the Geegeez site showing the A/E indices:

Somewhat surprisingly perhaps, the front-runners drawn widest (the high group) have fared exceptionally well and presented far better value than those horses drawn middle to low. The win percentage stats back this up, too:

Nearly 30% of the horses drawn in the top third of the draw have won when they have taken the early lead. These runners have won 16 races from 54, with a further 14 finishing 2nd or 3rd. The long run to the first bend, which gives the whole field a chance to make the lead, may be a factor:

The last stat to share for this CD is that each individual front-runner has been 3.93 times more likely to win than an individual hold up horse. As the heat maps above show this disparity becomes more potent the wider the draw.

3. Southwell 5f

This is the sole appearance for Southwell, and it is a top three entry over their straight 5f track. Let us start by comparing the wins to runs ratio within each run style group:

A very clear bias to front-runners and these figures correlate strongly with the A/E indices as shown below:

The 1.6 value for front-runners is comfortably the highest to date, while the prominent figure is the lowest.

It should be noted that front-running favourites have performed extremely well winning 43.9% of the time, while front-running second favourites are not far behind winning 37%. Compare this with favourites that were held up who have won less than 19% of the time and held up second favourites have won just 7.7% of the time!

2. Chelmsford 5f

The minimum trip at Chelmsford is second on my list but, to be fair, the top two CD combinations could have been reversed. To begin with let me compare the A/E indices and the Impact Values for each run style group:

The A/E index for front-runners is huge hitting just under 1.7, while prominent runners have also performed very well. Indeed, if you had backed horses from both run style groups pre-race you would have seen returns of 46p in the £ for front-runners and 18p in the £ for prominent racers. Meanwhile midfield runners lost 36p in the £ and hold-ups 42p.

In terms of Percentage of Rivals Beaten (PRB), front-runners stand at a huge 0.67 (67% of rivals beaten), whereas hold up horses are down on just 0.40. Finally, front-runners that were in single figures (SP 9/1 or less) won 39 races from 109 (SR 35.8%), whereas those priced in double figures (SP 10/1 or more) won just one race from 58 (SR 1.7%). Clearly front-runners that have started in single figures in the betting have offered punters enormous value over the past five years.

1. Lingfield 5f

Top of the tree (just) is the 5f distance at Lingfield. The A/E indices show that front-runners have offered better value here than at any other CD:

If pre-race you had predicted the front-runner or front-runners in every qualifying 5f handicap you would have made a hefty profit to SP of £128.03 to £1 level stakes. This equates to returns of 86 pence in the £! All the profits/returns quoted in this article have been calculated to Industry SP, so just imagine what the Betfair SPs would have paid.

Finally, I want to share some draw data for this CD when combining the draw with run style. Below is the heat map showing the PRBs – again this can generated by using the Draw Analyser - available to both Gold and Lite subscribers - on the Geegeez site:

Front-runners drawn middle to high have ridiculously high PRBs above 0.70. In contrast, hold up horses have very poor PRB figures regardless of draw position.

--------------------------

Conclusion

The positions in the top ten for each course and distance are, to some degree, subjective and there are few ‘next door’ positions that could easily have been placed the other way around. However, regardless of whether my order is 'correct' or not, what is clear, is that these ten combinations give front-runners a strong edge. Conversely, hold up horses are always at a serious disadvantage. The flat racing pattern that we have seen before, where the shorter the distance the better for front-runners, has been in evidence again here with four of the top five being 5f distances.

Of course, in terms of each individual contest, the run style groupings cannot be calculated until after the race, because before the race we do not know who will lead, who will track the leader, etc. Hence any profit figures or returns quoted can only be calculated after the event also. When quoting the profits / returns in this piece my aim has been to highlight why front-runners are potentially such good value.

As we know, predicting the front-runner is far from an exact science but the pre-race pace/run style figures found on the Geegeez Racecard are a very good starting point. Indeed, just for fun I have started to check some results of the top-rated pace/run style runners at Chelmsford in 5f handicaps. Currently I have back checked the last 63 races, which covers two years, of which the top-rated horse has won 11 times from 67 for an SP profit of £11.28 (ROI +16.8%). An encouraging start.

For the eagle-eyed amongst you, the reason there have been 67 top rated runners in 63 races is because in a handful of races there were joint top-rated runners and hence both were included. Perhaps even more exciting is that, if you had placed a £1 reverse straight forecast on the top two rated runners over these 67 races, you would have had six winning bets securing a profit of £106.26. Betting the Exacta instead would have been even more successful hitting a profit around the £150 mark. This type of research is labour intensive as one needs to check one race at a time, but over the next few weeks and months I plan to slowly trawl through more all-weather track/trip combinations to see whether a profit can be made using the racecard pace/run style figures.

Until next time...

- DR

Post Script: Using Pace on Geegeez

In support of Dave's excellent article, I've (Matt) recorded a short video to illustrate different ways you can see which horses are likely to lead over these potent track/trip combo's.

And a reminder that our Winter Special offer - big discounts on both Lite and Gold subscriptions - closes tomorrow (Thursday). So go here now if that's of interest.

- Matt

National Hunt Racing Systems for 2024/25

27 November 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

One approach to betting on the horses is to use systems, writes Dave Renham. Some punters are drawn to racing systems because once developed they are straightforward and easy to implement. No burning the midnight oil studying the form which can definitely be seen as a plus.

In this article:

Introduction

Most use a methodical approach, sticking to a rigid set of rules, and essentially users back whatever the system or systems suggest without any further thoughts. They are not swayed by the fact that the trainer may not have had a winner for a month, or that the jockey booked has not ridden a winner for the stable this year; they have a selection via their system and that is good enough. These users put their money on and have the rest of the day to themselves.

Geegeez Gold subscribers can create and then test certain systems using the Query Tool, and once a system that looks promising enough to follow is identified, it can be saved as a 'Query Tool Angle' – this means any qualifiers will appear on the racecard and in the member's personal QT Angles Report, only visible to them.

At this juncture it is worth remembering that not all people are fans of using systems. Some will say that systems lack flexibility and that they rarely perform as well ‘live’ as they do in testing. Non-system punters also believe that profitable systems have a limited shelf life and, more often than not, they are right. A perennial problem for system punters is that determining the likely shelf life of a system is virtually impossible. Horse racing and the betting market are continually changing and hence certain systems that have been profitable in the past at some point start to lose their value edge, and eventually start making losses. One of the main reasons this occurs is that the betting market adjusts, so although the strike rate essentially stays the same the prices on offer contract (shorten) and the profit margin disappears.

Therefore, as a system punter one cannot sit back on one's laurels once a collection of ‘winning’ systems has been created. We need to be constantly monitoring our results over the short, medium and long term to see whether that system should continue to be used. I wonder though, how many system punters do keep abreast in this way? It would be interesting to know.

Personally, I do not use such an archetypal system approach. I use ‘systems’ in a broader sense to create shortlists for specific races. I look for a group of rules or parameters that gives me maybe four or five horses to focus on rather than just one. It is a more general approach that works for me, closer perhaps to patterns than systems. It is far from the only betting strategy I use but it is the closest I get to using systems.

For this article I have concentrated on National Hunt racing in the UK from 1st January 2016 to 17th November 2024. I will share with you some systems that would have proved profitable to Betfair SP during this time frame. I also will share Irish data where appropriate.

System 1 – "Back so soon?"

Quick returning Last Time Out (LTO) winners

When, back in the 90s, I first looked at systems horses that returned to the track quickly (within a few days) generally performed above the expectations of punters and bookmakers alike. Maybe there was some prejudice at the time in terms of thinking that the horse had not had long enough to recover from its recent exertions. We now know that some horses actually thrive when returned to the racecourse quickly. So, onto the system:

1. Won LTO

2. Last race was 5 days ago or less

That’s it! Just the two rules. Generally, the fewer the rules the better in terms of systems. Too many rules can mean you can fall into the dreaded back-fitting trap.

Here are the overall results:

This ultra-simple system has produced a very impressive strike rate of close to 47%, especially when you consider all LTO winners in NH racing win on average only 21% of the time. Below I have graphed by year the win and each way (win & placed) strike rates for this system:

As you can see the win SR% has been over 40% in all but one of the years, while the each way SR% has been above 63% in every year bar one.

In terms of yearly returns to BSP, six of the nine years proved profitable with one break-even year and two losing years. The same yearly profit spread occurred if betting to SP, it’s just that the profits were slightly smaller each year. Finally, horses that started as clear favourite have produced 173 wins from 312 (SR 55.5%) for a BSP profit of £47.89 (ROI +15.4%).

Checking the Irish results now we see an overall profit has been made also:

Don’t be put off by the lower strike rate as the average number of runners in races in Ireland has been much higher than in the UK. In fact, Irish races involving these quick returners have averaged four runners per race more than their UK counterparts (12.6 versus 8.6). The ROI% for Irish and UK runners has been very similar and, all in all, it seems that quick returners continue to deliver both sides of the pond.

Combining the UK and Irish results gives us:

System 2 – "The Lightly Baked Baguette"

Inexperienced French-bred chasers

Breeding in terms of the country origin of the horse can give punters an edge if they have done their research. This system utilises the fact that French-bred (French bread, baguette, geddit?!) runners seem to take well to jumping the larger obstacles early in their chasing careers. Here is the system:

1. French-bred runners

2. Non-handicap chases only

3. First or second run in a chase

4. SP 4/1 or less

French bred chasers seem to mature quickly and take to these larger obstacles better, certainly when you compare them to the other two main countries of breeding namely GB and Ireland. Here is the profit and loss table:

The high strike rate means consistent results overall – the longest losing run has been just eight. Five of the nine years proved profitable, two broke even, while two showed small losses.

As with the first system I checked the Irish results over this time frame, and they too turned a small profit from a slightly bigger data set:

These figures are a smidge below the UK ones, but they still correlate well. Combining results from both the UK and Ireland we get:

Now, GB- and Irish-bred runners restricted to the same system rules have won 34% of the time (34.2% for GB, 34% for Irish) so that's quite a significant differential to the 42% for French-breds. The domestic product have also made losses of over 4% combined (GB -3.9%, Ire -4.4%) in this context. Finally, the A/E indices come out strongly in the French favour too with their figure standing at 1.03, the GB one at 0.93, and 0.92 for Irish-breds.

If you are a punter that primarily bets horses at shorter prices, this system may be one to consider.

System 3 – "Rested and ready"

The trainer lay off system

Trainer systems are popular be they course based, jockey based, etc. For instance, Trainer Track Stats is one such example.

This system combines three trainers that perform particularly well with chasers returning from a long break. The advantage of a trainer system including three trainers rather than one is that hopefully the ‘journey’ will be smoother, experiencing less ups and downs from month to month, year to year. This is of course assuming that all three trainer results don’t dip at the same time, which can obviously happen. Here is the system:

1. Chases only

2. Horse off track for 180 days or more

3. Trainer: Kim Bailey or David Pipe or Venetia Williams

Let me start by sharing the individual trainer performances with these horses that have effectively been off the track for at least six months.

As you can see, all three have done extremely well with this type of runner from good sample sizes. Williams has had six winning years from nine, Bailey seven, and Pipe a highly impressive eight. Combining their results in one give us the overall system results:

I think anyone would be happy with these results when betting in over 600+ races. It should be noted that profits to Industry SP stand at over £205 and all nine years produced a profit. In terms of BSP, here are the yearly ROI percentages:

This shows the advantage of merging three trainer systems in one. Profits and good ones every year. In terms of A/E indices only one year saw the figure dip under 1.00 indicating what excellent value these runners would have been. For the record there was only one qualifying race in Ireland as these trainers ply their trade in the UK 99.9% of the time.

This trainer system hopefully has ‘legs’ to continue in positive fashion over the next few years.

UPDATE: This system has had five winners from 15 since the article was written, for a profit of £9.79 to BSP (ROI +65.3%). Including an Ascot double for Venetia Williams last Friday and a Haydock double on Saturday. Kim Bailey weighed in at Haydock as well so three from four that day - treble paid over 130-1 SP and 177/1 on Betfair.

System 4 – "Cotswold Champions"

LTO winner at Cheltenham system

This is a system that I first wrote about for another publication back in 2015. At that time, it had been profitable over a number of years going back to 2008, and looking at this more recent data set I see a similar performance. Here are the rules (no surprises based on the system title!):

1. LTO course Cheltenham

2. Won LTO

Here are the results going back to the start of 2016:

Returns are close to 8p in the £ which is positive. Also, it makes total sense to once again check runners in Ireland for this system considering so many Irish runners win at Cheltenham. The good news is that this subset also produced a profit:

Fewer qualifiers but double the ROI%.

Let me combine both UK and Irish results to see how these runners fared overall and on a year-by-year basis:

As can be seen, the yearly results have certainly fluctuated, and if taking out 2021’s excellent returns there would have been a small overall loss incurred. Hence this system could go one way or the other in 2025 and beyond. However, as I stated earlier, it also produced a profit from 2008 to 2015 so has performed solidly over nearly 20 years now.

It should be noted that horses that win at the Cheltenham festival in March are the best group of LTO Cheltenham winners to follow. No surprises there.

System 5 – "Lightweight Winners"

LTO winners carrying bottom weight in handicap hurdles

This is very similar to a system I heard about 25 years ago; that one focused on the weight carried rather than the position in the weights, and followed low weighted LTO winners running in handicap hurdles. From memory the system pinpointed horses carrying 10st 4lb or less.

Anyway, onto the more recent system I want to share with you. Here are the rules:

1. Handicap hurdle races only

2. Won LTO

3. Bottom or joint bottom weight

I should mention that I have taken any jockey allowances / claims into account, so the system is based on the actual weight they are carrying. Here are the UK results going back to the start of 2016:

This looks a promising starting point. Let us look at the BSP Return on Investment percentages by year:

2021 was the only poor year, while four others (2016, 2018, 2022 and 2023) were close to parity, three of those four managing a tiny profit; and there were four very good years.

For fun, I looked at restricting these bottom weighted runners to those carrying 10st 4lb or less (matching the weight criteria of the old system I mentioned above). Doing that would have produced 112 winners from 511 runners (SR 21.9%) for a BSP profit of £134.84 (ROI +26.4%). This additional rule takes out about half of the original qualifiers but has increased the profit. For anyone interested in using this system, whether you add this rule or not is up to you. Some would argue it is back-fitting, but in my defence, I did mention the original system criteria earlier.

Going back to the basic system without adding that weight carried rule, the Irish results have proved profitable also, but the sample size is small:

The lower strike rate is once again down to much bigger average field sizes. The profit is small, but a profit is a profit! It is also worth noting that taking the UK and Irish results individually, both would have secured a small profit to Betfair SP Place betting.

I think some horses sitting at the bottom of the weights in handicaps are under-estimated by the betting public. Perhaps this is why this system has proved profitable in recent years.

Summary

It is time to wind this piece up. As I said at the outset, rigid systems are not really for me but I totally appreciate why many punters use them. The five I have shared in this article have all shown positive results over a recent time frame. The UK results have also been backed up in most cases by Irish racing results lending more credence to the angles.

Of course, as with any article I write, I can only report on past data; there are no guarantees any of these systems will make a profit over the next x number of years. Hopefully they all will – only time will tell.

- DR

A Look at All-Weather Returners

20 November 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

In this article I am looking at some all-weather data going back to 2019 in the UK, writes Dave Renham. At this time of year, the only flat racing in Britain occurs at the six all-weather tracks, these being Chelmsford, Kempton, Lingfield, Newcastle, Southwell and Wolverhampton. The first three named all race on a Polytrack surface, the last three on a Tapeta surface.

In this article:

My initial research for this piece is connected with the last time out all-weather (LTO AW) course that a horse ran and linking it to the course they raced on next time. As you might expect, certain horses tend to stick to one specific AW track. The two most likely reasons for this are either they run better there, or their stable is close to the track in question (or both). I guess trainers with smaller yards have to keep a close eye on costs, and travelling less distance is one way to save money.

All Runners: Surface Same or Different

When thinking about AW runners that have run well LTO, my perception in the past has been that I would rather see a horse running at the same AW track as they raced last time. If the horse switches tracks, then I would prefer them to stick to the same surface (e.g. Polytrack to Polytrack or Tapeta to Tapeta). If a horse did not run particularly well LTO then any switch of track or surface could be seen to be a potential positive. Thinking about this now, I realise that I have not crunched any data comparing the LTO AW course to current AW course, so my starting point is to look at just that.

Let me begin by comparing all runners between the LTO AW course to today's AW course. It should be noted that for any data connected with Southwell, I have used only runs on the new Tapeta surface which was first deployed at the end of 2021. It made no sense to include previous fibresand results.

The table below displays win strike rates, ROI percentages (to both Industry Starting Price, SP, and Betfair Starting Price, BSP), as well as Actual vs Expected (A/E) indices. I have colour coded some of the A/E indices – those in green are deemed positive (0.95 or above), those in red deemed negative (0.79 or below):

The vast majority of LTO course to ‘this time’ course stats seem much of a muchness. However, the five A/E ‘positives’ each have one thing in common – these paired courses all have different surfaces:

I concede I was not expecting this. In terms of strong positives, I would have expected to see the two courses in question either being the same course, or at least having the same surface.

Sticking with Newcastle as the LTO course, the data seem to suggest that horses perform better next time when switching to race on Polytrack. Indeed, here are the exact splits for this:

There is quite strong evidence here highlighting that if a horse ran at Newcastle LTO, one would much prefer to see it switch surfaces next time to race at one of the three Polytrack courses (Chelmsford, Kempton, Lingfield).

Let’s now compare the A/E indices of the other five courses in terms of LTO course to the today's surface and see if a surface switch is also preferable:

As an example, the first bar represents a run at Chelmsford last time and racing on Polytrack next; second is Chelmsford runners moving to Tapeta next time; and so on.

Chelmsford (Polytrack 0.83/Tapeta 0.82) and Wolverhampton (Polytrack 0.82/Tapeta 0.83) have very similar A/E figures indicating that the next time surface makes little or no difference from a value standpoint.

However, the other three tracks have slightly bigger differentials seemingly in favour of a surface switch. This is especially true for LTO runners at Southwell. This cohort, when switching surfaces to Polytrack, has produced an A/E index of 0.91 compared to 0.84 for those remaining on Tapeta. That is not quite as potent as the figures shared earlier for Newcastle, but the differences are noteworthy given the data analysed covers thousands of races.

The overall data shared to date points firmly to the fact that a surface switch offers punters better value. This has especially been the case for horses that raced at either Newcastle or Southwell LTO.

LTO Winners: Surface Same or Different

So far, I have only looked at general cases connected with all runners. But what if we restrict the research only to LTO winners? The table below has the same columns as in section one, showing win SR%, A/E indices and returns to SP and BSP. Again, I have highlighted positive and negative A/E indices – green for positive, red for negative.

Nine of the LTO to 'today' course combinations have seen LTO winners show a profit to SP; this increases to 18 when using BSP.

Looking at the negatives we see that Southwell to Chelmsford and vice versa have both produced poor results for LTO winners. This may be worth noting.

Staying with A/E indices, here are the ten ‘positives’ (0.95 or higher) grouped together:

Again, perhaps surprisingly, nine of these ten ‘positives’ involve a surface switch. In fact, if we lump together all the results of LTO AW winners, comparing horses that have switched surfaces with those that did not, we get the following results:

All the evidence is pointing to the fact that LTO AW winners that switched surface are by far the best value and also are more likely to win compared with those that haven’t switched.

Looking at the least experienced LTO winners, two-year-olds (2yos), we can see that a surface switch (regardless of which way round) is an extremely strong positive when comparing the returns to SP and BSP:

These numbers show that 2yos that won LTO on the all-weather were far better on the wallet when switching surfaces from their last run to this one. In terms of win strike rates 2yos switching surfaces won 28.3% of the time, with those racing on the same surface having won 26.9% of the time. These SR%s are quite close together, so I am thinking it is not solely the 1.4% difference in strike rates that has affected the bottom lines. My guess is that it is also due to the fact that the market has been slightly blind, offering bigger prices on these inexperienced LTO winners when they switch surface.

Surface Same or Different: Trainers

I now want to look at a handful of trainers who seem to have strong patterns when it comes to comparing the LTO course surface with the course surface next time.

George Boughey

George Boughey’s runners seem to have performed better on a Tapeta surface than on Polytrack. In fact, looking at his runners on the sand since 2019 (regardless of whether they ran on the AW LTO) he has shown a blind profit to BSP at all three Tapeta courses (Newcastle, Southwell, Wolverhampton). I want to compare his record with horses that raced on Polytrack LTO and are racing on it again next time, with those that ran on Tapeta LTO and stick to Tapeta in their follow-up run. Here are the splits:

The differences are stark and the ‘betting angle’ is clear. Boughey horses staying on a Tapeta surface require very close scrutiny. Profits have been made ‘blind’ to SP; to BSP the profit stands at £50.10 (ROI +22.7%). Those returning to a Polytrack surface look best avoided. Here are some additional Boughey stats worth sharing:

1. Horses that have started favourite racing on a Polytrack surface having raced LTO on the same surface have won 9 of their 35 starts (SR 25.7%) for losses to SP of £16.07 (ROI -45.9%)

2. Horses that have started favourite racing on a Tapeta surface having raced LTO on the same surface have won 25 races from 62 (SR 40.3%) for a small SP profit of £1.67 (ROI +2.7%); to BSP this improves to +£10.54 (ROI +17%)

3. Boughey 2yos racing on a Tapeta surface having raced on Tapeta LTO have won 14 races from 50 runners (SR 28%) for a profit to SP of £24.73 (ROI +49.5%); to BSP the figures read +£32.31 (ROI + 64.6%). Compare this to his 2yos going from Polytrack LTO to Polytrack this time – these figures read a dismal 6 wins from 53 (SR 11.3%) for an SP loss of £40.97 (ROI -77.3%)

Charlie Johnston

Charlie Johnston has only been training on his own for a couple of years, but he runs plenty of horses on the AW, so we have sufficient data to crunch. Johnston has been the reverse of Boughey when it comes to Tapeta LTO to Tapeta this time runners. He has really struggled with these horses. Of the 159 qualifiers only 14 have won (SR 8.8%) for an SP loss of £41.10 (ROI -25.9%). The loss figures would have looked much worse but for one of his winners that scored at a very unexpected 40/1. He has saddled 24 favourites with this profile and only two have won for a whopping 82p in the £ loss to SP. His second favourites have fared little better winning three from 21, losing 44p in the £.

Compare this to a near 19% strike rate with Johnston horses racing on a Polytrack surface having raced on Polytrack LTO. Backing all runners blind to BSP in this scenario would have seen one break even. Backing favourites and second favourites combined with this profile yielded excellent results unlike their Tapeta/Tapeta counterparts. These runners have scored 16 times from 46 (SR 34.8%) for an SP profit of £8.36 (ROI +18.2%).

David O’Meara

O’Meara has a good record with horses racing on a Polytrack surface having raced on Polytrack LTO. 153 horses have tried, of which 28 have won (SR 18.3%) for a profit of £30.12 to SP (ROI +19.7%). To BSP this improves to +£60.66 (ROI +39.7%).

Horses switching from Polytrack to Tapeta though have been only half as successful from a win perspective, passing the post first just 9.7% of the time (17 wins from 176). It should also be noted that horses making this surface switch for O’Meara, and which started in the top three of the betting, have incurred SP losses of over 24p in the £. In addition, horses that finished first or second LTO on Polytrack before switching to Tapeta next time have won just four times from 46 attempts.

---------------------

Concluding Thoughts

When researching huge data sets like I have for the majority of this article, the good news is we can have a fair degree of confidence with the results that are found. As a general rule, this research seems to suggest that a switch of AW surfaces from LTO run to today's run is preferable, especially when we are talking about betting value. It certainly should not be viewed as a negative. For LTO winners and especially LTO 2yo winners, a surface switch does seem a real positive. The figures shared here for both look strong and clear-cut, showing positive correlation.

So, does this mean I’ll be lumping on surface switchers this winter? No, of course not, but I will take a much keener interest in such runners than I have done in the past. Another thing this research has done is open my eyes to how punters, like me, can be blinkered in their thinking. In the third paragraph of this article, I said,

‘When thinking about AW runners that have run well LTO, my perception in the past has been that I would rather see a horse running at the same AW track as they raced last time. If the horse switches tracks, then I would prefer them to stick to the same surface (eg. Polytrack to Polytrack or Tapeta to Tapeta). If a horse has not run that well LTO then any switch of track or surface could be seen to be a positive.’

As a mathematician by trade I am a logical thinker, so what I wrote earlier made perfect sense. Well, it did at the time! Now I have researched this area I can see that, according to this recent data at least, my perception was an inaccurate one.

This process has also demonstrated to me that as punters we should be evolving and always trying to get better. If we stand still, we will fall behind the crowd. Every day is a school day!

- DR

Hat Trick (Plus) Seekers in NH Racing

13 November 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

Some horses are better, or better handicapped, than others and, as a result, have been able to run up winning sequences, writes Dave Renham. In this article I will uncover some profitable angles in relation to horses that have won at least their most recent two races; that is, which are chasing a hat-trick, four-timer, five-timer or more.

In this article:

The focus will be horses bidding for a hat-trick plus specifically in the National Hunt sphere. I have taken data from 1st Jan 2017 to the present day (end of October 2024) for UK National Hunt racing. Profit/losses in all tables/graphs is calculated to Industry Starting Price, but I will quote Betfair SP where appropriate.

All NH Hat-trick+ Seekers

Let me begin by looking at the starting base figures of ALL horses trying to complete a third win in a row:

As might be expected, we see a strong win rate of close to one in every four starts, but losses to SP stand at over 13 pence in the £. To BSP this improves considerably but losses still exceed 4p in the £. Here is how that breaks down on an annual basis:

The results have been a little better in the last three years, but it is unclear whether this a trend or simply an anomaly. My suspicion is that it is the latter.

So, what about the type of NH contest - Chase, hurdle, or bumper (NH Flat)? Let’s see the splits:

Hat-trick+ seekers in bumpers have seen the best returns (close to parity) but in truth the sample size is modest. The chase and hurdle figures are similar to each other, with perhaps hat-trick+ seeking hurdlers a marginally better proposition than chasers.

NH Hat-Trick+ Seekers by Race Class

I want to examine class of race next. Below is a graph looking at the class of race these hat-trick+ seekers ran in comparing their win strike rates within each class:

This is interesting – from a win perspective at least it seems much harder to win in the two highest classes of race (Class 1 and 2), which stands to reason given horses have likely progressed from lesser contests. Below is a chart illustrating return on investment (ROI) by race class:

We see positive correlation between the ROI%s and the win strike rates, with hat-trick+ seekers racing in Class 1 and Class 2 events providing the worst value to punters. It should be noted that there have only been a handful of Class 6 races in comparison to the other five classes so we should not get too carried away with the 18p in the £ returns. Having said that, I did back check hat-trick seekers in Class 6 events between the years 2009 and 2016 and they proved profitable to SP in that time frame with an even better win strike rate of 43%. However, since 2018 NH racing no longer has Class 6 events except for some hunter chases.

If we focus on handicap hurdle races at Class 5 level, the lowest grade, hat-trick+ seekers have won 85 times from 253 qualifiers (SR 33.6%) for an SP profit of £15.33 (ROI +6.1%); to BSP +£37.76 (ROI +14.9%). [And once from one run since the research was completed, a 3/1 scorer at Chepstow on 6th November]

The Betting Market for NH Hat-Trick+ Seekers

The betting market is my next port of call. Below are the SP results for different price groupings:

The best returns - as is usually the case - have come from shorter priced runners (6/4 or less) and to BSP, losses for these runners stand at 1.7%, not far from break-even. The 17/2 to 12/1 group have offered the poorest value and even losses to BSP have been quite steep at 18p in the £ (-18.2% to be exact).

Horses priced 14/1 or bigger win rarely but they have proved profitable to BSP (+£160.38; ROI +24.8%). This has not been due to any ridiculously priced winners: it is basically down to 14/1, 16/1, 20/1 winners paying much more on the Betfair machine.

NH Hat-Trick+ Seekers by Days Since Last Run (DSLR)

I wanted to next check the data for days since last run (DSLR) which of course was a winning run. Here are the findings:

Horses returning to the track within two weeks have made a small profit to SP. Indeed, to BSP horses off the track for 14 days or less produced a tidy profit of £108.33 (ROI +14.4%). In addition to this, these horses have been quite consistent over the years, with their yearly strike rate always exceeding 30% and five of the eight years proving profitable to BSP. If we look at their yearly A/E indices we can see that six of the eight years saw a figure above 1.00, indicating value. Only 2021 saw a modest A/E index:

I have added a trendline (dotted) which helps further to show the consistency. It seems that hat-trick+ seekers returning to the track within a fortnight have offered punters good value in the recent past and perhaps this is an area we can exploit this winter.

NH Hat-Trick+ Seekers by Trainer

It’s time to look at trainers now. Which handlers are most adept at finding that good opportunity for their charge to continue a sequence of two or more wins? Here are the trainers with at least 50 qualifiers (ordered alphabetically):

Oliver Greenall & Josh Guerriero, Alan King, Neil Mulholland and Nigel Twiston-Davies look to be four stables to avoid in this context; their strike rates as well as returns are lower than their peers in this cohort. Below are some highlights from a few of these trainers, with some positive angles but also some negatives, too.

Kim Bailey – has a virtually identical record with his hat-trick+ seekers in handicap and non-handicap races:

The profits to BSP for non-handicaps reads +£13.34 (ROI +32.5%) and in handicaps it is +£12.53 (ROI +29.8%). His record in chases is much better than over hurdles with 16 wins from 40 (SR 40%) for a profit to SP of £26.57 (ROI +66.4%); to BSP it stands at £33.54 (ROI +83.9%).

Bailey has also done well when his runners have been fancied – horses starting either favourite or second favourite have combined to win 25 times from 55 runners (SR 45.5% for a profit to SP of £12.94 (ROI +23.5%). To BSP this improves slightly to +£15.53 (ROI +28.2%). Kim Bailey looks a trainer to keep an eye on.

Nicky Henderson – Nicky Henderson is one of the greats, a fact rarely lost on the market. Steer clear of any hat-trick+ seeker from Seven Barrows racing in a handicap. They have won just eight times from 64 attempts (SR 12.5%) for a loss to SP of £37.68 (ROI -58.9%). To BSP he was only marginally off, and losses remained at over 55p in the £.

Willie Mullins – The majority of Willie’s hat-trick+ seekers looking to complete the trio in the UK raced at the Cheltenham Festival, and they returned the Irish maestro 22p in the £ to SP and 38p in the £ to BSP respectively. He also had a 38% strike rate with horses that had won at Leopardstown last time out, returning 49p in the £ to SP and 58p to BSP.

Fergal O’Brien – O’Brien has made a profit in both handicaps and non-handicaps. He has also made a profit with his bumper runners, hurdlers, and any runner that has started favourite. However, his most eye-catching stat might be his record with fillies and mares as the table below shows:

Returns of over 63p in the £ coupled with a strike rate of over 40% is remarkable. To BSP his profit stands at £42.37 (ROI +81.5%).

Nicky Richards –Richards has excelled outside Class 1 and 2 company. In Class 3 or lower his hat-trick+ seekers have won 35.9% of the time (19 wins from 53) for a profit of £22.49 to SP. This equates to returns of 42p in the £. To BSP the profit climbs considerably to £41.19 (ROI +77.7%). His handicappers have provided all of the profits, with his hurdlers outperforming his chasers.

Dan Skelton – Skelton has a surprisingly poor record with hat-trick+ seekers. Any Skelton qualifier that starts as favourite should be treated with caution. These runners would have lost you 23p in the £ to SP, 19p to BSP. Hat-trick+ seeking chasers are also ones to about which to be wary having lost 43p in the £ to SP, 41p to BSP.

Venetia Williams – Miss Williams has sent out 71 hat-trick+ seekers in chases of which 17 have won (SR 23.9%) for an SP profit of £24.81 (ROI +34.9%); to BSP this improves considerably to +£59.37 (ROI +83.6%). However, before getting too carried away, there was an SP winner of 40/1 that paid over 70 on Betfair in the sample; taking that winner out, Venetia's figures have produced a loss. It always pays to check for skewed data.

Other NH Hat-Trick+ Seeker Pointers

I have looked at most of the key areas but, before closing, there are a couple more findings I would like to share with you. Firstly, I want to look at how far winners won by last time out (LTO) in terms of lengths. When examining these LTO winning margins I found a clear pattern. Let me share the win strike rates first – I’ve split the LTO winning margins into three groups: won by 2 lengths or less; won by over 2 lengths up to and including 5 lengths; won by more than 5 lengths. Here are the splits:

As can be seen the horses that won by further performed best on their next run, from a win percentage perspective at least. But how does that translate to profitability measures?

Horses that won by over 5 lengths LTO not only have more chance of completing the hat-trick, but they provided the best returns by some way: both to SP and BSP.

Secondly, and in my final offering for this article, I want to share the stats for hat-trick+ seekers that are racing at a track where they have a previous course and distance (shown on the racecard as 'CD') win to their name. There were 745 past CD winners of which 234 won (SR 31.4%) for very small losses to SP of £9.18 (ROI -1.2%). To BSP these runners made a profit of £80.75 (ROI +10.8%). Their A/E index stands at very respectable 0.97.

---------------

Summary

Positives

In this article we've seen that some hat-trick+ seekers potentially offer value to punters, especially if backing to BSP (and/or, probably, to early prices with best odds guaranteed).

These include:

horses returning to the track within 14 days
horses that won by more than 5 lengths LTO
handicap hurdlers racing at Class 5 level
previous course and distance winners

Also, there are a few trainers to note positively including:

Kim Bailey
Willie Mullins
Fergal O’Brien
Nicky Richards (Class 3 or lower, handicaps)

Negatives

In terms of negatives, it seems best to ignore hat-trick+ seekers which:

are running in Class 1 or Class 2 events
are priced between 17/2 and 12/1
won by 2 lengths or less LTO

Some trainers look worth swerving in this contextand these include:

Oliver Greenall + Josh Guerriero
Alan King
Neil Mulholland
Nigel Twiston-Davies
Nicky Henderson handicappers
Dan Skelton chasers and/or favourites

So, it is time to wrap this up, and for me I am off to do some digging for my next article. I hope you enjoyed this one.

- DR

Sires on the Sand: All Weather Stallions To Note

5 November 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

It has been a while since I have looked at sire stats so, with the winter all-weather (AW) season just getting underway, I felt now was a good time to revisit this area, writes Dave Renham.

In this article:

Introduction

I know from past experience that certain sires perform better on the all-weather than on turf and vice versa. Other sires have distance preferences, some come to hand early with their two-year-olds, and so on; spotting key sire patterns can therefore help our betting, especially with less exposed runners and those trying a surface (or distance or going) for the first time. My main focus in this piece will be on the racing surface, to try and uncover some patterns rather than look purely for bottom line profits. Obviously, I will share profit and loss data where appropriate, both Industry SP and Betfair SP.

I have looked at UK all-weather data going back to the beginning of 2017, although I have ignored Southwell fibresand results as that surface is defunct now in Britain and Ireland. For the record, the last fibresand race at Southwell was held on 15th August 2021. Since then, specifically the 7th December 2021, they have raced on a tapeta surface.

For those unfamiliar with sire articles, let me briefly offer some background. Sires are the fathers of the respective horses and they generally have some sort of influence on their progeny (offspring). For example, if the sire was originally a sprinter there is a good chance that his progeny will perform better at sprint distances than over, say, marathon trips. Sires also vary in quality which will obviously influence the horse in terms of inherent ability. Some sires, for example, achieve around one win in every five starts with their progeny, others are nearer one win in 20.

Let's now look at some individual sire stats with a view to all-weather racing.

All-Weather Sires

Aclaim

Aclaim had his first runners in 2021 having last raced on the track in 2017. He enjoyed an excellent racing career winning seven of his 15 starts including a Group 1 success in his last ever race. As a three-year-old he raced primarily over 6f, but his two Group wins (as a four-year-old) came over 7f. In his second year as a sire, he landed his first Group 1 success when Cachet won the 1000 Guineas, and already in his fledgling sire career there seem to be some emerging patterns. Firstly, his two- and three-year-olds have performed better over 5f to 7f than they have over further. Secondly, and importantly as far as all-weather racing is concerned, there seems to be a big difference in performance as regards Polytrack versus Tapeta.

The sample size is decent and other metrics correlate with these figures. Firstly, the A/E index sees Aclaim’s Polytrack figure at 1.08, the Tapeta figure is down at 0.83. Secondly, the PRB (Percentage of Rivals Beaten) figures for Aclaim’s Polytrack runners stands at 55.8 with the Tapeta one only 49.2. Aclaim’s current record at Southwell has been particularly poor with just 6 wins and 9 placed runners from 80 runners – the PRB figure is a lowly 41.2.

A comparison I would like to share now is comparing horses that produced a decent performance on Tapeta last time out (LTO). This table contains data for horses that won or finished less than three lengths off the winner on Tapeta last time out, specifically focusing on which surface they raced on next time after that good run on Tapeta:

Those runners switching to Polytrack have done extremely well, albeit from a small sample. The PRB figure helps to give smaller datasets more credence as it stands at a mighty 65.9% of rivals beaten. Those remaining on their seemingly unfavoured AW surface of Tapeta have really struggled to back up that good run.

Another noteworthy difference can be seen when we examine the performance of male horses versus female horses. The win percentage strike rates are in the graph below:

Male runners have outperformed their female counterparts with a strike rate that is nigh on double. As a general rule males win more often than females on the sand, but the overall difference is nowhere near this stark. Also, when we examine Aclaim’s turf gender stats we see that there is only 0.6% between their respective strike rates (male 10.9% v female 10.3%).

Aclaim is a relatively new sire but there seem to be some strong AW patterns that we need to be aware of over the coming months.

Belardo

Belardo won two Group 1s in his racing career - the Dewhurst as a juvenile, and the Lockinge as a four-year-old. As a sire his first runners graced the track in 2020 and he has performed well to date, scoring around once in every eight starts. However, there is a big difference between his record on turf and all-weather, as the table below highlights:

The win-and-place percentages correlate well with the win only percentages, standing at 35.4% for turf runners and just 28.2% for AW runners. Likewise, the A/E indices reflect this disparity, at 1.03 (turf) and 0.75 (AW) respectively. Belardo progeny when starting favourite on the sand have struggled, as one might expect, winning 11 of 55 starts (SR 20%) for hefty losses of 48p in the £ to SP, 45p to BSP.

There is also a difference when it comes to AW surface. Belardo progeny have not enjoyed the Polytrack surface whereas Tapeta win and placed figures are much stronger. The bar chart below illustrates this fact:

There is one important stat to share before moving on and that is when it comes to distance. Belardo runners are much better over further when racing on the AW as the table below shows:

If you are looking to back a Belardo runner this winter, I would focus on distances of 1m2f or more. It should be noted that we see the same distance bias with his progeny on the turf.

Dark Angel

Dark Angel’s life on the racecourse lasted just one year when, as a two-year-old, he won four times including the Group 1 Middle Park Stakes at Newmarket. Dark Angel is now 19 and edging towards the end of his stud career, but his fee remains high at £60,000. Dark Angel progeny seem equally effective on the all-weather and the turf which means we can be hopeful that good turf form for any of his progeny will be replicated on the sand. Indeed, horses that have been previously won and/or been placed on turf and which are now having their first run on the AW have won an impressive 24% of the time. However, backing all 176 qualifiers would not have turned a profit but it does support the earlier comment about being equally effective on both surfaces.

Dark Angel was a speedy juvenile racing primarily over 5f and 6f, and his progeny seem to prefer sprint distances, too. Here are the distance splits for Dark Angel’s runners since 2017 on the sand in terms of win percentage:

Runners over six furlongs or shorter have won twice as often as those trying trips beyond 1m3f. We see a very similar distance pattern on the turf although it is slightly less pronounced.

Dark Angel is known by anyone who uses sire stats in their betting to be a sire whose offspring perform best at sprint trips, but the AW value has been with those racing over 1m½f to 1m 2f. The graph above shows that the win strike rate holds up well, and backing all Dark Angel runners over this distance band would have yielded a profit of £65.38 (ROI +18.3%) to BSP. To SP you would have suffered very small losses but remember this is assuming we are backing all qualifiers blind without any other considerations. The A/E index for this distance group is 0.96 which suggests to me that some of these runners at least have started at value prices, possibly due in part to the prejudice about Dark Angel progeny attempting slightly longer distances. It seems clear to me that Dark Angel progeny have the scope to be effective up to 10f; anything longer and then their lack of stamina does start to come into effect.

Fountain Of Youth

Fountain Of Youth is not a particularly well-known sire, and that may be all the more reason to take note. He has not really fired as a sire just yet, and this especially true on the all-weather. Here are his turf versus AW progeny data:

The BSP profit figures for the turf do not jump out at me as much as the success rate. On the sand progeny of Fountain Of Youth have scored around 2½ times less often than they have done on the turf. Not only that but he has sired some well fancied runners on the sand despite this overall record. 57 horses sired by Fountain Of Youth have run on the AW when positioned in the top three of the betting, but only six have won (SR 10.5%) for SP losses of £31.17 (ROI –54.7%). Even to BSP the figures are dreadful showing a loss of £29.65 (ROI -52.02%). He's a sire to avoid this winter but maybe to keep a closer eye on when the grass action resumes in the spring.

Frankel

The great Frankel should need no introduction. As a racehorse he won 14 races from 14 starts, ten of those were Group 1s. He was definitely one of the greatest ever horses to grace a racetrack. As a sire he has done extremely well to date, his progeny winning over 18% of their races. On the turf his strike rate stands at 18.8%, on the AW a smidge lower at 18.2%. The main reason I wanted to highlight Frankel is the consistency his runners have displayed across the six UK AW tracks. His win strike rate across them varies only by 3.3% between the ‘best’ and the ‘worst’, while five of the six hit over 18%. The graph below shows the splits:

For the record, the lower strike rate at Kempton is mainly down to the fact that when Frankel’s progeny have run there the average field size has been bigger than at the other tracks.

Frankel’s offspring have struggled, however, once they hit the age of six. The table below shows the age stats and there has been a serious drop off once they reach that age:

Focusing in on the age six-plus group, such horses that started in the top three in the betting won just five times from 43 qualifiers (SR 11.6%) for SP losses of 68p in the £ (66p to BSP). I would be very wary of backing Frankel’s runners aged six or older this winter and market confidence would not change my mind.

Before moving on, in terms of distance preference, 1m4f to 1m7f proved the most successful by far on the sand for Frankel progeny. Horses that ran within this distance range, when starting favourite or second favourite, won an impressive 51 times from 113 (SR 45.1%) for an SP profit of £21.60 (ROI +19.1%); to BSP this improves a little to +£29.31 (ROI +25.9%).

Harry Angel

Harry Angel was a top sprinter that won five of his 12 starts comprising two Group 1 successes and three Group 2s. He had his first runners as a sire in 2022 and he has already had eight Group winners across the globe including a Group 1 success in Australia with Tom Kitten.

Let us look at turf flat versus all-weather results for Harry Angel; they make interesting reading:

We can see much stronger figures on the AW and the A/E indices correlate with 1.13 for the sand versus 0.84 for the turf. It should be stressed that it is still early days in his sire career and the gap between the AW and turf numbers may close. However, any horse that has acted on the turf is highly likely to act on the sand. Indeed, horses that finished first or second LTO on the turf, when switched next time to the all-weather, have won 11 of 26 starts (SR 42.3%) for returns of 19p in the £ to SP, 26p to BSP.

I for one will be looking out for horses sired by Harry Angel this winter.

Lethal Force

Lethal Force as a racehorse was a top sprinter winning the Diamond Jubilee Stakes and the July Cup in the same year (2013), both Group 1 status. As a sire he has performed solidly with a win rate of around one in nine, and on the turf his progeny definitely prefer a firmer surface. On good to firm or firmer his win rate improves to one win in seven.

In terms of the all-weather, like Aclaim, Lethal Force offspring seem to prefer Polytrack over Tapeta:

The differences are arguably not as strong as they were for Aclaim, but they seem significant especially considering the big sample size. The PRB figures also favour Polytrack with a 52.6% figure compared to the Tapeta figure of 48.6%. Also, if we focus on runners that started in the top three in the betting, the correlation is positive with the overall splits as follows:

Clearly, fancied horses do better on the Polytrack when it comes to the progeny of this sire.

Another stat worth sharing is that his male and female runners have performed equally well in terms of their AW strike rate. In fact, the females have shaded it (10.9% v 10.7%), and if we compare their A/E indices we see that the fillies and mares have an excellent figure of 0.99; the males are down on 0.81. Female runners have offered good value.

Lethal Force no longer stands as a sire, so make the most of the next couple of years as there will be fewer opportunities thereafter to take advantage of the Polytrack/female edge.

Wahington DC

Washington DC is another sire early in his career, but the initial stats suggest a bias to all-weather racing. Here are the current splits:

As I said previously, it is early days in terms of sire data for Washington DC, but all the positive signs are currently pointing towards the AW. The tapeta record to date is particularly good with 19 wins from 107 (SR 17.8%) for an SP profit of £40.51 (ROI +37.9%); to BSP it stands at an enhanced +£84.28 (ROI +78.8%). It should also be noted that male Washington DC runners on the AW are currently winning twice as often as female runners.

----------------------

Sires In General

To finish this article I'd like to share some general data for a bunch more sires who we should see appearing regularly on the sand this winter. I have published win percentages (Win SR%), each way percentages (win & placed %s) and A/E indices. First let us look at some gender-related stats for each:

Australia, Night of Thunder and Zoustar all see stronger male stats than female stats across the three metrics. Havana Grey is one of two sires where the trend is with female progeny outperforming males across the board, Too Darn Hot being the other. Havana Grey’s female runners have turned a small blind profit to BSP, and their performance has been particularly good on Polytrack, more especially at Lingfield.

Now let’s compare Polytrack with Tapeta stats:

Too Darn Hot is the stand-out in terms of Polytrack outperforming Tapeta across all three metrics. Blue Point progeny seem to have an edge on Tapeta. The remaining sires seem roughly as effective on both surfaces.

Finally, a look at the two-year-old and three-year-old data:

Blue Point’s three-year-olds have stronger stats across the board compared to his juveniles; likewise, Kingman. Invincible Army’s win stats suggest 3yos have completely outshone their younger counterparts but the each way stats imply something nearer parity. Calyx is a young sire, and it looks currently that his 2yos perform exceptionally well. Zoustar has figures that correlate with the fact that his 2yos are better betting propositions than his 3yos.

Sire research is an inexact science, but I hope this piece has given readers some interest and hopefully you will take some useful nuggets away to help your AW betting this winter.

- DR

Statistics for National Hunt Racing in November

29 October 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

The National Hunt season starts to move up a gear as we roll into November, writes Dave Renham. We have the Paddy Power meeting at Cheltenham; the Grand Sefton Chase at Aintree; the Betfair Chase at Haydock featuring the first Grade 1 of the season; the Fighting Fifth Hurdle at Newcastle; the Ascot hurdle, Haldon Gold Cup at Exeter, and on.

In this article:

In this article I will look at November stats and trends for National Hunt racing in the UK going back as far as 2017. Profit and loss has been calculated to Industry Starting Price (SP), but I will quote Betfair Starting Price (BSP) where appropriate.

Betting Performance by Market Rank, November, 2017-2023

Let's start off by looking at the betting market and the returns to SP (ROI%). Below is a graph with an overview of the top market ranks versus the rest:

Favourites lost the least in terms of return on investment, while horses 5th or bigger in the betting have proved very poor value. To BSP, losses for favourite backers would have been only 1.56% so not far from a break-even scenario.

Favourite Performance, by Race Code, November, 2017-2023

Sticking with favourites let us see the splits when it comes to race code. For the record there were 11 races held on the all-weather that were classified as National Hunt Flat races so I have combined these results with the overall NH Flat race numbers:

Favourites in chases proved the best value – an A/E index of 0.97 is close to that magic 1.00 figure. In contrast, favourites in NH Flat races struggled a fair bit. Even at Betfair SP losses were over 12p in the £ (-12.2%). Be wary of any favourite in a NH Flat race in November which finished 2nd or worse LTO. 70 horses have started favourite after this LTO placing of which 18 have won (SR 25.7%) for a loss of £23.70 (ROI -33.9%). Losses to BSP were still steep at £19.51 (ROI -27.8%).

Favourite Performance, by Race Type, November 2017-2023

A look now at handicap market leaders versus non-handicap favs. Here are the splits:

There is quite a difference here: market leaders in handicaps got to within touching distance of a break-even situation and, to BSP, handicap jollies made a small profit during the study period of £61.52 (ROI +2.8%). Both handicap chase favourites and handicap hurdle favourites proved profitable on 'the machine'.

While I’m discussing favourites, it should be noted that of the 30 such horses in Grade 3 races in November only two have won. A small sample for sure, but one to be aware of.

Performance by Last Time Out (LTO) Finishing Position, November, 2017-2023

I want to look at LTO performance next in terms of finishing position. Here are the numbers:

Last day winners were the best of a modest bunch in betting performance terms. Having said that, if betting to BSP, LTO winners only lost 2% of stakes (2p in the £). Sticking with LTO winners, if the horse won LTO when making its seasonal debut - and was thus having its second start of the campaign - such runners recorded a profit at BSP of nearly 5p in the £.

Another LTO winner group worth noting is that of those returning to the track after less than three weeks. This cohort won 90 times from 246 (SR 27.6%) with a small loss to SP of £11.01 (ROI -1.2%), but a profit of £88.87 (ROI +10%) to BSP.

It looks worth almost blindly avoiding LTO runners that fell, were pulled up, or unseated their riders. Their figures are extremely poor (perhaps not surprisingly).

Trainer Performance, November, 2017-2023

Time to look at trainer stats now and below is a table containing the trainers with the top 20 overall win strike rates during November since 2017. This covers all runs in the month and all prices:

Eight of the 20 handlers notched a blind profit to SP, five of which (Greenall / Guerriero, Fergal O’Brien, Twiston-Davies, Venetia Williams and Symonds) were particularly impressive as they did not have big-priced winners skewing their results. The big guns of Nicky Henderson and Paul Nicholls had plenty of success, but neither offered value across their full runner cohort.

As I have mentioned before, we need to be careful sometimes with trainer data as big-priced winners can skew the profit figures. Hence, I have taken trainers in the above table and compared their A/E indices across two price bands – 9/1 or shorter, and 10/1 or bigger. The first graph shows the trainers whose A/E indices are higher with their shorter priced runners:

For this group of trainers, therefore, we can be more trusting in their overall figures. The A/E indices for horses priced 10/1 or bigger are generally poor. Indeed, Messrs. Greenall and Guerriero had no winners from 30 from that group, and Nicky Henderson managed a solitary score from 81 starters.

Most of these trainers have decent A/E indices with their runners priced 9/1 or shorter. Anything 0.95 or higher I would deem as positive and those trainers with that range of A/E index are shown below along with their complete stats for runners priced 9/1 or shorter:

Five of the nine proved to be profitable while the SP losses for Richards and Henderson were small.

Now let me look at the remaining trainers from the original table whose A/E indices are higher with their bigger priced runners:

Kim Bailey, Jimmy Moffatt and Tom Symonds all had decent A/E indices for both groups, whereas the other four trainers - Newland, McCain, Thomas and Thomson - did not. The overall figures for both Thomas and Thomson in the ‘all runs in November’ table showed good profits, but this graph highlights neatly that their figures were skewed. Indeed, the pair enjoyed a winner apiece at 66/1, while Thomson also saddled a 25/1 winner.

Additional Trainer Statistics

Below are some additional trainer stats that could prove useful to follow this November:

1. Paul Nicholls at Wincanton. This was especially so with horses priced 9/1 or shorter. With this cohort he had 30 winners from 79 (SR 38%) for a profit to SP of £16.09 (ROI +20.4%). To BSP it reads +£24.83 (ROI +31.4%).

2. Nicky Henderson runners priced 9/1 or shorter having their second start of the season. This group produced a 30.2% strike rate (35 wins from 116) for a profit of £23.01 (ROI +19.8%). To BSP this improved to £32.24 (ROI +27.8%). Staying with Henderson, his hurdlers at Newbury produced a 31% strike rate and returns to SP of 18p in the £, 27p to BSP.

3. Three trainers have performed particularly well with horses making their seasonal debuts and their results are shown in the table below:

None of the three have had big-priced winners skewing their results so they are worth keeping an eye out for this November.

4. Chris Gordon at Plumpton. Gordon recorded 11 winners from 39 (SR 28.2%) for a profit to SP of £4.68 (ROI +12%); to BSP £10.45 (ROI +26.8%). When his runners were in the first three of the betting the figures improved to 11 wins from 26 (SR 42.3%) for a profit of £17.69 (ROI +68%) to SP; £23.45 (ROI +90.2%) to BSP.

Trainer Performance, 60+ Runners at 9/1 or shorter, November, 2017-2023

Finally in this piece let me share a good chunk of trainer data in one table. Below are the figures for all trainers that have had 60+ runners that have started at an SP of 9/1 or less. Nine of the trainers have had their data displayed above but I have included them here, too, as it makes more sense than to leave them out. The table is ordered by win strike rate:

There are 66 trainers there, so plenty to get your teeth into!

Let’s hope the recent historical data in this piece help to point us in the right direction over the next few weeks. It would be nice to win a bit of extra money with Christmas around the corner!

- DR

Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases: 2024/25 Season Update (Part 2)

21 October 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

This is the second of two articles where I am revisiting run style bias, writes Dave Renham. As with the first piece, which can be read here, the focus is on handicap chases with seven or more runners, and all data has been sourced from UK NH racing between 1st January 2017 and 6th October 2024. I looked mainly at the distances of 2m1f or less and 2m3f-2m4f last time; in this follow up I concentrate on races of 2m5f-2m6f and 2m7f-3m2f.

Before getting into the numbers here is a quick recap of which type of horse fits each run style profile:

Led – horses that lead or dispute the lead early, usually within the first furlong; known as the front runner.

Prominent – horses that race close to pace tracking the leader(s).

Mid Division – horses that race mid pack or just behind the mid-point.

Held up – horses that are held up at, or near the back of the field.

In this article:

Front Runners in UK Handicap Chases (7+ Runners)

Let us begin by comparing the A/E index for the ‘Led’ group (early leaders/front runners) versus the other three groups combined (Prominent, Mid Div, Held Up) across different field sizes for ALL distances.

This graph is illuminating. It clearly shows that the front running edge in handicap chases becomes stronger as the number of runners increases. The Impact Value comparison shows the same trend:

Once we get to 11 or more runners the front running bias becomes extremely potent, strengthening further still as we hit 14+ field sizes.

It’s time now to look at the stats over 2m5f-2m6f.

Run Style in UK Handicap Chases, 2m5f-2m6f (7+ Runners)

My first port of call in terms of this distance band is a comparison of the win strike rates for each run style group. It is important to note that these figures are based, as in the previous article, on the wins to runs ratio within each specific run style group. Here are the splits:

As with the first article we see a bias towards front runners, and a tapering related to early race position thereafter; but at 2m5f-2m6f prominent racers were not far behind front runners. Horses that raced further back early in the race continued though to struggle.

Let me share the A/E indices next:

There is good correlation with the wins to runs ratio here. The 1.15 figure for front runners indicates good value but it is less impressive than the 2m1f or less figure of 1.23, and also the 2m3f-2m4f figure of 1.31. Prominent racers are within 0.01 of the magic 1.00 figure. The held up A/E of 0.63 is low and has offered punters really poor value.

Onto the Impact Values now:

The same sloping pattern can be seen again, displaying good correlation across all three metrics. The 1.5 Impact Value for front runners is, like the A/E number, below the figures achieved at the two shorter distances examined in the first article (1.65/1.75). However, the front running bias is still in evidence, such types winning 50% more than might be expected.

Now I want to examine the individual course run style stats over 2m5f-2m6f. Less than half of the UK NH courses race over this trip so there are only 15 courses to share. Below is a table comparing the wins to runs ratio within each run style group, as well as their A/E indices. As with the first article I have colour coded it to help make the biases clearer. Numbers in green are positive, numbers in red are negative.

Aintree didn’t make the table due to a small sample size of races. Having said that, four of the 14 races were won by front runners and the average field size was 20. Hence, from limited data, front runners at Aintree look to have an edge.

The strongest front running biases from the other tracks appear to be at Cartmel, Kelso, Sedgefield and Taunton. Ffos Las consistently played against front runners at the shorter distances reviewed in part one, and this has again been the case. Front runners have also struggled at Leicester.

Before moving onto the longer distance races let me share the run style figures over 2m5f-2m6f restricted to horses from the top three in the betting. These stats also share potential profit and loss amounts to SP:

This table helps to show the positive correlation between the A/E indices with the ROI column. Horses from the top three in the betting that have taken the lead early have been excellent value and profitable to follow; those that raced midfield or were held up early have been very poor value.

Run Style in UK Handicap Chases, 2m7f-3m2f (7+ Runners)

Once again I’ll start by sharing the strike rates for each group (wins to runs ratio):

Even at longer distances horses that get to the front early have a strong edge. The same pattern across all run styles continues with ‘L’ outcompeting ‘P’ which in turn out outcompetes ‘MD’ with ‘HU’ bottom of the pile once more. Horses that led in handicap chases at this distance range won twice as often as horses that raced in midfield.

The A/E indices are next up:

These indices suggest that the front running bias is stronger for races between 2m7f and 3m2f than it is at those from 2m5f to 2m6f. Indeed, if one had correctly predicted the front runner(s) in each race from 2m7f-3m2f one would have profited to SP to the tune of £842.05 (ROI +31.6%). Finally let me share the Impact Values:

These values confirm how strong the bias is, so now may be a good time to compare the A/E indices and Impact Values for front runners across the four distance bands covered in the two articles:

This confirms the consistently strong figures across the board, with the 2m3f-2m4f distance edging it in terms of having had the strongest bias over the period of study. But there looks to be value and a well above average strike rate at all distances reviewed.

Back to the longer (2m7f-3m2f) distance band and let me share the run style stats when restricting to those horses that were in the top three in the betting only.

Front runners from the top three in the betting have performed extremely well showing how profitable they could have been. Again, we have terrible returns for mid division and held up runners.

It’s time now to look at the 2m7f-3m2f course run style splits looking at wins/runs and A/E indices. The format will be familiar by now:

The courses with the strongest front running biases in this distance bracket have been at Ayr, Cartmel, Catterick, Cheltenham, Chepstow, Exeter, Hereford, Hexham, Ludlow and Musselburgh, while front runners have struggled at Bangor, Carlisle and Haydock.

Overall Front Running Biases in UK Handicap Chases (7+ Runners)

There were eight courses that showed a consistently strong bias across all distances. They were Cheltenham, Doncaster, Exeter, Hexham, Kelso, Musselburgh, Sedgefield and Southwell. Two courses saw front runners at a disadvantage overall, those being Bangor and Ffos Las. The remaining courses offer front runners some sort of edge although its strength varies from track and trip to track and trip.

-------------

Summary

That concludes this two-parter. In summary, since 2017 in handicap chases of 7+ runners, front runners have enjoyed an edge at all distances and at nearly all courses. The strength of the bias has been as strong in 2023 and 2024 as it has ever been so when analysing such races make sure you consider how the race is likely to be run from a run style / pace perspective. I have no doubt it will improve your bottom line.

And, if you're not using the pace maps on this site, you are at a distinct disadvantage to those who are. The maps on geegeez.co.uk are more accurate than any other pace maps I've used, and are worth the subscription fee alone in my opinion.

- DR

Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases: 2024/25 Season Update (Part 1)

15 October 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

It has been three years since I looked at run style bias in National Hunt racing, so I felt now was a good time to revisit the topic, writes Dave Renham. Personally, I use run style bias for around 50% of my National Hunt bets so it is an area that I feel is extremely important. This article is the first of a two-parter.

The focus for both articles will be handicap chases with seven or more runners. Data has been taken from UK NH racing spanning from 1st January 2017 to 6th October 2024. I have split the races into four distance bands – 2m1f or less, 2m3f-2m4f; 2m5f-2m6f and 2m7f-3m2f. In this piece I will concentrate on the two shorter distances of 2m1f or less and 2m3f-2m4f. There is a relatively small number of handicap chases at 2m2f and these have a micro-section below.

As a reminder, geegeez.co.uk offers some powerful resources and the stats I am sharing with you here are based on the site’s pace / run style data, which can be found within individual racecards, a separate Pace Analyser tool, and in the highly configurable Query Tool. The run style data on Geegeez is split into four groups – Led (4), Prominent (3), Mid Division (2) and Held Up (1). The number in brackets is the run style score assigned to each group. Below is a basic breakdown of which type of horse fits which type of run style profile:

Led – horses that lead early, usually within the first furlong or so; or horses that dispute the early lead. The early leader is often referred to as the front runner.

Prominent – horses that lie up close to the pace just behind the leader(s).

Mid Division – horses that race mid pack or just behind the mid-point.

Held up – horses that are held up at, or near, the back of the field.

In this article:

Race Leaders in Handicap Chases

Let me start by comparing the win percentages for the ‘L’ group (early leaders/front runners) versus the other three groups combined (Prominent, Mid Div, Held Up) across all distances by Year:

As the graph indicates front runners have a definite edge when it comes to strike rate. It is important to be aware that the number of runners in each run style group differs: prominent and hold up categories usually have more runners within their groups. 'Leaders' is the smallest group as usually you only get one early leader in this type of race, occasionally two when there is a battle for the early lead.

Hence although raw strike rates have significance, it is may be instructive to look at metrics like Impact Values (IV) and the A/E index (Actual winners/Expected winners). More information on these IV and A/E metrics can be found here.

First here are the A/E index splits by year:

These figures correlate positively with the strike rates. The ‘L’ group of race leaders have recorded consistently high A/E indices ranging from 1.09 to 1.33. The three other run style groups combined have ranged from 0.76 to 0.82. Anything above 1.00 for A/E indices suggests good value so front runners have consistently offered punters good value year in year out. Onto the Impact Value comparison now:

This is to all intents and purposes a carbon copy of the A/E graph. These initial findings already highlight why run style bias is important in handicap chases and something that needs to be factored in to your form study. It is time now to break the stats down into the distance bands as mentioned earlier. Let me start by examining the shorter distance handicap chases.

Handicap Chases of 2m1f or less

To begin with l will share the win strike rates for each group. Note that these figures are based, as before, on the wins to runs ratio within each specific group. Here are the splits:

Based on what we have seen already in this article in terms of the overall stats, these figures should come as no surprise. The ‘led’ group is comfortably clear of the rest in terms of win rates. Thereafter, the graph slopes from left to right implying that the nearer a runner is to the front of the race in the early part the better. We will see this pattern tend to recur across all race distances. Let me share the A/E indices for these shortest distance handicap chases next:

This is another demonstration of how the 'Led' group have offered punters excellent value. 1.23 is a strong A/E index figure on a significant sample size. We again see the sloping pattern from left to right, giving us the correlation statisticians are always looking for. The IV splits complete the set:

There is strong positive correlation once more, emphasizing the edge front runners have over 2m1f or less. Indeed, if you had sourced a crystal ball in perfect working order and been able to predict all the horses that led or contested the lead early in these races you would have secured a huge £1 level stakes profit of £330.21 (ROI +29.9%). This is just to Industry SP; to Betfair SP you could probably double that figure.

Now I want to examine the individual course run style stats over 2m1f or less. Courses that had a handful of qualifying races have not been included. Below is a table comparing the wins to runs ratio within each run style group, as well as their A/E indices. I have colour coded it to help make the biases clearer. Numbers in green are positive, numbers in orange or red are negative.

The strongest front running biases look to be at Cheltenham, Doncaster, Hereford, Hexham, Sedgefield, Southwell and Stratford. Other courses where the bias is still very significant include Cartmel, Huntingdon and Plumpton.

I did a little extra digging into the Cheltenham and Sedgefield run style stats because, as we know, it is all very well having a front running bias, but it is not easy predicting who will lead a race early. Looking at the Cheltenham numbers first, five of the 27 winners were top rated pre-race in the PACE section of the geegeez.co.uk racecards, while 12 of the 27 came from the top three in the pace ratings. If you had backed ‘blind’ the top three pace rated horses in all qualifying races at Cheltenham, you would have made a profit of £29.18 to SP (ROI +36%). Looking at Sedgefield, where there were more qualifying races (44), the top-rated pace horse won 12 times and backing them blind would have secured an SP profit of £16.55 (ROI +37.6%). The second rated pace horse won eight times for a profit of £28.04 (ROI +63.7%). So, 20 of the 44 races were won by one of the top two rated pace horses in the pre-race pace cards. That is extremely impressive going.

Clearly, I have delved more deeply into just two courses and distances as regards analysing the performance of the pre-race pace ratings, but the initial signs are promising. The problem with this type of research is that it is quite time consuming as you can only cross-check one race at a time. However, when I get some time, I will analyse some more.

In terms of courses where front runners ‘under achieve’, these include Carlisle, Ffos Las, Newbury, Sandown, Uttoxeter and Warwick. As punters, it is important to recognise the uniqueness of British horse racing in terms of how different course configurations can be. Courses can be left- or right-handed, sharp or stiff, undulating or flat, while the circumference and shape of each track differs too. Fences are placed in different positions and the length of run ins also varies. Some of these factors may help to strengthen or indeed weaken any front running bias.

Now it is time to switch to the next distance band.

Handicap Chases at 2m2f

Briefly, there were 86 races at this specific distance in the near eight year study period. The breakdown is below and, happily, the pattern is repeated: horses that lead do much the best, though those racing midfield have outperformed prominent runners. Hold up runners have found life difficult.

Of the five qualifying tracks with 7+ runner handicap chases at this specific distance, Kempton was by far the best performing for front runners.

Handicap Chases of 2m3f to 2m4f

I am going to start with this cohort by looking at the strike rates for each run style group as I did before. Keep in mind that these are wins to runs ratios calculated within each group.

These figures mimic closely those for the 2m1f or less distance band. Front runners would have again been a licence to print money should you have been able to predict them pre-race. Backing the front runner during this timeframe, would have made a profit of £548.82 to £1 level stakes (ROI +33.3%).

Onto the A/E indices now:

These numbers suggest the front running bias is stronger than over the shorter distance. Let’s see if the IV figures back up that assertion:

The chart does correlate with the slightly improved A/E indices. To save readers scrolling up and down to compare the two distances, the table below shows these stats in one place to make the comparison easy:

The led and prominent figures are higher for both metrics at the 2m3f-2m4f distance, while the mid div and held up figures are lower. All of this points firmly to an even stronger run style/pace bias to front runners.

Time to examine the individual course data for the 2m3f-2m4f group now, and below is another table comparing the wins to runs ratio within each run style group, as well as their A/E indices. It’s colour coded as before:

It is interesting to see that Cheltenham, Doncaster, Sedgefield and Southwell have strong front running biases again as does Plumpton. Other courses that have displayed a good edge to early leaders include Carlisle, Musselburgh, Perth and Uttoxeter. There are three courses where front runners have been at a disadvantage which were Bangor, Ffos Las and Lingfield. The Ffos Las figures for 2m1f or less were also poor for front runners.

--------------------

And that is where we will leave the first of this two-parter. It will be interesting to see how strong the front running biases are at the two longer distance groups - find out next week! Until then...

- DR

More on Price Movement from Opening Show

30 September 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

A few weeks back I wrote an article, which you can read here, that featured an introduction to patterns of price movement from Opening Show odds (OS) to SP odds, writes Dave Renham. In this piece I want to revisit the topic and expand my research. I have taken data from 2021 to 2024 (up to and including September 21st) for UK flat and all-weather racing and I have used William Hill odds as representative of the general bookmaker community.

As I mentioned in my earlier piece, the OS for most races occurs around 10-15 minutes before the race is due to start. Each horse will have its opening price and then, as money is wagered in that period before the race starts, the odds will fluctuate. Some will shorten, some will drift, and some will either not move or end up back at the same price they started.

In this article:

Price Movement: All Runners

I will begin by sharing the figures for all UK flat/all-weather runners during the study period to see what percentage of these runners shortened in price, lengthened in price, or stayed the same price when comparing their OS to their final Starting Price (SP). There is an extra chunk of data compared to the original article here, but the splits are virtually identical (within 0.2%):

We can use these figures as our baseline when comparing different angles. As can be seen, nearly half of all runners lengthen in price from OS to SP, compared with just under a third that shorten. Around one fifth of all runners end up having the same SP as their OS price.

Original Article Summary

Before moving on let me quickly recap the other main findings from the original article:

1. Horses that shorten in price win roughly 1.7 times more often than horses that lengthen in price.

2. Horses that lengthened in price when their OS was 7.0 (6/1) or less, lost only 1.5% to BSP.

3. Horses with an OS starting point of 18/1 or bigger have lengthened or drifted in price more than half of the time.

4. Horses with an OS of between 100/30 and 13/2 have similar percentages when it comes to shorteners and drifters. All other prices see a big differential as shown in the overall figures (see graph above).

5. The five trainers with the highest win strike rates of the period, namely Charlie Appleby, John & Thady Gosden, William Haggas, Saeed bin Suroor and Roger Varian combined to make a BSP Return on Investment of 5.5% when combining all of their horses that shortened in price from OS to SP.

---------------

Clearly if we can improve our chances of predicting the price movements of horses we are planning to back in the time between OS and the start of the race, then it has the potential to improve our bottom line.

Price Movement by Trainer

My first port of call in this piece is to examine more trainers in detail.

Positive Price Movement by Trainer

To begin with here are the trainers with the highest percentage of runners that have shortened in price between OS and SP:

The top 20 are listed and Jane Chapple-Hyam heads the list. She is one of only two trainers who had more horses that have shortened in price than lengthened, John Gallagher being the other. Focusing on her runners with an opening show price of 9/1 or shorter we get the following splits:

Over 45% of her shorter priced runners hardened in price in the 10-15 minutes before the start of the race. Compare this to the average figure for all trainers with this price stipulation which stands at 37%. That is a noteworthy differential but John Gallagher’s splits see more than 50% of his runners priced at single figures on the opening show shortening in price. His stats are thus:

What is quite bizarre, however, is that the Gallagher runners that drifted in price won more often than those which shortened. Not only that, but the drifters made a tidy BSP return of over 30p in the £; his horses priced 9/1 or less on the opening show that shortened to SP showed a huge loss of 44p in the £ at exchange prices.

All of the other 19 trainers in the above list had the reverse with their shorteners winning more often than their drifters, which is the pattern one might expect based on the overall data. Jane Chapple-Hyam’s performance fitted this far more typical profile, and the results of her shorteners were much more impressive than for those that drifted as the table below shows:

Chapple-Hyam’s horses that shortened also made a small profit to Industry SP. It should be noted that her 159 runners whose price remained the same also made a profit to BSP.

Negative Price Movement by Trainer

Time to look now at those trainers whose horses have drifted / lengthened the most in percentage terms from OS to SP.

As you might expect, most of the trainers on the list are lesser name trainers whose horses tend to operate at the lower end of the ability spectrum. This is reflected in a tendency to saddle bigger priced runners which we know from previous research means they are more inclined to drift than mid- to shorter range priced runners.

There are a couple of additional stats I’d like to share. Firstly, Grace Harris when sending her horses at Wolverhampton has seen 66 of the 99 runners lengthen in price, exactly two-thirds. Secondly, Linda Perratt runs more horses at Ayr than at any other track, but her runners drift in price more often than her average: just under 61% of her Ayr runners drifted in price from OS to SP, and of these 133 runners just five won, showing significant losses. At Hamilton, where Perratt also runs a good proportion of her horses, she sees a similar percentage, 64.3%, drift from OS to SP.

Before moving on from this table of trainers, it is quite a surprise to see George Boughey in this group. It is also interesting to note that his shorter priced runners have similar percentages to his overall ones. Below, there is a graph that shows the percentage splits for runners that were 5/1 or shorter at OS:

Using this OS price stipulation across all trainers sees 43% of runners drift in price. Boughey’s figure is over 10% above this. So why do so many of Boughey’s shorter priced runners drift in price from OS? That is the 66 million-dollar question, I guess; most likely is that they are frequently over-bet earlier in the day, which leads to a correction 'on the show'.

Why Do Horses Drift?

In fact, now is perhaps a good time to discuss some of the reasons why a horse may lengthen in price in the period close to the ‘off’. Firstly, it is partly due to the bookmaker’s overround being slightly bigger on OS compared with the final market overround, in order to defend against a horse which might have been offered at the wrong price - a rick, in the parlance.

Secondly, how a horse behaves before its race can influence the price, normally in an outward direction. For example, horses that sweat up in the paddock or behind the stalls are noted and this tends to be a negative which often pushes the price out. Also, some horses get very agitated in the parade ring and that warning sign tends to see the price start to drift also. Other horses get to the start fine but then become a problem, usually making it difficult for the handlers to load them in the starting stalls. Another factor can be that a horse is difficult to restraint when going to post, expending too much energy before the start. And yet another reason for horses drifting is when a different horse in the same race is well backed. In that scenario and in order to balance the market, bookmakers will ensure that at least one horse, often more, move out in price to compensate.

Why Do Horses Steam?

Horses that are being backed close to the off can be down to a mix of reasons also. One obvious reason is because the owner and/or stable are expecting a very big run from their charge. Another reason for contracting price movements is when a horse is shortened deliberately by the bookmakers because they have 'running on' liabilities from multiple bets should the horse win. A third reason could be paddock demeanour - fitness, behaviour, physical well being and the like. And there will be a few times when it is simply not easy to explain a late market move be it positive or negative.

Price Movement by Owner

I want now to look at a selection of owners and consider the percentage splits for those whose horses have run the most during the study period. I have ordered them by the highest percentage of horses that have shortened in price:

There is a huge difference between Marc Chan at the top and Antony Brittain at the bottom. Chan’s runners do very well when they shorten in price, hitting a strike rate of 29% and producing a profit to SP of £38.77 (ROI +56.2%) and to BSP of £48.65 (ROI +70.5%).

Horses from the Shadwell ownership have also made sound profits when concentrating on their runners that have shortened from OS to SP. Of the 437 such runners 116 have won (SR 26.5%) for a profit to SP of £48.29 (ROI +11.1%). To BSP this improve to profits of £89.39 (ROI +20.5%).

One of the most interesting findings from my point of view is that Godophin’s runners are not that strong in the market. Personally I would be betting a Godolphin runner as late as possible or at BSP if fancying one of them.

Price Movement by Horse Gender

I want to look next at the sex of the horse to see if that makes a difference to the how the price changes from OS to SP. You hear comments especially about younger male horses such as ‘he is acting very coltish’, etc. Hence, I thought it was worth looking at the figures for colts, geldings, fillies and mares.

There are some differences here with fillies drifting in price more than the other three – over 50% of all fillies have drifted in price. Is this partly down to their behaviour / composure in the paddock, going down to post and behind the starting stalls? I’m not an expert in animal behaviour so I cannot say, but it definitely gives food for thought.

Price Movement in Selected Horses

Finally let us look at some individual horses – I have chosen to share the data for just over 50 horses currently in training. The ones in green are horses that are often backed and hence tend to shorten more from OS to SP; those in red tend to lengthen in price most of the time. The number of qualifying runs in 2021-2024 must have been 30+ to make the list:

Given how frequently these horses run it is no surprise that there are familiar names in the list including sprinter Summerghand. It may be interesting to note that he is rarely backed late and has drifted from opening show to starting price in nearly 60% of his races. My personal plan is to dig deeper into each horse in the table to see if I can find logical reasons why their stats are as they are. What those are could be down to one key factor, or a group of factors; it might be horse behaviour pre-race, or linked to trainers or owners, or perhaps due to the price range the horse goes off at. I think there are likely to be reasons why the stats for each horse are as they are because they are all far from the ‘norm’ at either end of the % splits spectrum.

That's all for this second helping of price movement from opening show to the off. I hope it has given you some further insights into how the market may shape up in those last few minutes before the start of the race.

- DR

A Study of Owners in UK Flat Racing, Part 2

24 September 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

This is the second of a two part series looking at some owner data for UK flat horse racing, writes Dave Renham. The period of study covers 1st January 2019 to 8th September 2024. Profit and loss figures have been calculated to Industry Starting Price (ISP), but I will quote Betfair SP (BSP) when appropriate.

In the first piece I shared data for the major owners who had the top 25 strike rates during this time frame and drilled into three - the Godolphin operation, Shadwell Estate and Cheveley Park Stud. To begin with in this piece, I will review the man with the second-best strike rate overall.

In this article:

Mark Chan

Backing Marc Chan-owned horses in Britain during the study period has returned a tidy profit to SP of £34.12 (ROI +20.1%) with a strike rate close to one win in every four. Chan, a Hong Kong businessman, has a small but select group of horses that race in the UK. Initially, he owned and raced horses solely in Hong Kong, however in more recent years he has spread his wings. Saturday August 26th 2023 is a date that will be etched in his memory forever, as he landed an impressive treble that day with Angel Bleu winning the Group 2 Celebration Mile at Goodwood, Kinross the City of York Group 2 contest at York just 20 minutes later and then, 55 minutes after that, Lezoo prevailed in the Listed Hopeful Stakes at Newmarket. Three Class 1 wins at three different courses in just 1 hour and 15 minutes.

Most of Chan's horses are trained by Ralph Beckett and their record together reads: 38 wins from 144 starts (SR 26.4%) for a profit of £27.37 (ROI +19%). To BSP this improves to £44.34 (ROI +30.8%). Chan also has a couple of horses in training with John and Thady Gosden. Currently the Chan/Gosden combination has seen 4 wins from 11 starts.

Mark Chan Runners by Gender

One stat that stands out with Chan’s horses is the difference in success between his male runners and his females. Let’s look at the strike rates first:

Male horses have been 1.8 times more successful in terms of winning races than female horses. There have been more male runners, but still a fairly even split (94 male; 76 female). In terms of returns to SP there is a considerable difference:

That disparity equates to around 63p in the £ between the SP returns for male horses compared to female ones.

Other Mark Chan Runner Stats

There are three further subsets of stats I’d like to share:

1. Chan’s runners performed well when priced 6/1 or shorter. This group of runners secured 36 wins from 96 (SR 37.5%) for a profit of £35.62 (ROI +37.1%); A/E index 1.31.

2. Focusing on the Grade 1 tracks (Ascot, Doncaster, Epsom, Goodwood, Newbury, Newmarket, Sandown, York), Chan secured a 21.5% strike rate (20 from 93) for an SP profit of £13.60 (ROI +14.6%); A/E index 1.29.

3. Chan-owned two-year-olds have performed extremely well with the benefit of at least one previous run. These juveniles have won 16 of their 43 starts hitting a huge strike rate of over 37%. Returns have been 34p in the £ to SP, 44p to BSP. Compare this to his 2yo debutants who have scored only three times from 21 (SR 14.3%).

As I’m writing this, Kinross has just won for a tenth time (eighth for Chan) winning the Park Stakes (Group 2) at Doncaster.

Sheikh Mohammed Obaid Al Maktoum

I want to concentrate on the past three years for this Dubai-based owner as his team has excelled during that timeframe. Sheikh Obaid's prizemoney earnings have exceeded £1.5 million in each of the three years, and each year has seen his strike rate north of 20% (21.4% in 2022, 20.9% in 2023 and an impressive 24.7% so far in 2024). Backing all runners ‘blind’ in the past three years would have seen a £85.28 profit to SP; to BSP it stands at a very healthy +£164.41 (ROI +26.6%). It should also be noted that his figures are not skewed by several big-priced winners.

At the front end of the market, Sheikh Obaid has proved profitable to follow, with his favourites and second favourites having combined to win 92 races from 256 (SR 35.9%) for an SP profit of £18.20 (ROI +7.1%). To BSP this improves to £36.03 (ROI +14.1%).

Sheikh Obaid Runners by Age

Moving onto age of horse now and here are the splits:

Two-year-olds have an excellent record as have those aged four. What is interesting about the 2yo results is what happens when we compare win strike rates based on number of career starts. Normally 2yo debutants score much less frequently than those that have run before. However...

...as can be seen here, Sheikh Obaid-owned juveniles on debut have won more often than any other subset and, at a ridiculously high 29.9% strike rate for 2yo debutants. The average strike rate for all 2yo debutants in the past three years stands at just 8.4%. Here are the full figures for these 2yos on debut:

To BSP these figures improve further to profit of £99.37 (ROI +129.1%). Backing Sheikh Obaid-owned debutants has been a license to print money in the past three seasons.

Sheikh Obaid Runners by Trainer

It’s trainer time next and here are the stats for all runners from any stable that has saddled more than 40 runners for Sheikh Obaid:

Karl Burke looks the stand-out performer and, if ignoring his bigger-priced runners (14/1 or more), the overall profit improves by £26 to £87.08. His 2yos have been exceptional winning over 36% of the time (16/44) and returning 42p in the £ to SP, 60p to BSP.

Kevin Ryan has a good record in novice events for the Sheikh, scoring ten wins from 36 (SR 27.8%) for a tidy profit of £19.40 (ROI +53.9%). To BSP the profit stands at £30.46 (ROI +84.6%). Sticking with Ryan, when his runners have been in the top three in the betting they have won over 30% of the time (17 wins from 56) returning 39p in the £ to SP, 56p to BSP.

Roger Varian also has a couple of positive stats to feedback to you. Firstly, when Jack Mitchell has ridden their record reads 12 wins from 40 (SR 30%) for a profit of £10.83 (ROI +27.1%). To BSP that improves by a further 9p in the £. In Class 5 events Varian has a 35.7% strike rate thanks to ten wins from 28. Returns to SP stand at 18p in the £, 31p in the £ to BSP.

Unfortunately for Varian, and to a lesser degree for us punters, Sheikh Obaid removed all of his horses from Varian's Carlburg Stables last month.

Sheikh Obaid Runners by Race Class

There has been excellent consistency over the last three years from the runners of Sheikh Obaid which is highlighted nicely by an analysis of race class. His runners have produced profit to SP in every single class of race as the graph below shows:

Obviously, to BSP these figures improve still further. Sheikh Mohammed Obaid Al Maktoum is by all accounts a demanding owner, but he does seem to be one to keep a close eye on at present.

Amo Racing Limited

Amo Racing Limited was founded by football agent Kia Joorabchian and they have had over 200 winners in the past six seasons. However, this year has not gone so well hitting a strike rate of below 10% compared with over 16% when combining the years 2019 to 2023. There have been plenty of ups and downs already with horses being taken away from trainers and jockey Kevin Stott being sacked after eight months of an initial one-year contract; Joorabchian certainly seems to do things his way.

To date he has one Group 1 success courtesy of King of Steel in the 2023 Qipco Champion Stakes. However, it was his 150-1 winner, Valiant Force, at Royal Ascot in the same year that perhaps he is best known for.

Amo Racing by Trainer

In terms of trainers both George Boughey and Alice Haynes boast a 20%+ win strike rate, although this year, as with all his trainers, this figure has dropped.

Perhaps the most potent stat is for favourites: jollies wearing the distinctive purple and white livery have won 103 of their 249 starts (SR 41.4%) for a profit to SP of £28.59 (ROI +11.5%). To BSP this stands at +£44.60 (ROI +17.9%). For the record Amo-owned favourites have edged into profit to BSP even during this poor year of 2024.

Trainer Performance by Price Movement

In some other recent articles I have written about price movement, so I thought I would check for any owners who have fared particularly well with horses that have shortened in price from Early Morning Odds (around 9am in the morning) to final Starting Price. The idea was to try and establish which owners may be worth 'following in' if you see a horse of theirs being backed.

Positive Price Movement

There are six owners who have achieved an A/E index of over 1.00 with at least 75 horses that have shortened in price during this time frame. They are shown in the graph below:

Two owners that I have discussed earlier, Marc Chan and Sheikh Mohammed Obaid, both appear in this list of six. All six from the chart above - the others being David Armstrong, Valmont Racing, Qatar Racing and Paul & Clare Rooney - have been profitable to SP as well as BSP, impressive considering all the horses shortened in price during the day. Hence, a positive market move for any of these owners should be seen as material.

Negative Price Movement

It is interesting when looking at the A/E index of Paul & Clare Rooney with horses that do the reverse and drift from Early Odds to SP. When this has happened their A/E index was way down at 0.59. Such runners showed hefty losses to SP standing at over 55p in the £. But when their horses have been backed, they have produced a return to SP over nearly 7p in the £, with an A/E index of 1.01 (as can be seen in the graph). The strike rates between the two groups vary massively, too, going from 18.9% for horses that shorten to 6.7% for horses that drifted in price.

There is a similar pattern when comparing ‘shorteners’ and ‘drifters’ for Qatar Racing Limited. Here are their splits:

There is a noteworthy difference here again, much bigger than the norm. Are certain owners really in the know? It’s obviously difficult to tell, but if I was thinking about backing a horse owned by Qatar Racing, I’d prefer to see it strong in the market than weak.

Additional Owner stats

For the final part of this article I'm going to share some individual owner stats that I believe are worth knowing:

1. Opulence Thoroughbreds have an excellent record with their 2yos when racing on the all-weather, scoring over 37% of the time and producing returns to SP of 22p in the £.

2. Kirsten Rausing has a good record with her 2yo runners trained by Andrew Balding. Eight of the 24 runners in the study period have won securing an SP profit in every year from 2020 to 2024.

3. Middleham Park send out on average over 600 runners every year hitting a win strike rate of 12%. They spread their horses across numerous trainers and the stand-out handler for them has been Robert Cowell. Of his 67 runners 17 have won (SR 25.4%) for an SP profit of £48.23 (ROI +72%). No other trainer for Middleham has exceeded an 18% win rate with most of them between 10% and 14%.

4. The Cool Silk Partnership has an overall strike rate of 14% but with runners from the Archie Watson yard this jumps to 20.1% (19 wins from 93). Also keep an eye out for the jockey booking because when Hollie Doyle has taken the ride the stats read nine wins from 27 (SR 33.3%) for an SP profit of £16.26 (ROI +60.2%). To BSP it jumps up to +£22.78 (ROI +84.4%).

5. Sticking with Archie Watson and The Cool Silk Partnership, runners sent off first or second favourite have produced outstanding results: 15 wins from 31 (SR 48.4%) for a profit to SP of £24.15 (ROI +77.9%).

And that concludes the second of two owner articles. I hope you enjoyed both pieces and have gained some useful insights to help inform your betting where certain owners are concerned.

- DR

A Study of Owners in UK Flat Racing, Part 1

17 September 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

As the title indicates, this article looks at some owner data for UK Flat and AW racing, writes Dave Renham. The period of study is from 1st January 2019 to 8th September 2024. Profit and loss has been calculated to Industry Starting Price, but I will quote Betfair SP when appropriate. This is the first of a two-part series.

In this article:

Flat Owners' Strike Rate League Table

Let's kick off by looking at the top 25 owners in terms of their strike rate (150 runs minimum to qualify):

Godolphin top the chart perhaps as one would expect, but hot on their heels is Marc Chan. The top six in the list all have decent A/E indices with four of that six hitting 1.00 or above. I will look at some of the owners in more detail later in the piece.

One owner to not quite make the cut is King Charles and Queen Camilla. Since taking over from the Queen at the end of 2022 the Royals have slimmed the operation down a little. They have had 21 winners from 164 runners (SR 13.8%), but losses have been steep, at £70.42 (ROI -42.9%). The A/E index stands on just 0.71. There has been performance drop off since the death of Her Majesty. From 2019 to 2022 Queen Elizabeth II had 270 runners of which 56 won (SR 20.1%) for a loss of £42.37 (ROI -15.2%); A/E index 0.92. It will be interesting to see if there is an improvement in performance with Royal runners over the next couple of seasons.

Godolphin

Godolphin had their first winner in December 1992 in Dubai and from 1994 the operation went global. At the time of researching this piece Sheikh Mohamed's racing entity winner-count worldwide stood at 8787, of which 430 came in Group 1 races.

Godolphin UK Annual Strike Rates

In this country they are based in Newmarket and have two trainers, Charlie Appleby and Saeed bin Suroor. Below are their overall yearly win strike rates.

There seems to have been a slight uptick in performance in the past three seasons (2022 to 2024). This has been reflected in the profit/loss column with 2019 to 2021 seeing losses of £368.61 (ROI -18.0%), while from 2022 to 2024 these have been much reduced to just -£38.48 (ROI -2.4%).

Godolphin Top Jockeys

Onto jockeys now and a look at all jockeys have had at least 60 rides for Godolphin and have ridden for them in 2024. I have ordered them by number of rides:

William Buick is the main stable jockey now James Doyle has moved on to Wathnan Racing. Doyle has still ridden for Godolphin this year but only 13 times and with just one win. Buick has an excellent record considering how many rides he has had. Betting all his rides would have yielded just a penny in the pound loss, while to BSP this moves into profit by £73.00 (ROI +6.8%). Oisin Murphy has an excellent record and primarily has ridden for bin Suroor. He’s only been called upon seven times so far in 2024 but has three wins from those rides. Going back to 2019 Murphy has an excellent record when riding in novice events. He has managed 18 wins from 41 rides (SR 43.9%) for a profit of £19.85 (ROI +48.4%). To BSP this improves to +£27.73 (ROI +67.6%).

Godolphin at Grade 1 Tracks

The next area to share is the stats at Grade 1 courses. This is where the biggest races tend to occur and a big operation like Godolphin do target quality.

The performances at Newmarket stand out. As you can see, I have split them into the Rowley and July courses, partly to show the consistency shown at Godolphin's local track. The two highest strike rates come from the Rowley and July course stats, both have shown profits to SP, and both A/E indices are comfortably above 1.00.

Now, the Godolphin stables are based in Newmarket, so the horses do not have to travel and are used to the surroundings. Even so, these stats are impressive especially given the quality of opposition they face at Headquarters. If you had backed all of their runners at Newmarket to BSP, profits would stand at an impressive +£172.44 (ROI +22.2%). If we look at the yearly BSP returns (ROI%) we see the following:

Profits in every single year showing excellent consistency. The last three years have been particularly strong.

William Buick has an outstanding record for Godolphin at the Suffolk track thanks to 133 winners from 368 (SR 36.1%) for a profit of £84.61 (ROI +23%). To BSP this climbs to +£121.46 (ROI +33%). Oisin Murphy is 10 from 22 and his mounts have returned a huge return to SP of 159 pence in the £. That has been achieved with the biggest priced winner being 9/1.

All in all, the Godolphin operation keeps firing year on year, and there are no signs of this abating.

Shadwell Estate Co (formerly Hamdan al Maktoum)

The Shadwell Estate is a world-renowned racing and breeding operation located in Britain, Ireland and the USA. Sheikh Hamdan al Maktoum became one of the leading figures in international horseracing from the 1980s until his passing in 2021. He was champion Flat owner in Britain nine times, the last of which was in 2020. The operation is now run by his daughter, Sheikha Hissa. It is noticeable that the operation seems to have been streamlined since the death of Sheikh Hamdan with the number of runners per year roughly halving. This seems mainly due to the number of 2yo runners which have decreased dramatically.

In 2022 Shadwell had their best season in the 2019-2024 period hitting over 32% winners and returns to SP of 25p in the £. This year to date has been a little ‘sticky’ relatively with a strike rate of half that on 16.8% and losses edging close to 40p in the £. I am assuming 2024 has just been a small blip, based on going back further in time when they had similar strike rates in 2012, 2013 and 2016.

Shadwell Estate Trainer Performance

Below is a table showing trainers who have saddked at least 100 runners for Shadwell and at least one runner in 2024:

The Gosden, Varian and Burrows yards have all provided excellent long-term results, blind profits to SP and A/E indices above 1.00. This year two trainers in particular have struggled, with Charles Hills on just one win from 19 and Richard Hannon having drawn a blank from all of his 14 runners.

A trainer they may start to use more is Kevin Phillipart de Foy. He has had only four horses to date but three of them have won and overall, he has five wins from 12 from those horses.

In terms of jockeys, Jim Crowley gets the lion’s share of the rides and from 2019 to 2023 he made a blind profit to BSP in every single year, and to SP in four of the five years. This has not been the case this year which is no surprise given the 2024 figures shown above.

From a racecourse perspective, there are 11 courses where Shadwell has sent at least 100 runners since 2019. These favoured tracks have combined to produce a BSP profit of £199.67 (ROI 12.7%). I have graphed their A/E indices below:

Doncaster and Lingfield have extremely strong A/E indices of 1.29 and 1.26 respectively when Shadwell runners visit. At both courses they have provided good profits to both Industry SP and BSP and the strike rate at Lingfield has been better than one win in every three (34.3%). Kempton is another track where their runners have performed extremely well.

Shadwell Market Performance

Looking at the betting market, Shadwell runners have turned a profit on both favourites and second favourites:

To BSP profits stand at £45.85 (ROI +6.7%) for favs, and +£65.42 (ROI +14.4%) for second favs.

It will be interesting to see how Shadwell move forward in the next two or three years.

Cheveley Park Stud

The Cheveley Park Stud is Newmarket’s oldest stud farm and has been one of the major forces in European bloodstock and racing for over 35 years. With a strike rate of around one in six they have not been as successful as the likes of Godolphin, but there are still a few positive angles to share, as well as some negative ones.

Below is their annual breakdown:

As can be seen, it has been a little up and down. This year to date has been good, as was 2021. Last year saw quite a dip so it is difficult to get a handle on how things may go each year.

Cheveley Park Stud by Race Class

Onto to Class of Race next and here are the splits:

The headline here are those 38 wins at Class 1, with a profit to boot. To BSP this profit stands at £75.71 (ROI +29.3%) and sticking with BSP Class 1 races have yielded a profit in four of the six years. If we breakdown the Class 1 races we see that Listed races have offered the best returns:

All 17 wins from the Listed races have come with female runners. Females have provided 86 of the runners; the 11 male runners have drawn a blank. It should be noted at this point that around 75% of ALL the horses from Cheveley Park have been female with the vast majority of these being fillies, most of the colts from the stud being sent to auction.

Cheveley Park Performance by Surface

With most of Cheveley Park's runners being fillies, I suspect that the turf versus all-weather stats are worth looking at. Generally, female runners find it harder on the all-weather than on grass, so I am predicting that the red, white and blue-silked runners have a slightly better record on turf. Let’s see:

No surprises here. The turf figures are far superior to the all-weather ones across the board.

Cheveley Park Performance by Trainer

A look at trainers next. Firstly, a comparison of strike rates across the main trainers (60 runs minimum):

Quite a variance here, ranging from William Haggas at over 22% to Roger Varian at under 10%. Let’s see which trainers have produced the best A/E indices over the period of study:

David O’Meara is the standout with an A/E index of 1.11. He had a decent strike rate of close to 19% and has been profitable with Cheveley Park runners to both SP (12p in the £) and BSP (24p in the £). Also take notice if Danny Tudhope is booked to ride for O’Meara and Cheveley Park. They have combined to secure a 54% profit to SP, 71% to BSP.

The Gosden stats look a bit weird as they have been profitable to SP (18p in £) and BSP (26p in the £), but their A/E index is down at 0.84. However, this is because of a below average performance with shorter-priced runners. For the record the stable has made an SP profit in five of the six years.

Cheveley Park Market Performance

Finally for Cheveley Park, let me share some market data because it caught my eye. When the SP has been short (9/4 or shorter) the results have been quite poor. The ownership entity has managed 100 wins from 294 qualifiers (SR 34%), but losses have been significant at £69.53 (ROI –23.7%).

But when their runners have drifted in price from Early Odds (around 9am in the morning) to their final SP they have made a profit if backing to BSP. There have been 749 horses which have lengthened in price from Early Odds to SP of which 108 have won (SR 14.4%) for a BSP profit to £81.08 (ROI +10.8%). So don’t be put off by a Cheveley Park drifter. Drifters at single figure BSP prices have made a profit so these figures are not skewed by several big priced winners.

That concludes my first piece. I hope there have been some useful nuggets for you to take advantage of in the future. I will continue from where I left off next time. Until then...

- DR

Seeking Value with Female Flat Jockeys

11 September 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

The 3.30 race at Goodwood on September 3rd 2024 will be one that Hollie Doyle will cherish for the rest of her life, writes Dave Renham. It was the race where she rode her 1000th career winner on the David Simcock-trained Leyhaimur. In doing so, Hollie became only the second woman to achieve this monumental feat following in the footsteps of Hayley Turner who rode her 1000th winner in November last year (2023).

Horse racing is one of the few sports where men and women compete against each other on a level playing field. One would sincerely hope that by now Doyle and Turner have proven to trainers, punters, bookmakers and fellow jockeys alike that women riders can be as successful as their male counterparts.

Back in January 2021 Matt wrote a piece on the site where he set about trying to answer two questions:

1. Has the sport begun to level the chasmic disparity between male and female rider opportunities? and

2. To what degree is it appropriate to do that based on performance data?

His study covered a five-year period from 1st January 2016 to 31st December 2020 and the link to read it is www.geegeez.co.uk/male-and-female-jockeys-a-comparison/.

What I plan to do with this article is twofold. In the first part I am aiming to build upon the start of Matt’s research into his question of gender disparity, bringing us up to date over the subsequent four years. In the second part I would like to focus solely on the performance of female jockeys.

Male vs female: Overall Numbers

Firstly, let me share Matt’s findings for all riders in UK flat races between 2016 and 2020, broken down by gender focusing solely on the percentage of rides for each group.

As the pie chart shows, a whopping 91% of all rides were taken by male jockeys during this time frame. That's an enormous disparity. The question is, have matters improved at all in more recent times? Below is the same male/female percentage comparison but looking at data from 1st January 2021 to 5th September 2024:

Things have improved but just barely. I wonder if we have seen a year-on-year increase or not? Let’s see:

From 2021 to 2023 we were heading downwards not upwards. At least 2024 has seen the percentage move in the direction it should be. As can be seen, parity is a long way away and even an 80/20 male to female split seems years, possibly decades, away.

For these figures to change we need to see more Hollie Doyles. What I mean by that is that Hollie has ridden 17% of all the rides given to female jockeys in 2024. That equates to 796 rides out of the 4741 total rides for all female jockeys. Only two other female jockeys have had more than 300 rides this year to date, those being Saffie Osborne on 493 and Joanna Mason on 470. If, say, just another three female jockeys had been given the opportunities this year that Hollie has had (e.g. ridden in nearly 800 races), then the male riders to female riders’ splits would have moved from 88.7% male rides vs 11.3% female rides, to a better, if still badly unbalanced, split of 82.9% vs 17.1%. However, that would still be a solid improvement on the situation in a scenario where just three female jockeys get those better opportunities - and two of them used the lever of family connections to get started. Riders need races to gain experience, and the simple truth is that female jockeys are still not getting enough opportunities.

Male vs female: Favourites

Matt’s article also looked at data for favourites in terms of the male rides / female rides percentage splits. From 2016 to 2020 only 6.7% of all favourites were ridden by female jockeys. In the more recent past (2021 onwards) this has improved a little, but only to 8.3%. However, when we look at the overall results (2021-2024) for both groups of favourites we see some interesting findings:

Strike rates for both are within 0.33% of each other, but female jockeys have offered punters by far the better value. Losses to SP have been 7p in the £ better for female riders compared with the male jocks. Meanwhile the female A/E index is an excellent 0.96 compared with 0.91 for male riders. To Betfair SP backing all favourites ridden by female jockeys would have made a blind profit of £46.97 (ROI +2.6%).

If we examine like for like we get a better idea why the female jockeys have had the best of it on favourites. Most races in this favourite sample have been handicap races (because 71% of flat races in 2024 have been handicaps - and similar percentages apply to the other recent years). 80% of the races where females rode the favourite and 68% of races where males did have been handicap races. And in these handicap races female riders have outperformed their male counterparts. Here are the handicap favourite results for ’21 to ‘24 split by gender of the rider:

In these like for like races female jockeys have a better strike rate by roughly 1.5%, and they have almost broken even to SP, as compared with losses of 10% for males. The A/E index values (0.97 vs 0.91) also show a value edge for female riders. This represents a still present blind spot in the markets.

Before moving to part 2 of my piece, all the other stat comparisons Matt made in his write-up have similar percentage splits now to what they were then. As an example of this, from 2016 to 2020 25.2% of all apprentice jockey rides came from female riders, from 2021 onwards it stands marginally higher at 26.4%.

We can only hope the next four or five years sees a vast improvement and many more opportunities for female jockeys.

Top Female Jockeys: An Overview

At this juncture, it's time to move away from the male vs female rider comparison and focus solely on the ladies. Let me look at the records of the female jockeys who have had the most rides between January 2021 and early September 2024 (ordered by number of rides):

Hollie Doyle

Hollie Doyle has the highest win percentage but over the years, as her stock has risen, it has become difficult to find profitable angles when backing her. Hollie still performs exceptionally well and is obviously one of the top jockeys in the country; it is just that she has become very popular with punters which makes her expensive to follow generally speaking.

If we go back to the previous two years (2019 and 2020), her ROI was -8% to SP, and you could have secured a healthy £177.24 (ROI +9.9%) if backing all her mounts to BSP. These 2019-2020 figures were achieved with a virtually identical strike rate to what transpired in 2021-2024. Clearly, then, it is this rising popularity in the last four years especially that have driven down the prices on her runners and thus any value has been stifled.

Saffie Osborne

That has yet to happen - though of course it will do - with Saffie Osborne, as backing all her rides “blind” in the past four seasons would have secured a profit to BSP of £65.98 (ROI +3.6%). In fact, Osborne has produced a blind profit to BSP in each of the last three years.

I am a firm believer that Saffie Osborne, if given the right opportunities, can be as successful as Hollie Doyle in the years to come. She is only 22 and she seems to be going from strength to strength, especially when we consider her yearly performances in terms of the A/E index stat. This stat is one that attempts to establish value where, generally speaking, a figure above 1.00 represents a good value proposition. Here are Osborne’s A/E figures by year:

As the graph shows her figures have been getting better and better year on year. No wonder she has proved profitable to back to BSP more recently.

Saffie has had an excellent record with horses near the front end of the betting since the start of 2021. Those runners with an SP of 6/1 or shorter have provided her with 162 winners from 653 runners (SR 24.8%) for an SP profit of £40.04 (ROI + 6.1%). To BSP this improves to +£97.50 (ROI +15%). If we extend this to horses priced 14/1 or shorter, she is still in profit to SP to the tune of £31.54 (ROI +2.5%) thanks to 220 wins from 1277 rides (SR 17.3%). To BSP her profits stand at a healthy £207.88 (ROI +16.3%).

I am sure the value on Saffie Osborne’s mounts will soon diminish, especially if continuing this upwards spiral. However, for the moment I think she will continue to offer punters good value.

Joanna Mason

Another female jockey to impress me recently has been Joanna Mason. She primarily rides for the Mick & David Easterby - granddad and uncle respectively - yard and, when we compare her record for this yard with all other jockeys combined, we see the following:

Her stats are far better than when combining all the other Easterby jockeys in one group. This has also been the case when we compare the results of the more fancied runners from the stable. With Easterby horses priced 9/1 or shorter we get these splits:

It should be noted that to BSP a blind profit could have been had backing all of Joanna's runners, as well as the subset of those priced 9/1 or shorter.

It is a shame that she has not been given many opportunities from the bigger yards: she has ridden five times for William Haggas including three rides since May this year. She has ridden one winner and had three placed horses so hopefully more rides will come her way from that stable soon.

Hayley Turner

Hayley Turner averages around 400 rides a year these days, down somewhat on the peak of her career when between 2006 and 2012 she averaged 725 rides per year. However, she is still performing well 24 years after her first ride and especially when her horse is prominent in the betting. In the past four seasons on horses with an SP of 4/1 or shorter she has won 81 of her 264 rides (SR 30.7%) for a small £10.76 profit to SP. This equates to a return of just over 4p in the £. To BSP the figures improve to +£28.65 (ROI +10.9%).

David Simcock and Andrew Balding continue to use Hayley on a fairly regular basis and these two trainers have provided her with the most rides in the past four seasons. Both trainers have been rewarded with excellent results:

Turner has been very close to breaking even for both trainers across all their combination runners, and to BSP she has made a profit of £15.77 (ROI +9.3%) for Balding, and £21.83 (ROI +10.8%) for Simcock.

Josephine Gordon

Josephine Gordon has an overall win strike rate of only 7% across the past four seasons but 58% of her rides have been on horses priced 14/1 or bigger. Hence, she tends to ride lesser fancied runners which explains that low strike rate. However, when we focus on her rides on horses whose prices were 12/1 or shorter at SP her record reads 57 wins from 458 rides (SR 14.6%). These runners have edged into profit at SP to the tune of £2.42. To BSP profits stand at +£64.66 (ROI +14.1%).

While writing this article there has been quite a coincidence because Josephine Gordon has just won at Kempton in the Class 2 London Mile Series Final Handicap on Whitcombe Rocker at 11/1, giving him a brilliant ride from a tough outside stall. Funny how things happen like that!

One to note: Olivia Tubb

To finish up I want to talk about an apprentice who, despite having only 122 rides to date, could be the real deal. Her name is Olivia Tubb, and she is currently apprentice jockey to Jonathan Portman. Her overall record is impressive:

Clearly it is early days, but when we examine her record for Portman, she has a 17.7% strike rate producing returns to SP of 26p in the £ (44p to BSP). All other jockeys combined when riding for Portman have won just 7.4% of races losing a whopping 45p in the £.

It is also impressive to note that with horses priced 4/1 or shorter she is 11 from 29 (SR 37.9%) for a profit to SP of £15.24 (ROI +52.6%). Her A/E index stands at a huge 1.55. She should have an exciting future – let’s hope she gets enough chances to prove it.

To conclude, there is sadly still a wide opportunity chasm between the chances afforded to male riders as compared to female riders. That needs to change because there is plenty of female talent in the jockey ranks - and the stats I've shared I hope has proved that beyond doubt.

- DR

Early Odds to Opening Odds to Starting Price

3 September 2024/in Dave Renham/by Dave Renham

In this article I will compare the early morning odds (EMO) of horses with their opening show odds (OS) to their final Industry Starting Price (SP), writes Dave Renham. Data has been taken from 1st January 2021 to 31st August 2024 focusing on UK flat racing. This includes both turf and all-weather racing.

To begin with let me look at all horses whose prices have shortened throughout the day. In other words, their OS were shorter than their EMO, and their SP odds were shorter than their OS. For future reference these runners will be known as the ‘shorten/shorten’ group. Here are the figures:

As we can see there is a healthy strike rate close to one win in every five and a sound A/E index of 0.91, with losses to SP equating to around 12p in the £. When we look at the Betfair SP returns losses reduce to just over 4p in the £.

Let's compare those figures with the same view where the prices drifted all day. Therefore, horses whose OS were greater than their EMO, and their SP's were longer than their OS. I will call this group ‘drift/drift’. Here are their splits:

As you might expect we see a much lower win rate (roughly one success in every 16 starts), a much lower A/E index of 0.81, and significant losses of 34p in the £. These figures do improve markedly when looking at the BSP returns but losses still are over 12p in the £.

Clearly there are more combinations of price movements than just ‘drift/drift’ and ‘shorten/shorten’. Below is a graph showing the percentage of runners for each ‘price movement combination’.

As the graph shows, around a quarter of all runners drift from EMO to OS and then drift again when it comes their final SP. This ‘drift/drift’ group contains almost twice the number of runners of the ‘shorten/shorten’ group. That should not come as any great surprise based on what we have seen in previous articles where far more horses drift in price than shorten in price.

Time to go back and dig a bit deeper into the ‘shorten/shorten’ group. Let me share their results based on their EM price range. Prices shown are in decimal form:

The stats shared in the table show that the shorter the price in the morning the better for these horses that shorten and then shorten again. Horses priced 6/4 or lower in the morning that have shown the ‘shorten/shorten’ profile have got close to breaking even to SP. To BSP they edged into marginal profit to the tune of £13.75 (about 1%). That is impressive, and surprising given the tight nature of the betting market at these very short prices.

It is time now to examine the ‘drift/drift’ group by EMO. Here are their splits:

We have a similar ‘feel’ here with shorter priced runners in the morning doing the best by far. This can be seen by the correlation between the ROI column and the A/E index column. Once the Early price hits 3.5 or bigger we see a real dip in both columns. Focusing on the horses that had Early Morning Odds of 3.25 (9/4) or shorter, when you look at the BSP returns we see that backing all of these runners would have procured a profit of £46.20 (ROI +1.2%).

Sticking with this subset of ‘drift/drift’ runners that were priced 3.25 (9/4) or shorter early, if we focus on those that had a Starting Price of 5.50 (9/2) or bigger we get these very impressive results:

These runners have produced a one in six strike rate, an excellent A/E index of 1.08 and returns of over 8.5 pence for every £1 staked. Using BSP the results are naturally better, showing a very healthy +£156.07 profit (ROI +25.1%).

Staying with the ‘drift/drift’ group, let me share the returns on investment for both Industry SP and Betfair SP when we split the results by handicaps versus non-handicaps:

The graph shows that horses that have the ‘drift/drift’ profile in non-handicap races lose punters far more money than those with that profile which contest handicap races. This graph is a good illustration of the value that can be found on the exchanges these days, and this article hopefully outlines an approach for exchange SP players.

I want to now focus on trainer data to see if any patterns emerge. Let's first look at the trainers with the highest win strike rates when their horses fit the ‘shorten/shorten’ pattern. (A minimum of 100 runners to qualify):

Seven of the 15 trainers in the table have secured a profit to Industry SP, while a couple of others (Varian and bin Suroor) have made a profit to BSP.

This trainer data includes all price points. But there is going to be a world of difference in terms of long-term performance between horses that have Early Odds of 33/1, Opening Odds of 28/1 and an SP of 25/1, compared with those whose odds went 7/1, 6/1, 5/1. Therefore, as I often do with trainer data, I am narrowing down my focus to horses whose Early Morning Price was a single figure one (e.g. 9/1 or shorter).

Here are the trainer splits for these more fancied runners who fit the ‘shorten/shorten’ profile. (A minimum of 75 runners to qualify this time – ordered by win strike rate):

Considering we are talking about horses whose prices have shortened during the day these overall results are excellent – much better than I would have anticipated. The profit/loss figures are impressive especially as they are based on Industry SP returns. 14 of the 22 trainers in the table have secured a blind profit to ISP. This moves up to 16 when using BSP. It is also good to see other trainers perform well under these circumstances such as Hughie Morrison, Jim Goldie, Brian Ellison, Richard Fahey and Mick Appleby. Just imagine if as punters we could have predicted this ‘shorten/shorten’ pattern before it happened and backed them all at their early prices! Ah well, at least there's still value in following the money later on with these handlers.

Of course, just because the price of a horse shortens from EMO to OS, does not mean it will continue in that downward direction. In fact, only about 35% of horses that shortened from Early to Opening (with Early Odds of 9/1 or shorter) will continue to shorten from Opening Show to SP. That is, two-thirds of positive early movers will drift back out again before the off.

To finish this piece, I want to look at the ‘drift/drift’ data as far as trainers are concerned. It makes sense to focus again on those horses whose EMO were 9/1 or shorter. The trainers with the top 15 strike rates are shown (min 100 runners):

As you can see, strike rates are much lower (to be expected), and the P/L figures are generally much poorer, although six of the 15 still made a profit to SP.

As a mathematician, I find market movement analysis fascinating. In the teaching of mathematics, pattern recognition is so important for contextual understanding. In horse racing, finding any patterns within price movements can help in determining the optimum time to place your bet.

Although this article has merely scratched the surface of EMO to OS to SP price movements, there have been some very interesting findings. From my research I feel inspired to do some more digging. And when I do, I will be sure to share it with Geegeez readers.

- DR

Membership Login

Introduction

Chelmsford 5f

Chelmsford 6f

Kempton 6f

Wolverhampton 5f

Summary

Pulled Up LTO by Race Code

Pulled Up LTO by DSLR

Pulled Up LTO by Going

Pulled Up LTO by Number of Race Non-Completions

Pulled Up LTO by Trainer

Summary

Introduction

Top Ten All-Weather Run Style Biases

10. Kempton 7f

9. Lingfield 6f

8. Chelmsford 1m

7. Kempton 6f

6. Chelmsford 6f

5. Wolverhampton 5f

4. Chelmsford 7f

3. Southwell 5f

2. Chelmsford 5f

1. Lingfield 5f

Conclusion

Post Script: Using Pace on Geegeez

Introduction

System 1 – "Back so soon?"

Quick returning Last Time Out (LTO) winners

System 2 – "The Lightly Baked Baguette"

Inexperienced French-bred chasers

System 3 – "Rested and ready"

The trainer lay off system

System 4 – "Cotswold Champions"

LTO winner at Cheltenham system

System 5 – "Lightweight Winners"

LTO winners carrying bottom weight in handicap hurdles

Summary

All Runners: Surface Same or Different

LTO Winners: Surface Same or Different

Surface Same or Different: Trainers

George Boughey

Charlie Johnston

David O’Meara

Concluding Thoughts

All NH Hat-trick+ Seekers

NH Hat-Trick+ Seekers by Race Class

The Betting Market for NH Hat-Trick+ Seekers

NH Hat-Trick+ Seekers by Days Since Last Run (DSLR)

NH Hat-Trick+ Seekers by Trainer

Other NH Hat-Trick+ Seeker Pointers

Summary

Positives

Negatives

Introduction

All-Weather Sires

Aclaim

Belardo

Dark Angel

Fountain Of Youth

Frankel

Harry Angel

Lethal Force

Wahington DC

Sires In General

Betting Performance by Market Rank, November, 2017-2023

Favourite Performance, by Race Code, November, 2017-2023

Favourite Performance, by Race Type, November 2017-2023

Performance by Last Time Out (LTO) Finishing Position, November, 2017-2023

Trainer Performance, November, 2017-2023

Additional Trainer Statistics

Trainer Performance, 60+ Runners at 9/1 or shorter, November, 2017-2023

Front Runners in UK Handicap Chases (7+ Runners)

Run Style in UK Handicap Chases, 2m5f-2m6f (7+ Runners)

Run Style in UK Handicap Chases, 2m7f-3m2f (7+ Runners)

Overall Front Running Biases in UK Handicap Chases (7+ Runners)

Summary

Race Leaders in Handicap Chases

Handicap Chases of 2m1f or less