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

Doncaster Draw and Pace Bias On The Straight Track

/in , /by

As we move towards the jumps season the quality of Saturday flat recent declines, and we start seeing live weekend racing from Cheltenham once again.

Don't forget that Geegeez Gold is completely free from 18th October 2021 to 27th October 2021 inclusive. You just need to ensure you are a free registered user to gain your free access. Click here to become a free registered user.

There is still pretty good racing from Doncaster though on Saturday, including Group 1 action, and it’s worth noting that seven of the eight races at Doncaster on Saturday will be run on the straight course. This must therefore be the ideal opportunity to investigate potential draw and pace biases at Doncaster on softer ground, which tends to dominate conditions at this time of year.

Doncaster Straight Course Draw Bias On Softer Ground

On straight courses you don’t tend to see draw biases change over different distances so we can look at a collection of distances together to get as much data as possible at courses such as Doncaster.


Overall across these distances there seems very little between the data for each draw type. The win percentages and place percentages are all pretty similar whilst the PRB figures suggest high is maybe slightly better with a PRB of 0.52 compared to 0.49 for both low and middle.

This data probably means one of two things. The first is that there is simply no real draw bias at Doncaster and you can have a pretty much even chance whichever part of the course you race on.

The second possibility is that at different points in the year there can be varying biases in the course and sometimes it’s better to be drawn a bit lower, and sometimes it’s better to be drawn higher. This can be the case at Ascot and is probably the case here too.

At the Lincoln meeting in 2021 for example, a high draw seemed very important. At this meeting in 2020 a low draw seemed an advantage.

If betting before a meeting begins, going for something towards the middle might be the safest option as you’ll never be too far away from favoured part of the course (if there is one). If possible it could be best to hold bets until a few races have developed. Even then though, the jockeys can suddenly explore a different part of the track and decide that is the favoured side.

Doncaster Straight Course Pace Bias On Softer Ground

Is the pace bias going to be any easier to predict? Front runners tend to be favoured more over shorter trips so it’s a good idea to look at each straight course distance separately this time.

Doncaster 5f Pace Bias

This shows why it is good to compare both win and place percentages. Amazingly from the above sample, which is for biggish fields on good or worse ground, no front runners have won which obviously gives them a 0% win strike rate. That’s pretty rare for the minimum distance! However the best place percentage of these run styles belongs to none other than front runners - they have a 25% place strike rate.

Prominent run styles here over the minimum dominant in terms of win percentages and provide by far more winners than any other run type. They are also only just behind front runners in terms of place percentage so it seems being close to the pace is definitely an advantage, as it is at most courses over 5f. But being right on the pace in bigger fields must leave you vulnerable here in the final furlong handing the advantage, as far as winning is concerned, to the prominent racers.

Given an advantage for prominent racers and front runners you’d expect mid division to perform better than held up but although it’s close, held up actually edges mid division. It’s certainly not the case that it’s impossible to come from way off the pace here over 5f and granted a decent early gallop and good form it would be unwise to be completely put off those that are patiently ridden but it’s definitely worth marking up those that race prominently in many races over this trip.

Doncaster 6f Pace Bias

The prominent racer bias doesn’t lend itself to all sprint trips here, over 6f the pendulum swings firmly in favour of front runners, despite the large field sizes in the sample.

Front runners impressively dominate and produce very healthy win and each way profits. There is no reason I can think of why they should be more effective over 6f than 5f but it simply seems to be the case.

Prominent racers actually fare worst of all now but only marginally worse than mid division or held up. This again suggests that just because there is an advantage towards either front runners or prominent racers, it is not a huge disadvantage to be held up.

So just as was the case with 5f, don’t rule out anything based on run style but do mark up the chances of a certain run style, this time front runners.

Doncaster 7f Pace Bias

Over 7f we are seeing a much fairer spread of results, in fact a remarkably even spread!

There is barely 1.5% between the win percentages and less than 3% between the place percentages.

It’s impossible to say any run style is either advantaged or disadvantaged over 7f at Doncaster away from fast ground. The main takeaway here could be to upgrade those that race in mid division or are held up that ran well enough last time out at a pace favouring track as they are likely to improve on that run this time around, assuming other conditions are in their favour.

Doncaster 1m Pace Bias

Over 5f we saw a slightly confusing win percentage and place percentage combination for front runners and it happens again over a mile.

The win percentages would have you believe that front running is the best run style over a mile here whereas the place percentages suggest it is the worst. There are a couple of things to consider with this.

A relatively small sample size means more emphasis should be put on the place data rather than win data, whilst still respecting the win data. On top of that we should also be looking at the trajectory of data for the other run styles.

The win percentages are pretty even for the other three run styles whilst the place percentages are also pretty even, but improve for those held up. Given the best place percentage is for held up and the worst place percentage is for front runners that seems to suggest the further off the pace you are the better. It’s worth noting though that there aren’t great jumps in the figures from one run style to another so just like the 7f distance this looks a pretty fair distance but preference begins to go towards the hold up performers, whereas it was with front runners over 6f and prominent racers over 5f.

Overall, it is no surprise that the shorter distances favour those nearer the pace, that’s a common theme in racing, but those that race nearer the rear still have a fair record over the shorter trips and that record improves dramatically over a little further suggesting Doncaster is a track that favours patience more than many others.

4.20 Doncaster - Virgin Bet Handicap Preview

This 5f handicap is comfortably the most interesting race on the card for me. A turn out of 15 runners is slightly disappointing from an each way perspective but as is often the case these days, most bookies are offering 4 places on this race as standard and a couple are even offering 5 places which gives the each way betting a more appealing feel.

I often start my analysis of a race with the pace map and that looks a good starting point here.

There looks to be at least 4 front runners in this and they are Indian Sounds, El Astronaute, Dakota Gold and Copper Knight. The first three of those are drawn relatively close together in the lower numbers and Copper Knight should give the higher numbers a good tow.

The pace data here over 5f suggests that prominent racers should be marked up but it’s worth remembering that the more patiently ridden runners do go well here too and with a likely contested speed they could end up just as advantaged as those nearer the pace, if not more so.

I’m going to declare early that I think those nearer the head of the betting could dominate this. If picking a bit of ‘each way value’ at double figure prices I’d suggest that Zim Baby (25/1) is overpriced and will enjoy the ground and a thorough test at this trip. He was 3rd in a listed contest here 12 months ago and although he hasn’t got his head in front this term he was beaten just a nose on soft ground at Ripon off a 1lb higher mark earlier this season and he’s run as if in form on his last three starts, all of which came on ground that would have been too fast. The bookies have him beating just one home, he’ll do much better than that.

Other than that I’d expect Sunday Sovereign to run well as he enjoys this sort of ground and did well to get as close as he did last time out at Catterick given he came from off the pace and the other four who finished around him raced closer to the pace. He doesn’t hold too many secrets from the handicapper though and is ‘only’ 9/1.

He was behind Zargun on that occasion, who opposes here. Based on weight for distance Sunday Sovereign should pretty much dead heat with Zargun here but given the pace favouring profile of Catterick compared to Doncaster I’d expect Sunday Sovereign to finish ahead of Zargun this time around.

Another who should finish ahead of Zargun is Illusionist. Illusionist beat Zargun at York a couple of weeks ago by a neck and is also 3lbs better off here thanks to Zargun franking that form since. Again, Zargun also loses out on the fact that he very much got the run of the race at York whereas Illusionist didn’t. So that’s two I have finishing ahead of the relatively short priced Zargun.

On the subject of that Illusionist win at York, it really is a performance worth watching if you have that option and haven’t seen it already. Not only did nothing else come from off the pace in that race, nothing made any inroads off the pace all day at York. His performance, when coming from last to first, really should be marked up significantly.

Then there is the strength of that race. Zargun, the runner up, won next time out whilst the 4th finished a fair 3rd next time. This, in combination with how well he did to come from last to win, suggests a 5lb rise is very lenient. He now runs off 89 and he was beaten a short head last season off this mark by Live In The Moment - that runner has subsequently rated 15lbs higher.

For a horse that so clearly wants softer ground, Illusionist hasn’t run on it that many times which still leaves him unexposed in such conditions. His form figures on good to soft or worse read 5620311. That in itself doesn’t look overly impressive but the 5th came in a listed race at Royal Ascot, the 6th came in a 21 runner handicap at Royal Ascot and the 0 came in last season’s Ayr Silver Cup when he didn’t quite seem ready for 6f. He’s won both runs on softish ground this season and his form figures in fields of 20 or less in softish ground are 2311.

Illusionist is clearly one I am very interested in at around 7/1, as you’ll be able to tell, and another is Boundless Power, who is a slightly shorter price. He was a winner last time out in heavy ground at Ascot and before that found only subsequent Group 3 winner Hurricane Ivor too good in the Portland here. He’s 4lbs higher than that win and 7lbs higher than his Portland run but since being gelded in April he has produced form figures of 12121 over 5f with cut in the ground so he’s clearly a major player here.

He doesn’t really have any recent ‘hot form’ to note like Illusionist does but his 5th at Ascot in July is worth examining.

Pretty much every horse that ran well has since franked the form, even the winner, who hasn’t won again since, has run well enough in group company. Boundless Power bumped into plenty of improvers that day and this came on good ground, not soft ground. He is 6lbs higher this time around but this race is unlikely to be as strong as that Ascot race was and conditions will suit more here too so he’s certainly entitled to go close.

Raasel is the unexposed one in the line up, from the same yard as Boundless Power. With these two runners, Mick Appleby has the first two in the betting so it will be interesting to see which direction they each go in the betting.

A 201 day break seemed to do the trick for Raasel as he’s won three on the bounce since, all relatively comfortably and certainly more comfortable than the winning distances suggest. Those races did lack strength in depth though so whilst it’s impossible to say he doesn’t have more left in the tank, it’s also difficult to prove he’s necessarily ahead of his mark of 81, having gone up a total of 8lbs for his hat trick of wins. He’ll certainly need to be as he’s actually racing off 85 here, 7lbs higher than his last win, due to the fact that he’s 4lbs out of the handicap. It’s easy to understand why connections are taking that chance with the prize money on offer but as a punter I hate backing horses that are out of the handicap , certainly by this much, and I feel the bookies don’t fully account for that with their prices. Had he been raised 7lbs for his last win I think he’d be a bigger price here despite the fact that he’s still running from a 7lb higher mark.

I was already willing to chance Illusionist and Boundless Power against Raasel even off his correct mark. I realise Adam Farragher takes off ‘the handy 5lbs’ as they say but that’s what apprentices do anyway and his lowest riding weight in the past 12 months is 7-10, 4lbs lower than the weight Raasel should carry here so it will be interesting to see if he can shave an extra 1lb off that to use his full claim.

Either way my two against the field are ILLUSIONIST and Boundless Power, with slight preference for the former because he’s had fewer chances in ideal conditions and did extremely well to win a warm race last time out. I’ll probably have a small saver on Boundless Power, who I think is almost certain to be in the first four, and I’ll be very interested in a reverse forecast too given I think this race lacks real strength in depth. I'm generally not one for backing last time out winners but I will do when I still think they offer value.

Others To Note At Doncaster

One runner I am quite interested in for the 2.05pm at Doncaster is Another Batt. This is a wide open handicap but Another Batt ran well last time out when a lot of things weren’t in his favour.

He ran the same day as Illusionist when York was heavily favouring front runner, even more than it often does. He was 6th in a 20 runner mile handicap and he finished a running on 6th, doing best of those held up and doing so from stall 20 which is rarely the place to be over a mile at York.

The mile probably didn’t play to his strengths either, all seven of his wins have come over shorter and he’s even effective at 6f. His most recent win was a comfortable one off a 1lb lower mark and although he’s not the most consistent it looks as though he has been freshened up by a break and is back to form. Everything should be in his favour here so I’m expecting a big run from him at a decent price. He's not necessarily the most likely winner (there are some interesting 3yos) but I'd fancy him as an each way punt.

One runner I am sadly against on Saturday is Aaddeey who runs in the 2.40pm at Doncaster. I say sadly because this is very much a horse on my radar as being well handicapped but he’s been running on the wrong ground nearly all season. He’s well handicapped on several pieces of form, none more so than when beating Rodrigo Diaz by 4.5 lengths. He’s now 12lbs higher because of that but that rival is now rated 22lbs higher!

So why the lack of interest on Saturday? The ground has once again gone against him for a start. Even more reason to oppose him is the record of Simon and Ed Crisford’s runners after a 60+ day break. Aaddeey has seemingly had a slight problem because when the ground suddenly came right for him a couple of months ago he was completely absent from the races you’d expect him to be running in. He’s been off 84 days and although he went well fresh on seasonal debut, Simon and Ed Crisford’s runners have achieved a PRB of just 0.34 with handicap runners in the past 90 days returning from a 60+ day break whereas their total handicap runners in the same period have a PRB of 0.51. Those disappointments include runners at 3/1, 4/1, and 4/1 and the common theme has been that they are weak at the finish.

Reading between the lines, he’s had an issue and the target this season is going to be the November Handicap back here in a couple of weeks’ time. The ground may well go against him there again but this has the look of a prep run and for a horse rated 99, do they really want to win here and carry another 5lbs or 6lbs in the big one? Unlikely. The ideal scenario for me, who desperately wants to be on Aaddeey when he does win, is an okay performance here without winning and then he turns up in the November Handicap after an unseasonal dry and warm spell in the next fortnight. That might be wishful thinking but he won’t be carrying my money here. I’d much rather back Rhythmic Intent in this at the same sort of price in a race that admittedly probably isn’t going to take a great deal of winning.

Monday Musings: Champions

/in /by

An epic Champions Day at Ascot on Saturday definitely settled one major argument and all but decided another, writes Tony Stafford. In all honesty though, Murphy versus Buick and Appleby contra the Gosdens were the sideshows to an overwhelming afternoon for the Shadwell Estate Company, Jim Crowley and William Haggas.

There was a tinge of irony in the fact that in the week after the announcement of an admittedly expected but still shocking major reduction in the number of horses in the blue and white colours of the late Sheikh Hamdan Al Maktoum, Shadwell won half the races.

Most – me at the head of that particular queue – expected a John and Thady Gosden benefit. But in the opening stayers’ race, Stradivarius suffered another defeat at the hands not only of Trueshan but 50-1 shot Tashkhan who came through late to give Brian Ellison a scarcely credible second place.

So once again Hollie Doyle was the nemesis for Frankie Dettori. He had accused racing’s favourite and most talented female rider of setting an inadequate pace on a pacemaker when the pair were riding for Aidan O’Brien in the Prix Vermeille on Arc Trials Day.

Dettori was on the unbackable Snowfall that day, previously a triple Oaks winner in the summer, including at Epsom under the Italian, but was turned over by Roger Varian’s Teona. Frankie reckoned Hollie got the pace wrong, but horses are supposed to run on their merits and in the event La Joconde was only a half-length behind the superstar in third. If that smacked of sour grapes, on Saturday it was more a case of sour face.

Riding his favourite horse the now slightly faltering multiple champion stayer Stradivarius, Dettori came back boiling, now blaming young Irish rider Dylan Browne McMonagle for twice blocking his run. My view of the closing stages was that any inconvenience could hardly have been of the order of four lengths – the margin by which he was behind Trueshan. McMonagle, far from bowed by the old-timer’s complaints, quite rightly called it “just race-riding”.

The fastest finisher of the front three was undoubtedly Tashkhan, who started out in 2021 having joined Ellison from Emmet Mullins on a mark of 70. He was already up to 106 by Saturday and no doubt will have earned another hike. For Trueshan and his owners, who include Andrew Gemmell, his exploits entitle him to be the year’s top stayer.

I felt it worth starting out on Grumpy Frankie, who in a magical career of well over 30 years has had more than his fair share of good fortune – and leniency from the authorities - notably that day with the seven winners on the same racecourse. That was the year when I had just finished writing his “autobiography”, a Year in the Life of Frankie Dettori. Come off it Frankie, imagine how many times you’ve got in someone’s way when they thought they had a race in the bag!

But we move back to Shadwell. Two of their three winners on the day were home-breds. These were Baaeed, emphatic winner of the QE II Stakes and Eshaada, another Roger Varian filly to lower the colours of Snowfall, again below par in third in the Fillies’ and Mares’ race. After the brilliance of her trio of summer Group 1 wins at Epsom, The Curragh and York Snowfall may just be feeling the cumulative erosion caused by those efforts – not least her sixth in the Arc just two weeks previously. Varian must be thinking she’s his Patsy!

The third Shadwell winner was like the other two, a progressive three-year-old. William Haggas had not even revealed Baaeed to the racing public until June 7 of his three-year-old career but in the intervening 18 weeks he had won four more times including at Longchamp. Here the son of Sea The Stars was faced with the Gosdens’ Palace Pier, the highest-rated horse in Europe last year.

That status has been usurped by last weekend’s Arc hero Torquator Tasso. Baaeed was a most convincing winner and must have a massive future. Whether it will be that much more glorious than what we will see from Haggas’s other winner in the same colours cannot be certain. Aldaary, by Territories, had won a handicap on the same track two weeks earlier, the 6lb penalty for which brought his mark in Saturday’s closing Balmoral Handicap to 109. No problem as he proved to be the proverbial group horse running in a handicap by galloping away from 19 others under an exultant Crowley in a time only 0.07sec slower than the Group 1.

If there was an element of sadness around Hamdan’s colours winning half the races on that massive day, for me there was just as much poignancy about Aldaary’s success. The breeder is listed as M E Broughton, slightly disguising the identity of a man who equally hid behind the name of the Essex-based company he built, Broughton Thermal Insulation, in his many years as an enthusiastic owner-breeder.

Michael died last year – as did his wife Carol – and that after a career where the Racing Post Statistics reveal more than 100 winners in his sole name. He won races in all but two of the 33 seasons for which the Racing Post carries statistics, and in his final days actually won four to get him past the century.

He was a one-trainer owner, relying on the always-reticent Wille Musson and when the trainer retired five years ago, he stayed on as Broughton’s racing manager. Clever man that Willie Musson.
Michael was a jovial red-faced enthusiast and for a few years he used to ask me to go through the Cheltenham card on the days when he entertained a table of friends. These included his loyal PA, Maggie and Michael’s brother Roger as well as the Mussons, in the main restaurant at the Cheltenham Festival.

All his horses carried the prefix Broughtons (sometimes with an apostrophe before the “s”) and Broughtons Revival won three races of the four she competed in on turf as against a winless five appearances on all-weather, of course for Musson.

Retired to stud she had six foals before Aldaary and five of them are winners. No wonder Aldaary realised 55,000gns as a foal to the bid of Johnny McKeever at the 2018 December sales and then, re-submitted the following year in Book 2 of the October Yearling Sale, jumped up to 150,000gns to Shadwell. More than 150 Shadwell horses are due to go under the hammer at the Horses in Training Sale next week. I doubt that Aldaary, who holds the entry, will be sporting the insignia of Lot 1308 at Park Paddocks, rather enjoying some down time back at Somerville Lodge.
However sad it was that Sheikh Hamdan could not enjoy his day of days, I have much more regret that Michael was unable to enjoy seeing by far the best horse he has ever bred over all those years. Willie and Judy Musson will have been pleased as punch no doubt.

Earlier in the piece I suggested that Snowfall might not have fully recovered from her demanding run in the mud of Longchamp 13 days earlier, but the horse that finished one place ahead of her that afternoon stepped up to win the Champion Stakes thereby unseating Mishriff, the second Gosden ace in the hole.

That top-class globe-trotting winner of more than £10 million had sat out the Arc presumably to save his energies for Ascot, but shockingly, he didn’t last home, fading to fourth as Sealiway and Mickael Barzalona strode forward. Dubai Honour made a great show in second for the Haggas team and Classic winner Mac Swiney was third ahead of Mishriff thereby keeping Jim Bolger well in the action hard on the news that his other star of 2021 Poetic Flare is off to a stud career in Japan.

Sealiway had benefited from the traditional French way of training top-class three-year-olds. He had not run for almost four months before his Arc challenge having been runner-up a length and a half behind St Mark’s Basilica in the Prix Du Jockey Club.

Trained then by F Rossi, he switched to Cedric Rossi during the layoff and this convincing victory showed him as a high-class performer and one that is sure to be a major force in European and world racing over ten and twelve furlongs for the next year or so.

Elsewhere, Oisin Murphy held on to win a third title, but I understand there might still be some uncomfortable moments for him. He is a wonderful jockey and we have to hope he can overcome his demons. William Buick’s strong challenge will have given this unassuming young man the confidence that a championship is within his grasp especially as the Charlie Appleby stable remains so powerful.

Last week I suggested the Gosdens had more than enough firepower to claw back the half-million or so deficit they had on Godolphin’s main trainer, but in the event they retrieved barely ten per cent of it on Champions Day. Admittedly the season and therefore the title race in name continues until December 31 but big John and son Thady have no realistic chance of breaching the gap.
Creative Force won the sprint for Charlie and William and a touch more than £300k in the second race of the six. With his main rival surprisingly failing to get a winner on the day – especially the QE II and Champion Stakes, worth considerably more than £1.1 million that looked at their mercy - Appleby assuredly will win his first title after a period when John Gosden and Aidan O’Brien have been dominant.

The massive crowd and good weather and not least fair ground made for a wonderful day – on the tenth anniversary of the lavish Qipco sponsorship. A couple of friends managed to secure tickets for the owners’ lunchroom and Kevin and Dave had a wonderful time. The staff seemed overrun at times but the very pleasant greeter at the top of the stairs was a superlative advertisement for the hospitality trade.

The smile never left her face and then later in the afternoon I was quite surprised to see her carrying out a heavy load of rubbish to the bins. On suggesting that might be someone else’s job, she replied: “They are so busy and have been working very hard, it’s only fair!” What a woman!

At the end of the afternoon, when Dave, having enjoyed a fairly long and liquid lunch, mistook a step and fell headlong down half a flight of stairs, again the staff were quick to come to his aid, calling immediately for the medics. Dave, 78, was pronounced okay so we were cleared to go off to an evening at an Essex hostelry to complete a lovely day. And while I was fully aware of my chauffeuring requirements, the boys made a night of it and true to form were up and ready to go early on Sunday morning with Kevin, I know, supervising the action at his shellfish cabin in Billericay.

- TS

Today I am 50

/in /by

Exactly ten years ago, I wrote a blog post entitled "Today I Am 40", which you can read here should you be so inclined. Being mathematically astute, you will have figured out that a full decade has since passed and I am now marking the milestone (millstone?) that is fifty.

40 was a largely pleasurable moment, reminiscing with fondness on aeons of vague recklessness in the years theretofore. Fifty, it's a word not a number, feels somewhat more ominous. For anyone so presumptuous as to believe a hundred is achievable, it represents halfway; as the transit through a fifth decade has increasingly frequently reminded me, 80 might be considered a very fine stint and, as such, one is now well into the back nine. Such mortal self-awareness has some legitimacy, as will emerge before the end of the page.

If that's as sombre an overture as has perhaps ever been scribbled in this virtual notebook, allow me to indulge a moment or three further, and to paint a spot of colour into that dark initial outline. Actually, some bright flourishes.

The '40' post offered a potted history of a lifetime to that point; here I will merely fill in the gaps since then, many of which have been shared with the longer-suffering amongst you (sincerely, THANK YOU) in real time.

Shortly after my 40th - note, not immediately after! - young Leonardo was conceived and, in September 2012, he arrived. Just about every mum and dad will recall with seems-like-only-yesterday lucidity the early reactive struggles of clueless parenting. They soon (relatively) give way to a lifetime of joy - at least from where I'm sitting prior to the teenage years - and I can honestly say that each year with Leon has been more of a pleasure than the one which preceded it.

Carole (Mrs Matt from older personal accounts) and I are extremely fortunate to have carved out livings in a way that allows us to be at, or close to, home most of the time. That means Leon has been a little spoiled for parental attention or, to spin that more positively, has been given every opportunity to show academic and generous-spirited aptitudes. It is my very great pleasure to relate that he has accepted all such figurative invitations to date. Just turned nine, he's a kind, funny, bright, loving, inquisitive, charming, thoughtful, handsome young man. And, obviously, he is the apple of his dad's (and his mum's) eye. He is also lucky enough to have perfect health, as have we all, touch wood, and that is one of the things for which time - and experience - has given me a far deeper appreciation.

In 2013, I conceived my second child, almost as beloved as the first. Yes, Geegeez Gold emerged threshing and wailing, burping and farting into the bright lights of the internet and onto a screen near you. Having previously overseen a portfolio of websites (with help from many people, notably Chris - my mainstay and right hand here), I took the decision to dump them all bar geegeez.co.uk and to instead double down by building "the best racecard and form tool website in Britain". That was my ambition eight years ago and, while it is maybe not for me to judge [we have won gongs, don't you know? 😉 ], I feel we've come at least pretty close to that bold aspiration.

It obviously didn't happen overnight; and it didn't happen without the endeavour of some very smart people - Dave, Nige, Paul, Jean-Francois - and me a bit, too. Since 2014, your subscriptions have fuelled the development of the service, and they continue to do that. We've added so many features, too many to mention, but perhaps the stroke of genius/luck (there's a fine line, right?) was the very first thing I created: Instant Expert, or the unsexily-named 'Race Analysis Report' in its first incarnation.

That simple view, which can deconstruct the entire form history of all the runners in a race in, literally, seconds is the 'go to' for many Gold'ers even after myriad features and functions, metrics and matrices, have been subsequently added. And understandably so; it remains a core part of my 'first pass' research also.

Geegeez Gold is reaching maturity now, by which I mean it has become hard to add features of earth-shattering utility because most of them are already there. Nevertheless, the workstack continues to grow and things on the near- to mid-term 'to do' list include a big Query Tool overhaul, further sectional additions (including, hopefully, the remaining course data), a Profiler page, and potentially some big race trends pages. There is always more to add!

As well as investing in the software, and the editorial on site (most of it brilliantly provided by others this year, though I definitely plan to get back writing in 2022), we've been able to sponsor a few of the actors, too. Currently, the Champion Apprentice (and Champion All-Weather Apprentice - a double I don't think any other rider has achieved) Marco Ghiani (85 winners in the past year), fourth-placed finisher in the Flat Championship David Probert (169 winners in the past year), and the shrewd and ascendant jumping yard of Anthony Honeyball - as well as his two stable jockeys, Rex Dingle and Ben Godfrey - all sport the geegeez.co.uk logo with swash and buckle. And all are top blokes, too: that's been a very great personal pleasure for me in recent years.

*

Since 40, that previously alluded to autobiography illustrated with a picture of a trifle made by my mother, I'm sad to impart that, in August 2015, she passed away suddenly, aged 70.

In August 2019, having been diagnosed only two months previously, my sister Celeste also passed. She was 54. That was in many ways a greater shock. The loss of a loved brother or sister is more poignant than that of a loved parent, at least it was for me: we expect to outlive our parents, we don't take such liberties with our siblings.

I don't mind admitting that, for six months or so, that - excuse me - knocked the absolute bollocks out of me. All passing loved ones are tough to bear, some tougher still.

*

The world kept turning while I wasn't really paying attention to it and, from that difficult stanza, I came out swinging on the business front. 2020 was going to be a year of transformation. I hired marketers, we had a plan to expand socially (one of the biggest challenges of growing a business like geegeez.co.uk is that we are so heavily constrained in terms of where we can advertise - sigh), we had a new office from which to expedite this scaling mission... and then, Covid.

Belt tightening was the first order of business for every commercial entity not owned by Jeff or Zuck (nauseating little megalomaniacs that they are), and geegeez was no different. The timing of expansion plans was thus horrendous. Thanks in major part to the understanding and kindness of the geegeez community we rode out that storm, and came back firing from June onwards.

Changes in the development team slowed progress for a while but we are now on a better than even keel, and looking forwards once more.

*

I've been doing a few different things alongside geegeez since stepping back from the huge time vacuum that is the Horseracing Bettors Forum, of which I was a founder member and latterly Chair for a while. There's the tennis project, TennisProfits.com, created by the brains of Steve 'Goal Profits' Brown and Paul 'Tradeshark' Shires, and me; and I've been playing with crypto investing for a few years, too.

(Investing is too strong a term. I started out with eight Bitcoin, which I bought for £300 each, and have managed to fritter most of that away via Ponzi schemes and altcoin 'diversification'. Here's what I've learned: put 85%+ into Bitcoin and guess your best guess on the rest. There will be big winners while most go to zero, and it is still too early to say especially convincingly which will be which. But Bitcoin is very likely here to stay. N.B. this does NOT constitute financial advice. Duh!)

*

And now, here I am at fifty. Try as I might I've not yet got my head around the number. I know it's a 'thing', this mild midlife crisis, fifty-itis: like all the other stuff I've referenced above, encountered and experienced by many/most of those at such a vintage. And, like many/most, I'll get over it and press on.

Leon is growing up and, if I'm lucky enough to get to another birthday ending in zero, he'll have just about flown the coop. At that point, I'll be able to say that I've achieved the big things I wanted to achieve, both personally and professionally; though of course I still have unfulfilled ambitions on both scores (many of them revolving around racehorse ownership - first world dreams!)

When I was forty, I didn't think, "where will I be when I'm fifty?". And I didn't know Geegeez Gold would become the thing that it has. And I definitely didn't know that 'young man' would illuminate every day with his casual facility.

So, why worry about sixty? Or even fifty-one. Carpe diem.

Matt

p.s. it's very unlikely you've read this far if you don't know me - and geegeez - very well already. But in the unlikely event that that is the case, you can get full Gold access for the next week or so just be registering a free account. Here's the link you need for that.

Ascot Champions Day Draw And Pace Bias

/in , /by

There is no debate about where the top action is this weekend. It’s Champions Day and all eyes will be on Ascot.

The course biases won’t be seen to full effect in the smaller field Group races but these races do attract bigger fields and there is also the big field Balmoral Handicap so Ascot course biases should still be on show on Champions Day.

The key thing to consider here is the changing course biases as the year goes on at Ascot. We can often see a very strong draw bias at Ascot in October which could help us narrow down some of the more difficult races.

Ascot Straight Track Draw Bias In October

It often pays to be on the near side of the track (high numbers) for the early part of the year at Ascot but does that change in October?

This table shows results at Ascot from the past five years in straight track races in fields of 16 or more.

We only have 14 races to look at which means a small sample, so a pinch of salt is taken with this data, but this is what it seems to say.

Firstly, 10 of these 14 races were won by single figure stalls. That means 71% of the winners have come from 50.6% of the runners, those that were drawn lowest. A tick for lower draws when it comes to finding the winners.

How about the places? Well the four best EW PL figures belong to stalls 4, 1, 8 and 7. In total 39 out of 53 places belong to stall 10 or lower, that’s 73.6% of places from 56.2% of the lowest drawn runners.

So that certainly seems to more than hint at lower draws having an advantage on the straight track at Ascot in October and the draw bias could be as strong as ever this year as the low draw bias seems to be increasing if anything.

Looking at the Balmoral Handicap, 5 of the last 6 winners have been drawn 10 or below but Escobar did win from stall 21 in 2019. In fact that year the first two home were drawn in stalls 21 and 20. However the runners raced on the far side of the course that day too and Escobar finished right on the far rail so he very much overcame his high draw rather than won because of it.

In 2020 4 of the first 5 home were drawn in stalls 7 or lower, again showing a low draw bias, and we saw another strong bias in the 2021 Challenge Cup with just three runners exploring the far side of the track and two of those pulling clear of the field.

So in the bigger field races on Ascot’s straight track at this year’s Champions Day I’ll be trying to concentrate on lower drawn runners where possible.

Ascot Pace Bias

Ascot is often considered a course where hold up performers do well, especially the mile distance, and this is backed up with data.

The table above shows the record of horses held up early across all race distances at Ascot and the distance where hold up performers have the best place percentage is a mile.

When you look at the pace analyser data for Ascot’s mile in 16+ runner handicaps away from fast ground (the ground is very unlikely to ever be good to firm on Champions Day) it is clear that the closer you are to the pace, the more compromised your chance is.

A massive 20 of these 24 races have been won by horses that race either in mid division or are held up in the rear. Looking at the place percentages, front runners have just an 8.7% place strike rate compared to 10.79% for prominent, 17.86% for mid division and 25.51% for held up. Those are some hefty jumps between figures and go to show the best run styles for Ascot’s mile.

Balmoral Handicap Preview

The race that I’m most interested in from a betting point of view on Saturday is the Balmoral Handicap.

Let’s first have a look at the pace map for this contest.

There should be no shortage of pace with four potential front runners all drawn next to each other in the middle to high section of the draw. Shelir also made the running last time out so there could be quite the early burn up.

Given there is plenty of pace towards the higher end of the draw it’s very possible that some of this pace stays near side and doesn’t track over the to the far side. If that happens it would increase the chances of the more patiently ridden higher drawn runners staying near side rather than following the pace across to the far side.

If that does happen there is still some pace amongst the lower numbers. Marie's Diamond often makes the running as can Rhoscolyn.

It doesn't seem the the betting for this race has adjusted enough for the draw and that is hopefully something we can take advantage of. Given the pace data above and the pace setup for this race I’m still convinced that low numbers are the place to be with preference for those held up.

John Gosden seems to target this race, just like he seems to target the Cambridgeshire, but whilst he has a decent recent strike rate in that Newmarket race he is yet to win this contest. He’s had the beaten favourite in 2018 and 2019, although he certainly had a well handicapped horse in 2019, Lord North was runner up off 110 and subsequently rated 123.

This year he has the first two in the early betting, plus Magical Morning a little further down the list. The well bred Kingman half brother Sunray Major could be anything having won both starts this season, including a 7f handicap here last time out. A 6lb penalty for winning a 17 runner handicap comfortably last time looks fine but he’s drawn in stall 21. He’s going to have to either stick to his side of the course which will probably cost him his chance or track over, which can be done, but it means he’s covering more ground than anything else.

Gosden’s other runner in this is King Leonidas. He’s seemingly done much better with the draw in stall 8 and he looks well handicapped based on the form of his Newmarket novice win early last year. He was disappointing in the Jersey Stakes here after that though and subsequently missed 454 days of action before a promising return in a competitive Newbury handicap over 10f. He was poorly placed in that event and stayed on well but doesn’t look good value on the limited evidence that is his form, for all he has to be respected as a lowish drawn, lightly raced hold up performer.

There are quite a few I like here and one that I’m worried about the ground for is Nugget. This is a horse who I thought would absolutely love the Royal Hunt Cup but unfortunately he picked up an injury in the Thirsk Hunt Cup and missed the majority of the summer. He returned with a slightly workmanlike win at Haydock and he’s gone up another 3lbs for that. The form of his early season runs is very strong but he’s never raced on anything softer than good before and that seems to be more by design than coincidence. The ground will probably be just the good side of good to soft so it’s hardly going to be desperate but you have to be ruthless to narrow down these big fields so I’m going to reluctantly give him a miss, for all I still think he has a big handicap in him.

Aldaary is another I like. His draw actually put me off when he won last time out because most of the action on the previous day had developed on the other side of the course (hopefully I don't get the draw wrong again here!). He loved the softer ground that day and a 6lb penalty is unlikely to stop him. His worst run this season came on his only try at this distance but he’s shaped all season as though he wants it and he’s been extremely consistent at Ascot this year (form figures of 1551 in some super competitive handicaps). He’s also won 4 out of 5 on ground softer than good. His draw in stall 11 should be just about okay and thanks to the presence of the Gosden runners he’s actually a very fair price at around 9/1. At the very least he’s worth an each way saver with bookies paying six or even seven places. There is better value elsewhere though.

Escobar is interesting. He runs off a 1lb higher mark than he won this two years ago, beating the well handicapped Lord North comfortably. Despite plenty of placed efforts since that was actually the last time he won and he is finding it difficult to get his head in front these days. He was slightly disappointing last time here too so although better is expected this time around, especially with the step back up in trip likely to suit, he appeals as a place only bet if anything. He’s nicely drawn in stall 2.

I can’t completely rule out Rhoscolyn based on his effort in the Goodwood Golden Mile Handicap, which was run on similar ground to this. He was a neck ahead of Escobar that day and is 1lb better off here. He’s well drawn in stall 5 but he does seem to get on very well with Goodwood and is probably slightly better over an easy mile if anything. Given his draw he could easily run into the places but there are certainly others with better chances.

There was understandably a big plunge on Sir Busker on Thursday evening and it’s easy to understand why. He seemingly has a great draw in stall 3 and his record over Ascot’s straight mile is excellent. He won the Royal Hunt Cup consolation in 2020 off a 19lb lower mark but continued to improve and was 4th in the Queen Elizabeth II Stakes last season, just half a length behind Palace Pier. This season he was 3rd here at listed level on ground that would have been far too fast, still doing best of those held up and then it was the same story again in the Queen Anne Stakes. Given he’d improve for softer ground that was a serious effort. He’s maintained his form well since despite largely running at venues that haven’t suited his run style.

Now trying to translate Group form into handicaps can be expensive for punters but I can make a case for him still off a mark of 111 based on two handicap runs from last season (he hasn’t run in handicap company this year). He might have been 19lbs lower when winning the Royal Hunt Cup consolation but the ground would have been fast enough that day and the runner up has since rated 16lbs higher which definitely makes winning off this sort of mark within reach. He’s also proved he can run well off much higher marks. His last handicap run came at York, a course that wouldn’t suit him as well as Ascot, but he still managed to finish a neck 2nd off a 4lb lower mark.

The 3rd won a Group 3 on his next start, the 5th won on his next start at a mile and the 6th won next time out. A reproduction of this form would see Sir Busker go close. If he has improved since then or improves for Ascot’s straight mile and/or the softer ground he has a huge chance of winning. If you didn’t get the fancy prices on Thursday though you’ve probably missed the boat (still 25/1 with bet365 at the time of writing but that will probably be gone by the time this is published).

If the value call isn’t Sir Busker then it must be Accidental Agent, another Ascot straight course specialist. He’s getting on a bit now and his Queen Anne win is now more than three years ago but that effort proves just how effective he can be here. He also won the 2017 Challenge Cup over 7f here off a 3lb lower mark and was 4th in this race that year off a 3lb higher mark when not getting a clear run at things.

He's been in decent form this season since a wind op and won at Newmarket off a 3lbs lower mark. Now this race is more competitive than that but it was still hot form.

The 2nd, 4th and 5th have all won handicaps since suggesting a 3lbs higher mark really shouldn’t be beyond him. He was seemingly below par or outclassed in a Salisbury Group 3 next time but there was nothing wrong with his 2nd to subsequent Group 3 winner Al Suhail next time out. He outran his odds in the Group 3 Joel Stakes and then ran okay here in the Challenge Cup on heavy ground, doing 3rd best of those who raced in the centre and best of all out of those that were held up in the race. Fresh ‘won’ the race in the centre and he’s probably still a group horse in a handicap whilst Tomfre was 2nd in the centre and he was 2nd at Leicester this week on ground that was probably a bit fast for him. Stall 4 and a decent pace over a mile on this straight track should be the ideal setup for ACCIDENTAL AGENT and I think he offers huge each way value at prices as big as 50/1.

Next on my shortlist would be Sir Busker, Aldaary and Escobar in that order.

The Ultimate Guide to Betting on Horses and Using Geegeez Gold

/in /by

This Q&A article is designed to highlight and explain possible betting angles in horse racing and different ways to get the best out of Geegeez Gold. This will be added to on a regular basis, answering questions from YOU, the readers. 

For all questions there will be answers from each of Matt Bisogno, Sam Darby and Chris Worrall. Everyone has a slightly different approach when it comes to betting on horses so you should expect differing answers from all three contributors.

If you have a question you’d like to ask the Geegeez panel, about horse racing in general or specifically their use of Geegeez Gold, please post your query in the comments section and we’ll do our best to include it in the next round of answers.

How do you approach looking for bets with Geegeez Gold?

 

Matt: I’ve a number of things I’m looking for, some situational and some more general. The first and most important thing, in my view, is to choose the right races. Race selection is under-rated and yet, if fishing in shallower pools, we have a much better chance of getting a result. Because of the nature of Geegeez Gold, which is geared much more towards form profiles, I tend to look for races where the horses have already run plenty of times (and therefore we know pretty much their level of ability).

In such races, it is rare that one suddenly steps forward significantly, and so it is often a case of finding the one best suited by the conditions. Tools like Instant Expert, the pace tab and, for flat races, draw tab all feature strongly in my analysis.

More specifically, some of the things I’m keen on marking up (because I believe they’re generally under-rated) are extremes of going (heavy, firm) or field size (very small or 16+ runner fields), specialist distances (5f, 9f, 2m2f+ on flat, 3m6f+ over jumps), first/second time scenarios (trainer records with first or second time in a handicap), change of trainer, distance move, and so on.

For those of you more experimental (and experienced), taking a keen interest in sectional data can be rewarding. Identifying horses with a likely similar pace scenario today from when they recorded a strong sectional figure can be very worthwhile. Our Fast Finishers report is valuable to that end, and comes into its own during the AW season in my view.

Ultimately, I’m looking for value by using bits of information others might not be. Choosing the right races is a big leg up, and then Geegeez Gold can help hugely thereafter.

This video post on Race Selection may help.

 

Sam: In most races I already have an idea of what I’m going to be backing as I’ll be guided by my tracker entries. The races in which my tracker horses are entered are those that initially interest me.

First of all I’ll remind myself of why they are in my tracker, by either checking my notes or checking the strength of their recent runs (in nearly every case I’ll have added them as they’ve run well in a ‘hot’ race). Then I’ll go through the other runners in the race and I’ll check how my tracked runners are likely to be advantaged or disadvantaged by the run of the race based on course pace and draw biases and the pace setup of the race, so heavy use of the draw and pace tabs. 

If there are unknowns about any of the runners, particularly ground or distance, I’ll often use the sire tab on the Profiler tool to check their likely suitability. I’ll use all this info to determine whether or not those runners are a bet and if they are, the strength of that bet.

There are also courses where I always have a quick look through to see if there are any in form front runners likely to get an easy lead. I only do this for front runner favouring courses. I use the pace maps to get a quick snapshot of the pace setup and then I check the form of any lone pace angles. If they have the form to be competitive I’ll look at the entire race in more detail before deciding if that front runner is a bet or not.

 

Chris: As many of you are already aware, I’m predominantly a stats-based bettor and I use the query tool and report suites to highlight runners that might interest me. I then weed out those in races I don’t like getting involved in, sticking mainly (but not exclusively) to handicaps, where there’s plenty of data to work with.

Trainers are generally pretty fixed in their ways and once they find an approach that works for them, they’re loathe to change and that’s why I follow the stats. If trainer xyz excels in staying handicaps on testing ground and he suddenly has one out, then I’ll take a look, then I use the toolkit to assess whether conditions will suit the horse, before moving to pace and where relevant, draw.

But, I should re-iterate what I’ve said elsewhere, lists of horses from statistical reports, either created by myself or by the Geegeez report suite are only ever an initial excuse/reason to look at a race, they’re not a list of bets.

What do you think is the most underrated angle/aspect of form study?

 

Matt: Two things spring to mind. First, run style - especially front runners from higher draws - can be a gold mine. And secondly, exposed horses (i.e. those that have run many times already and have few secrets from the formbook) in exposed handicaps. 

It is often said that such horses “take it in turns to win”. That is true, but the inference - that it is impossible to know which will have its turn today - is incorrect. A combination of a competitive (relative to personal history) handicap mark, favourable draw and/or run style, and the right track and trip normally see a horse in the mix. That will often be factored into its price, of course, but still quite often it is not.

 

Sam: I still think pace biases are generally underappreciated, both by punters and bookies. In terms of course biases, using Chester as an example, bookmakers are obviously well aware of the effect of the draw and in most 5f handicaps the first three in the betting will be drawn in the lowest stalls. They are strongly reacting to the likely effect of the draw - and rightly so.

However in these same races the odds rarely reflect the likely pace bias to the same degree. You’ll see runners likely to be held up in last heading the betting over something, with not too dissimilar form levels, that will be ridden prominently.

Chester is a pretty obvious one but there are loads of courses in the UK where front runners can be heavily favoured where in my opinion front runners are being allowed to go off at too big a price. So understanding these course biases is crucial for me and it’s obviously something I find Geegeez Gold helps me a lot with.

 

Chris: At the risk of following the herd, I’d have to agree with my colleagues here. Pace, tempo, race tactics, running styles, call it what you will, but that’s the thing I’ve found has helped the most over the last year since getting more switched on to it. Some tracks suit the front runner, some don’t. Some benefit those who get waited with.

I’d also contend that track layout/tightness of bends and proximity of the first and last bends to the starting/finishing post are often overlooked, as these can massively affect horses drawn closest to the bend. Those who follow F1 will know about racing lines and how approaching a bend from off the rail and almost “cutting the corner” can be the quickest way from a to b, even if it’s a slightly longer route.

How much time do you spend studying racing, outside of your Geegeez contributions, in an average week

 

Matt: It all depends on what’s happening. Life is busy (good busy, generally!) and I, like everyone else, have to work around that. But I’m able to get a really good feel for at least a few races in relatively short order using the race selection approach and then the Gold toolkit.

When I’m framing a Win 6 syndicate, I’ll spend a good couple of hours (or more) piecing everything together; if betting in a couple of races, it might only be 15-30 minutes.

Over the course of an average week, with say five betting days, I’d be in the form book six to eight hours, I guess.

A weird side note: I don’t generally bet ‘seriously’ on a Saturday. Most pro’s do, and I’m not a pro (though I have a profit expectation from betting, which I’ve realised most years), so fair enough; but I’ve always found it hyper competitive.

 

Sam: On average I’ll dedicate around 12 hours to form study and research. Obviously this varies depending on the racing, during big meetings such as Royal Ascot I’ll probably spend something closer to 3-4 hours each day but on poorer weeks I might only need an hour or less a day to get through the meetings.

My time spent on racing is split into two general parts. The first would be looking at future races, after the final decs are out, and the second part would be research into past races, looking for future winners and horses to add to my tracker. This second part usually takes a couple of hours a week during the early months of the flat season.

The vast majority of my bets are on flat racing and I tend to only get involved in the very biggest jumps races so I’m far less active/busy in the winter months, preferring to concentrate on the all weather action. This helps me switch off a bit from racing (as much as I can!) for a few months a year and keeps me fresh in time for the next flat season.

 

Chris: I'd probably say that I actually spend only about an hour a day max, because I do much of my study/research for the next day at the same time as I'm writing Racing Insights. RI is only a two/three minute read at best for most people, but I spend a good couple of hours pulling it together after I've considered other races/angles etc, so it's not an exact science. 

I struggle to compartmentalise how much time any specific task takes as I'm often doing two or three things at the same time, but I'd probably say I've got racecards & stats etc in front of my face for three hours a day, except Saturdays, when (a) I don't bet and (b) I tend to take most of the day off.

What is your go to report on Geegeez Gold?

 

Matt: I built them so it may be little surprise that I use most of them! I check Fast Finishers daily, and will always scan Trainer Snippets, 2yo 1st run, HC1 and Trainer Change. TJ Combo I’ll look at less than I used to, as typically I’ll get that intel from the jockey form icon on the racecard.

And then, of course, I’ll be all over my Report and QT Angles, which again I view within the racecard of the race I’m looking at. 

The inference from the above is that I’m usually a ‘bottom up’ form student, looking within a race for the snippets of interest to me. That’s as different from a ‘top down’ form student, who might go looking for a bet based on, for example, the best TJ combo record on a given day. 

There’s no right or wrong way, and I’ve flitted between the two approaches over time (and still do). But, more often than not, I’ll start with the race and work from there. Did I mention race selection is crucial? 😉

 

Sam: Anyone who has read any of my previous content might be expecting me to say the Hot Form Report - and it’s an excellent report - but most of my hot form research is done before we get to the final declarations and most of the runners I want to follow, because of hot form, are already in my tracker.

The report I get the most use out of is the Trainer Change Report. I’m never quite sure what to do when one of the horses I am tracking changes stable and this is when I’ll check the Trainer Change Report. I’m not only interested in win percentages, place percentages, PRB and so on but I also like to look at the list of qualifying runners, checking their odds, the field sizes they ran in, etc. I’ll use all of this data to make a judgement call on how likely I think they are to run to previous form - or even improve on it. These runners are often off the track for a while before making the stable debut so I’ll always check the trainer record after 60+ day breaks too.

Very recently this report played a crucial role in having a strong bet on Chillsea at Wolverhampton as Tom Ward had a strong record with runners making their debuts after a stable change.

 

Chris: Probably Horses for Courses and Head to Head from the horse form reports and Trainer Stats / TJC and trainer change from the trainer form reports.

H4C speaks for itself, some horses just go better at certain tracks. There's probably something else affecting the horse on that day, but some are suited by certain conditions. Head to head on its own doesn't tell me too much, but when you delve into that race and assess the margin of defeat, how they've both ran since and the change/swing in weight, it can be very helpful, even if only to rule a bet out.

Most of you have read my stat-based pieces, so my reasons for using Trainer Stats and TJC are pretty obvious, but the Trainer Change angle might not be. A fresh trainer/approach can invigorate a failing horse, but I'm not really just looking for horses that have switched yards. I want to see horses moving yards and then tackling races their previous handler(s) wouldn't have entered them in. 

For example a struggling two-mile hurdler moves to a yard with a good record with stayers, he's in the yard for a while and then comes back from a break to run over three miles. he's doing something he's never done, but for a yard successful in that type of race. It's a bit of a leap of faith sometimes, but you have to assume they'll have prepped well.

How do you determine when a bet is a bet when it comes to price?

 

Matt: This is tricky because for me it’s quite feel based. And, within that, there is no room for atom-splitting. That is, I need to feel like there’s a fair margin in my favour. If I see a horse with a combination of suitable pace setup, back class (i.e. has performed well against conditions historically but not necessarily recently), respectable trainer, and/or interesting change today (1st handicap, up/down in trip, equipment/surgery, trainer switch etc), then I want to know the price.

If I can only get a subset of those criteria boxes ticked, then I want more of a price to counter the decreased likelihood I perceive of the horse winning. 

Quite often it is true that if I find a horse with the combination of factors I’m seeking, in a race where many/most of its rivals are less obviously suited, the price is acceptable. This, I think, is because things like run style preference and back form are underrated in the early markets. Those components are typically subsumed into the price by off time but I’m not betting SP or even on the show generally, so that’s the opportunity to find my idea of value. And, of course, Geegeez Gold is set up specifically to isolate this type of runner!



Sam: This is a great question and is probably one of the key factors in separating the good punters from the bad.

I’ll often formulate my bet shortlists before I know what the prices are going to be, or when only William Hill have priced the races up and most will know how reliable those prices are! So there is always a bit of guesswork involved as to what price my intended bets will be. 

I’m drawn more to competitive handicaps so the vast majority of my shortlisted bets will be a fair enough price to back, but how do I decide that? I don’t price up the entire race as it would serve no purpose for me, I’m not looking to back or lay anything outside of my shortlisted bets. I will however have a rough price in my head for each runner and that obviously plays a huge roll in what I back and more importantly, how much I stake. The prices I assign to my shortlisted runners are based on how well handicapped I think a horse is, how likely it is to run its race and how deep the opposition is.

There are prices I expect a horse to be and prices I think they should be. These are related but not the same. I might think a runner should be around 6/1 but I expect to get around 10/1. I’d perhaps still have something on even if it was 4/1, but it would be a much smaller bet than intended. Sometimes these runners end up at say 14/1 and in that case I’d have a much bigger bet than expected. 

In most cases I expect the bookies to underestimate the horses I’m interested in so I’ll expect to get a bigger price than I think they should be. From there it’s rarely a case of having cut off points about backing them but more of a sliding scale depending on price. The shorter it is compared to what I think it should be, the smaller my stake, the bigger it is in comparison to my expectations, the bigger the stake. In most cases I’d stake more on a 10/1 shot than a 2/1 shot.



Chris: For me, a bet is a bet when the odds reflect an equal or better return compared with the chance I think the horse has of winning.

If I think the horse has a 1 in 3 chance of winning, then I want 9/4 or better. I’m not interested in strike rates, it has to be about profit/ROI and if you don’t get “value” on your bets, you’ll find it very hard to make profit.

Basically a coin toss is a 50/50 chance ie even money. The bookie will give you 10/11 at best, because he needs to make a profit, so conversely I want at least 11/10 on an evens chance.

I suppose the real question is how you decide what kind of chance you think a horse has and that’s where you then need to delve into recent results to see how the horse ran, how its opponents from previous races have fared and also how your horse has performed under similar race conditions previously. 

If a horse has recently completed a hat-trick on the Tapeta at Wolverhampton and then runs on Polytrack elsewhere, he’s likely to go off/be priced much shorter than he should be, unless he’s also proven on Poly. The market is often driven by the 5 or 6 results shown to the left of the name, but results with no context are worth very little.

What is your process for adding horses to your tracker?

 

Matt: Part 1: Identification - Exclusively from watching racing, or from sectional times. The key with tracker horses from watching races - or indeed from sectional times - is to look beyond the obvious. The one that flies home for second is missed by nobody; the one who made great late gains into a never nearer sixth and is bred for further is notebook/tracker material. Or the one to run well from the wrong side of the draw, or to only fade late after setting crazy fractions. 

Part 2: Documentation -  Adding a horse to a tracker requires context. Here’s a (convenient, of course) example from my own tracker of a horse that just won: 

30/12/21: HC1, close up before outpaced and then staying on well at the death, btn 2L. By Al Kazeem, a step up in trip should see him go close next time.

I usually add the trip/class/going it ran over. That race was over 9.5f at Wolves and today she won over 11f at Southwell; she needed every yard of the distance and will probably improve again for a further increase in trip.

Importantly, I would have let her beat me at shorter trips because I will only bet tracker horses in the circumstances I’ve identified. Obviously that doesn’t always pan out as I’d like, but it is very important discipline overall, and the key to tracker success.

Part 3: Housekeeping - Horses cannot and should not stay on the tracker indefinitely. At least every two to three months (depending on how much weeding your tracker needs - more entries equals more weeding!), have a look through and cull at least a small percentage. And beware the cliff horse: if you can’t bear to see it win unsupported, just cut your stakes back and understand where you are emotionally with the horse!!

 

Sam: Anyone who has read any of my content on Geegeez will know I’m a big fan of hot form and that is responsible for nearly all of the horses that are added to my tracker. 

Every couple of weeks, especially in the first four or five months of the flat season, I go through every single handicap race result. I normally try to stay two or three weeks behind to ensure a few runners have already come out of the races I am looking at. From there, using the brilliant Future Form tab on the race results pages on Geegeez, I either ignore the race if it’s not working out, bookmark the results page if there isn’t enough evidence yet about the strength of the form and if the race is working out I’ll add the most interesting runners to my tracker. 

I’ll revisit those bookmarks regularly and once there is enough subsequent form to make a judgement I’ll delete the bookmark, adding runners from the race if the form is working out or ignoring the race if the form hasn’t worked out. .

I probably only back about half of the runners on my tracker each day, if that. Some I’m extremely keen to be with next time and others I’m only interested in them in certain circumstances. They might be course specialists, runners that need a very strong pace to aim at, etc.



Chris: To be honest, I don’t use trackers as much as (a) you’d expect or (b) others do, but I’ll add horses to my tracker, if I feel they were “unlucky” in running or possibly didn’t get the best ride (yes, it happens). I’ll also add winners who just did enough to win, but looked like they had plenty in hand, but there’s no real science to that, it’s pure opinion formed from watching the races.

Once I start tracking a horse, I’ll only leave them there for a couple or three races, before revisiting them to see if they’re still worth keeping an eye on. Quite often, they’ll have won and have been weighted out of it by the handicapper or conversely, they’ve produced nothing and have gone backwards. With the latter, I tend to just remove them, with the former, I’ll often leave them on the tracker, but I’ll add a note about what mark/OR/class etc I’d like to see it drop back to.

How much importance do you place on watching races back when looking through form, as opposed to relying on in running comments?

 

Matt: I don’t have time to watch a lot of race replays, so it’s one of those things where I know - and advocate - that reviewing races will improve the selection process; but I, like everyone, have to find an optimum approach that fits with everything else I do. 

The advantage I have over many is that I do watch a lot of racing live whilst working, so I’m able to add to my tracker; and, furthermore, I review sectional times so I’m not just relying on the ol’ peepers, which can deceive us sometimes.

 

Sam: I wasn’t a massive race re watcher until a couple of years ago, preferring to go almost 100% off form lines and in running comments, however in recent years I have started to watch replays and I’ve found it has helped massively.

The main reason I watch a race replay is to make my own judgements about horses that suffered trouble in running, were having their first runs after a break or may benefit from a change in distance.

I find that in running comments often do a poor job of describing how much traffic some horses encounter and even more so how much running they have left at the finish. I can usually make a much better judgement after watching a reply.

A not so great run after a break can mean a lot of things, and I’m no expert at deducing how much a horse is likely to come on for the run, but you can usually get an idea about if it was just race fitness they were lacking or if they’ve lost their ability. If I’m taking a positive view about something it will usually be because the horse has traveled well until a furlong or so out but just weaked more than most in the final 200 yards. 

It’s a similar feeling with horses changing trips. Just because a horse finishes well it doesn’t mean they need to go up in trip (I’m normally looking for something that was outpaced a couple of furlongs out). Likewise a horse that fades doesn’t necessarily want to go down in trip. Replays are more useful than in running comments when sussing these out.



Chris: In-running comments can only give you a brief overview of one other person’s opinion and to take them at face value is akin to following the selections made by a newspaper “tipster” on a Saturday, where he’ll select a horse from every race. He hasn’t time to do that selection process properly, just as the in-running person doesn’t really have the time (and probably inclination) to do a thorough job. 

That said, I do look at in-running comments from a couple of sources initially to see if there’s a common suggestion as to why/how a horse ran like it did and then I’ll go back and look at the race for myself, with half an eye out for something I’m already expecting to happen.

How do you quantify what mark a horse can run to because of differing race conditions (ground, distance, etc)?

 

Matt: This is not really my thing because, basically, I am very bad at the ratings side of the game. I’ve always felt that, especially in exposed form handicaps (i.e. where they’ve all run a hundred times already), it is the horse best suited to conditions that makes the best bet. 

In other words, I’m trusting the handicapper to have pegged the approximate ability level of a horse by the time it has run, say, six or eight times; and thereafter I can use the evidence of the form book to see how it stacks up against the race class. 

I wouldn’t back the best horse in a race (in form terms) if it didn’t have the best fit from a draw, pace, ground, class, field size perspective. In fact, that sort of fella makes the market for the less obvious (ostensibly, at least) one I do want to back!

When it comes to such as novice races, nurseries and early season three-year-old handicaps, I defer to others, or to the MO of the trainer or any pedigree hints. Generally, I avoid those races because I don’t know enough - and there are too many capable of leaping forward from what they’ve shown so far.

 

Sam: When it comes to race conditions I tend to be a bit more black and white rather than trying to assign precise marks horses can win off. Instead I initially concentrate more on drawing up a shortlist of those that I think will run to form and are capable of being competitive. If conditions (going, distance, pace and draw mainly) are suitable they’ll probably run to form and my judgement on how competitive they’ll be is largely based on the strength of their recent form, by looking at the subsequent runs of those who finished around them previously (looking for hot or cold form).

If I need to decide which runner from a shortlist of two or three is the ‘one’, I still won’t necessarily assign a value of how well in, in terms of pounds, the runners might be. Instead I’ll usually consider how much improvement they might have if they are lightly raced (based on trainer, breeding, visuals) and also a lot may come down to how well positioned they should be based on how the race will be run. For more exposed runners I’ll consider previous marks they’ve run well off in similar conditions. That’s not to say if they’ve won off 88 and are rated 80 today I’ll assume they are 8lbs well in, more so that they should have some wiggle room off their current mark.

The one time I really do tend to assign a more precise ‘potential’ rating, rather than just working off ‘well handicapped in conditions’ v ‘not well handicapped in conditions’, is when evaluating some hot form lines. If the winner of a race has subsequently rated 16lbs higher and the 3rd has rated 12lbs higher, it’s often safe to assume the runner up can rate around 14lbs higher. There are a lot of other factors involved in evaluating that but it’s a simplistic example.

 

Chris: Ah, ratings! Personally, I find them quite unreliable : just look around, there are hundreds of ratings available for every race and they rarely agree with each other. Ratings tend not to take into consideration race conditions and those along with pace/draw are more important factors, as are horse/trainer/jockey form.

Don’t get me wrong, there’s a place for ratings as a guide, but as an example a horse running to a mark of 80 over 5f on good ground at Brighton probably won’t run to that mark over 6f on good to soft ground at Haydock, where good to soft generally means soft! So the horse may be rated at 80 under optimum conditions, but does he get 6f? can he handle mud? If his past form suggests he can do 6f on softer ground, then you could rate him at 82+ and so on.

Horses are given a mark based on what they’ve already done and so that weights for their next race can be allotted. Our job is to work out how they’ll actually run in the future under different race conditions and mentally adjust their official mark.


If you have any questions for the panel please post them below in the comments section.

 

 

 

Run Style Bias in Non-Handicap Chases

/in /by

In this fourth and final part of my investigations into run style bias in National Hunt racing, I'll look at the effect of pace, or run style, in non-handicap chases, writes Dave Renham.

The previous three parts can be found below:

- Run Style Bias in Handicap Hurdles
- Run Style Bias in Non-Handicap Hurdles
- Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases

Run style is all about the position a horse takes up early in a race. Here at geegeez there is a pace section which splits the early positions of horses into four groups. The groups are called Led, Prominent, Mid Division and Held Up. Each group is also assigned a numerical value starting at 4 for led, and then 3 for prominent, 2 for mid division and 1 for held up. Essentially, ‘led’ means horses that led the race early, also known as front runners; ‘prominent’ equates to horses which race close up behind the leaders; ‘mid division’ refers to those racing in the middle portion of the field; while ‘held up’ covers the cohort close to or right at the back of the pack.

For this piece I will look at races with seven or more runners – for the other articles I used eight as my cut off, but non-handicap chases too often have smaller field sizes so I wanted to increase the overall data set. Indeed, despite including seven-runner races, in recent seasons the average number of qualifying races per year has been less than 100. That's quite a difference from the 2009 season when there were 226 qualifying races. Note also that hunter chases have been included in this dataset.

Overall Run Style Bias in Non-Handicap Chases

The first set of figures I wish to share with you are the overall run style stats for all National Hunt non-handicap chases in the UK from 1/1/09 to 31/7/21. These have been sourced from the excellent Geegeez Query Tool:

 

There is a definite advantage to early leaders / front runners here, with prominent racers notably second best. Horses that race mid division or are held up have remarkably similar records, both poor in relation to those campaigned more forwardly.

The strike rates for each run style section have stayed extremely consistent over the last 12 years or so, as the following bar charts illustrate. As with previous articles I have split the non-handicap chase data into two in order to compare 2009 to 2014 run style results with those for 2015 onwards. The bar chart below compares the win strike rates (SR%) over these time frames:

 

The difference in percentages is not significant when factoring in the reduced field sizes, so we can reasonably expect these run style patterns to continue in the coming season and over the coming years.

Onto the A/E values now and their comparison over the two time frames:

 

Again, there is very good correlation within the respective run style groupings.

The general pattern is clear, so let's drill down into different areas to see what differences, if any, there might be. With the data being consistent enough across the two halves of time I will analyse these areas over the whole period (Jan 1st 2009 to July 31st 2021).

 

Run Style Bias in Non-Handicap Chases by Distance 

I have split all race distances into three groups, as I did in the previous instalments in this series: the groupings are 2m 1f or less, 2m 2f to 2m 6f, and 2m 7f or more.

2m 1f or less

 

The shorter distance races seem to accentuate the front running bias. In addition hold up horses perform more poorly than the 'all distance' group. The stronger front running bias can be appreciated more clearly perhaps by comparing SR%, A/E values and Impact Values (IV) between these 2m1f or less contests with races of 2m2f or more:

 

Let us now split the last two groupings up and you will see they are similar, still giving an edge to front runners:

2m2f to 2m 6f

 

2m 7f or more

 

One factor to keep in mind in non-handicap chases is that there can often be a significant ability bias; that is, the horses at the front are frequently a good bit better than some of those at the back.

 

Run Style Bias in Non-Handicap Chases by Course

Let's move on to specific racecourses. The problem when slicing data to the course level is that sample sizes are quite limited, especially when focusing on specific course and distance combinations.

Only twelve specific course and distances have hosted thirty or more qualifying races during the period of study. These are the strongest front running biases from that small group:

 

Chepstow 2m 7f or more

At Chepstow they tend to race over 3 miles exactly (officially, at least). Twice in the last 12 years they have raced over further. Here are the run style splits by strike rate:

 

Leaders seem to have enjoyed a huge edge at the Welsh venue. The A/E values back this up from a betting perspective:

 

Front runners enjoy an A/E value of over 2.00 (2.16) with all other run styles falling well below 1.00. 

 

Exeter 2m 7f or more

At Exeter they race over 3 miles only. Here are the front running strike rates:

 

While not as strong as the Chepstow bias, it is still far more beneficial for a horse to be ‘on the front end’. Moreover, the prominent racer stats are strong, too, suggesting that this is not an easy C&D over which to come from off the pace. A/E values for the same now:

 

Again, we see good correlation, backing up previous observations. There is a less striking disparity between front of pack racers and later runners than at Chepstow's longer distance, but it is still comfortably the difference between long-term profit and the poor house.

 

Cheltenham 2m 4f and 2m 6f

Combining these two trips across the two courses (New and Old) at Cheltenham shows that that even with the fiercely competitive racing, and the individual track nuances, front runners remain the value:

 

As you might have come to expect the A/E values mirror the above run style split:

 

These are the three strongest course and distance run style biases I could find with big enough datasets. There will doubtless be others but some 'flyers' will need taking due to the small samples.

 

Run Style Bias in Non-Handicap Chases by Race Class

With such limited useful data at the course level, I decided to explore alternative areas. Class of race is something I have analysed before in relation to run style, but never in non-handicap chases. I decided to split the class of race into three groups, namely Classes 1 and 2, Classes 3 and 4, and finally Classes 5 and 6 (including the majority of hunter chases). Here are my findings for strike rates:

 

Now this is interesting. The orange bars, showing Class 3 and 4 run style results, clearly indicate at this class level the front running bias is at its strongest. Looking at the lowest class group (5 and 6) there is a front running edge but it is somewhat diminished. The highest Classes (1 and 2) have very similar figures for front runners and prominent racers. Those forward groups still have the edge on hold up horses but the bias is less potent than with the Class 3 and 4 group.

There are many ways one could interpret these findings. I am going suggest the following.

Firstly, in Class 1 and 2 races, these are often more competitive and hence it may be harder for front runners to repel later running challengers with a touch of quality. In Class 5 and 6 races, I surmise that front runners have less ability and, as such, are unable to sustain their pace throughout the whole race, thus fewer end up winning.

Finally, then, Class 3 and 4 races may then be the sweet spot, with horses that lead early having enough ability to see a race out while being faced with slightly lesser calibre rivals compared with Class 1 and 2 contests.

The above is, of course, just one interpretation and I may be wrong. Racing, and particularly analysing and betting on racing, is as much about opinions and theories as it is cold hard data.

 

Run Style Bias in Non-Handicap Chases by Field Size

My next port of call was to look at field size to see if smaller or bigger fields had any bearing on run style stats. I have again split the results up into three groups – races with 7 or 8 runners; those with 9 to 11 runners; and those of 12 or more runners.

For field size one needs to look at A/E or IV values rather than strike rates. Strike rates give an inaccurate comparison as seven-runner races are going to produce higher strike rates across the board than, say, twelve-runner races. I've used A/E as it offers an indication of market potential, higher numbers (above 1.0) leaning towards a suggestion of future profitability.

The bar chart below compares each section.

 

The data suggest that there may be less of an edge to front-runners in mid-sized fields (9 to 11). Unlike with the class data, I cannot offer a ready explanation for why this might be the case. I had expected smaller fields to do quite well in terms of front runners due to the limited competition numbers wise, but I had not expected bigger field races of 12 or more runners to be on a par with 7- or 8-runner races, however.

 

Run Style Bias in Non-Handicap Chases by Going

I wanted to study the going to see if faster or slower ground conditions made a difference. Here, I have split the data in two – firstly good going or firmer; secondly good to soft or softer. The bar chart shows the findings. The blue bars are good or firmer; the orange good to soft or softer:

 

One could argue there is a slightly stronger front running bias in softer conditions, as well as it seeming to be harder to win from the back or near the back (held up) when the turf is wet. However, the differences are relatively small so I'm not fully confident that this is the case.

 

Trainers showing a Front Running Bias in Non-Handicap Chases

Let's finish off by looking at trainers' front-running percentages. Below is a table highlighting the percentage of runners from a given trainer that front run. This type of information can be very useful when trying to work out which horse might lead early in a race, especially when there is little evidence in the form book. Here I have included those trainers with at least 50 runners under the conditions (7+ runner non-handicap chases, 2009 to end July 2021) :

 

There are some huge variations!

Donald Mc Cain’s runners lead over 39% of the time, just about four out of every ten runners; and Rebecca Curtis also seems to favour the front running option: not only do 31% of her horses take the early lead but 30% of those which lead have gone onto win their respective races.

 

Run Style Bias in National Hunt Racing Overall Summary

Looking at the four articles in this series as a whole, I hope readers can see the unarguable edge that front runners have in National Hunt racing. It is true that some front running biases are stronger than others, but in every article, thanks to a bit of extra digging, useful angles and stats have emerged to be deployed throughout the autumn, winter, spring and beyond.

If you have never personally researched run style angles or ideas, I really recommend doing so. Geegeez gives you the tools to unearth profitable pace/run style angles that very few other punters know about. And the great thing is, gathering and crunching data on Geegeez is a quick (and, dare I say it, fun!) process. Gone are the days of scrolling through formbooks and looking at one race at a time.

When you do find something interesting, or if you have any ideas you’d like me to research, please post them in the comments below.

- DR

Monday Musings: Newmarket Rejuvenation

/in /by

I had intended writing copiously 24 hours after my first wholly enjoyable, nay rejuvenating, visit to Newmarket racecourse for two years about a brief conversation of which I was the sole observer, writes Tony Stafford. The conversants were those two genial giants of our sport, Charlie Appleby and Aidan O’Brien, but I will leave that until later.

It was in the evening during a catch-up scan through the Saturday results that I noted the 7.30 p.m. race at Chelmsford was called the Tote.co.uk Now Never Beaten By SP Handicap (Division 1).

I’ve noticed that race title before, marvelling that the object of so much ridicule and indeed suspicion in its Betfred-owned days between 2011 and 2019 had been apparently transformed upon its acquisition and operation by the group formerly known as Alizeti Capital but now UK Tote Group.

Their intention, I remembered reading, was exactly that - to ensure the Tote returns were never to be bettered by SP and to help grow its new version to be of financial benefit to the sport.

In its rubric, Tote Group UK says it is “now owned by a group of racehorse owners and breeders who are passionate about the sport, backed by people who own and train over 1,000 horses worldwide.

“We’re united by a shared desire to secure British racing’s finances for generations to come through a revitalised Tote”. Glowing contributions in that notice in support of UK Tote Group have come from Sir Anthony McCoy, John Gosden, Richard Thompson of Cheveley Park Stud, and the Racehorse Owners Association.

I scrutinised all 36 races run in the UK on Saturday and in 24 of them, including the 7.30 at Chelmsford, SP was better than the returned Tote price about the winner. Course and betting shop punters would not have benefited, but I am reassured that online Tote odds backers will have been, according to the publicity (admittedly confusing) blurb to the tune of a maximum £500 per bet. [The race title referred to tote.co.uk, the online arm of the tote]

The three regular backers I know whom I thought might have been able to confirm this as correct all were unable to do so as they all three to coin a theme “had my account with the Tote closed years ago.” They all habitually try to get a few hundred quid on a horse. One big firm, asked for £500 each way on a horse the other day, offered to take £2.80 each way. Still theirs is a happy slogan and I wish anything that might correct the joke level of prize money in the lower reaches of the sport, a potential blessing. But as my three friends I’m sure would say: “Don’t hold your breath.”

I mentioned Charlie and Aidan’s very amicable chat earlier at Newmarket soon after the Darley Dewhurst Stakes victory of unbeaten Native Trail and the Irishman was glowing in his congratulations to his younger English counterpart.

Three wins on the day had already pushed Appleby past Andrew Balding at the top of the trainers’ championship standings for the first time and Aidan admired both Native Trail and the less exposed Coroebus, easy winner of the Group 2 Autumn Stakes.

Where Native Trail was a breeze-up buy for 210,000gns in the spring, able to make his debut in early July and now was making it a perfect four-for-four, there is no Godolphin blood in him, being by Oasis Dream out of an Observatory mare – Juddmonte all the way.

Coroebus meanwhile is Godolphin through and through: by Dubawi, their version of Coolmore’s great stallion Galileo, out of a mare by Galileo’s first superstar, the unbeaten Teofilo.

O’Brien remarked on both colts’ physicality, to which Appleby replied: “Coroebus is 540 kilos and Native Trail is 545, and that’s as heavy as Adayar who you know is a monster!”  Formidable for two-year-olds you would agree!

The wins brought Appleby some elbow room at the top of the table and with a dearth of major and valuable races to come save next Saturday’s Qatar Champions Day at Ascot and the Vertem Futurity (just over £100k)  at Doncaster the following weekend, opportunities are somewhat polarised.

Aidan told me he plans to run his top juvenile Luxembourg in the Vertem Futurity and expects that outstanding Camolot colt to go first in 2022 for the 2000 Guineas where he will almost certainly encounter Native Trail and Coroebus.

While Appleby has been inching his way up to and past Balding, who has had a season that must have surprised him with more than £4 million already in the satchel, he will be aware that John and Thady Gosden, who started slowly this year, are still in there pitching.

Balding has ten entries for Ascot, but only a couple, both 8-1 shots – Invite in the Fillies and Mares race, and Alcohol Free in the QE II – have better than outside chances. Appleby’s hopes from six entries centre, should he run, on Derby winner Adayar, about whom 3-1 is probably a little tight after his Arc exertions.

But the Gosden ten, with six in the closing Balmoral Handicap - Gosden senior dearly wants to win that race – include four serious darts at the biggest prizes of the day.

Mishriff, saved from the Arc in favour of the Champion Stakes, is 6-4 favourite for the £680k Champion. Palace Pier vies for favouritism with improving Baeed in the £623,000 to the winner QE II. Additionally, Free Wind is 7-2 for the £283,000 Fillies and Mares, and Stradivarius, should he renew hostilities with Trueshan, is second favourite behind that horse in the similarly-endowed Stayers’ race.

The Gosdens lurk around £500,000 behind Appleby and, unless such as Snowfall and maybe something else can edge out Mishriff, or The Revenant, back with a near miss at Longchamp, could possibly again unseat Palace Pier with Baeed’s help. Otherwise it seems a dominant position for a hat-trick for Clarehaven. It looks theirs to lose.

While that stealthy challenge in the trainers’ race has suddenly crystallised, the jockeys’ battle between incumbent Oisin Murphy and his nearest challenger William Buick has been a constant side-show most of this year.

It’s easy to portray this tussle as between Mr Naughty and Mr Squeaky Clean and certainly Oisin Murphy’s second failed breath test, which for the moment merely cost him one day’s riding at Newmarket on Friday, has done nothing for his reputation.

The jockey stressed that the alcohol reading while exceeding the permitted limit for being allowed to ride a racehorse was below that excluding him from driving a car. Great! Only slightly pissed then!

He dominated talk at Newmarket on Saturday, most people saying that for a repeat offence the case should get a proper investigation and the inside story at Newmarket on Saturday was that an inquiry will be held at the BHA today.

A one-day slap on the wrist, if that is all that happens for the offence, seems inappropriate to me. Suppose he hadn’t been tested, thus was free to ride on Friday and had caused danger to other jockeys and their horses. That puts the six-month ban (now ended) for promising apprentice Benoit de la Sayette when he was found in breach of the drug rules back in the spring in some context.

In the end, of course, Murphy was free to ride Buzz in the Cesarewitch and he gave the one-time Hughie Morrison horse a peach of a ride, one befitting of a champion, to make it a third win in the race for Nicky Henderson.

Buzz came to deny Burning Victory and William Buick in the dying strides, maintaining his margin over his rival to eight, when had the result been turned around it would have been only six. Charlie isn’t giving up on his jockey though and plans to run plenty of talented maidens between now and D Day on Saturday. Burning Victory of course was only Mullins’ second string but it would have been a nice result for readers of this column who may have noticed my frequent mentions of the mare in recent weeks.

So we had a seven-year-old winner who hadn’t raced on the Flat for two years beating a mare who had never previously run in a Flat race either in England or Ireland outclassing 30 other stayers. Burning Victory’s defeat and the no show of favourite M C Muldoon stopped a Willie Mullins four-timer in this contest.

Why are jumps trainers so good at winning on the Flat? We’ve known about these two for decades, but another younger member of their profession, an Irishman based in Gloucestershire, is showing similar tendencies.

Until 16-year-old daughter Fern attained that age in the summer, her father Fergal O’Brien was so disinterested in Flat racing that he had only winner from 50 runners in sporadic seasons from 2013 to 2019.

Fern, mentored by Fergal’s assistant and partner Sally Randell, a former star military race rider, won at the first time of asking a couple of days after her birthday and now stands on four wins from eight rides for her father as a lady amateur. His other 16 runners have yielded another four victories, including smart hurdler Gumball making all in a decent staying handicap at York on Saturday and Polish getting home first in a jump jockeys’ Flat race at Goodwood yesterday.

That makes it eight from 24 and a strike rate of 33%, a figure the Gosdens, Balding, William Haggas and the rest would kill for. And none of them has 55 jump winners since the end of April either!

  • TS   

Cesarewitch Draw and Pace Bias Plus The Effect Of The Ground On Front Runners At York

/in , /by

Some very interesting betting races at both York and Newmarket this weekend and the most interesting of all has to be the Cesarewitch Handicap at Newmarket. As usual there are 34 runners plus 2 reserves entered and some course biases would be extremely handy in narrowing down this field, so let’s take a look at what might prevail here.

Cesarewitch Draw Bias

The general consensus is you want to be drawn low in this, but how strong is the bias over 2m2f at Newmarket?

The Cesarewitch Trial doesn’t tend to attract big fields so we are fairly limited with our data here as most of it is only provided by the renewal of this race each year. The good news is that with some massive field sizes a huge amount of runners have contributed to the PRB data here and that is going to be by far our most reliable gauge of a potential draw bias at Newmarket.

The PRB data seems to favour low and middle over high with a low draw PRB of 0.54, a middle draw PRB of 0.53 and a much poorer PRB for the highest third of the draw of just 0.44.

The win data isn’t totally reliable given a relatively small sample of races since 2009 but it’s worth noting that only one winner since that data has come from a stall higher than 23 and that was when Frankie Dettori made all on Never Can Tell in 2011. His stall number was 36 but with non runners and reserves not making the cut he effectively came out of stall 33. It’s worth noting that not only was he able to get a good early position from his ‘bad’ draw, Dettori also explored a completely different part of the straight than the rest of the field which probably gave him a big advantage that day - negating the disadvantage of his draw.

That win certainly looks the exception to the rule and it seems that for win purposes we probably want to look at the bottom two thirds of the draw.

For a more detailed look at the draw we should check out the individual stall data.

Both the table and the graph are sorted by PRB3 (PRB3 is a rolling three-stall average percentage of rivals beaten) to give us the best indication of the best and worst places to be drawn in the Cesarewitch.

First of all though, we’ve established that winning is very difficult from the top third of the draw but what about placing? Higher drawn runners do place, and it’s easy to then suggest the draw bias can’t be very strong because of it, but that isn’t wise. Of the top eleven place percentages for individual stalls, nine of those come from stalls 11 or lower. The only other stalls to break into that top eleven are stalls 19 and 27.

Stall 33’s sole place came when Dettori found the quickest ground and if you were willing to ignore that, which admittedly is slightly selective use of the data, it could be said that the highest seven stalls are all in the bottom fourteen stalls as far as place percentages are concerned.

A total of seventeen stalls have placed more than once and fourteen of those were stall 16 or below. The other three stalls to have two places or more are 19, 22 and 27.

Based on the win and place data, I’d suggest that the winner is very likely to come from stall 23 or lower and the placed horses are very likely to be dominated by stalls 27 and lower. That potentially rules out eleven runners for win purposes and seven runners for place purposes.

As mentioned previously, the most reliable data in this sample is the PRB data as every runner is contributing to that.

Again, this is selective use of the stats as Stall 33 has won the race before, but we’ve established that he probably didn’t really win completely on merit so I’m willing to largely overlook that anomaly. If you did ignore that win the top twenty-two individual stall PRB figures would belong to the lowest 28 stalls and any stall higher than that would have a PRB of 0.46 at best. The top six PRB figures include five stalls that are 10 or lower.

For some reason there is a slight dip in performance as far as PRB3 is concerned from around stall 9 to stall 18. There is no obvious reason why that might be the case and perhaps that line will be smoothed further in future years. It certainly seems as though being drawn 11 or lower is absolutely ideal according to many of the individual stall metrics.

All of the above data is based on the actual stall the runners emerged from, which is impacted by non runners, rather than the racecard stall numbers. It’s worth noting that the reserves this year are drawn in stalls 23 and 3. Assuming neither gets a run stalls 4 to 22 will effectively break from one stall lower than their racecard draw and stalls 24 and above will effectively come out of two stalls lower than their racecard draw. So if you were using stall 23 as the cut off for where you might be able to win from, stall 25 would actually qualify as that will effectively be stall 23.

One final point to note on the Cesarewitch draw advantage is that as of 2020, you have to go all the way back to Sergeant Cecil’s victory from stall 9 in 2005 to find a renewal of this race where a horse drawn 7 or lower didn’t finish in the first four. So it might not be a bad strategy to simply back your favoured horse drawn 7 or lower to place - there are plenty of runners at very big prices amongst those draws this year.

Cesarewitch Pace Bias

So we certainly seem to have a Cesarewitch draw bias, what about a Cesarewitch pace bias at Newmarket?

The win percentages suggest the closer you are to the early pace the better but sixteen races is too small a sample to be reading too much into the win data when we can also look at the place data.

The place percentages suggest there really is much in it at all. The top place percentage of 15.91% belongs to prominent whilst front runners have a slightly inferior place percentage of 15.71%.

The best two place percentages do belong to the most aggressive run styles but with mid division place percentage coming in at 12.5% and held up providing a place percentage of 14.21% there really isn’t much between the data.

If there aren’t many front runners in the field I’d probably slightly favour something that is likely to be ridden in the front half of the field but granted an even pace or better I’d have no hesitation in going for something a bit more patiently ridden if they have the right sort of draw and a strong level of form.

Cesarewitch Draw and Pace Combination

Draw and pace are both extremely important factors in most races. In combination they can be hugely influential and the draw and pace combination heat map on the Draw Analyser helps give extra insight into potential course biases.

Despite Newmarket often being a front runner’s track, the data points to a front running ride from either low or middle to be a disadvantage in this race with extremely poor PRB figures for each of those combinations. The only reason front running from a high draw comes out okay is the victory of Never Can Tell in 2011 and that probably shouldn’t be taken at face value. More runners have led early from low, than middle and high combined, so it’s clear that it’s much easier to get the lead from a low stall as those higher drawn runners are likely to track across.

Racing prominently is rarely a bad thing at Newmarket and that’s certainly the case if a runner is drawn low or middle in this with impressive PRBs of 0.58 and 0.64 respectively. Things get drastically worse for this run style from high draws though with a PRB of just 0.31. Nineteen runners have raced prominently from a high draw since 2009 and only one of those even managed to place.

Racing in mid division is possibly just about the best place to be if drawn low but things get steadily worse the higher you are drawn for this run style. The place percentages for middle and high for mid division are extremely poor (less than 4% compared to 24.25% for mid division for low).

The draw seems to make the least amount of difference for those held up with not a massive amount between the draws for that run style. On balance, if you are backing a high drawn runner then it is probably best that the horse is dropped out from the start. If you are a hold up performer then there isn’t much between a low and middle draw as far as PRB is concerned, although place percentage data very slightly favours middle.

This heat map is very informative and my reading of the data is that prominent runners from low or middle draws should be marked up, as should those racing in mid division from low draws, whilst I wouldn’t be completely put off hold ups from low or middle.

Cesarewitch 2021 Pace Map

This is the pace map for the 2021 Cesarewitch Handicap, based on the last two runs of each participant.

I have added two blue boxes which may well be the most advantageous draw and pace combinations. There is of course no guarantee that those runners will reproduce those run styles, or that runners outside of the boxes won’t be ridden differently this time around.

Overall there is a fair amount of pace in this contest, particularly drawn very low although Aleatoric is second reserve and unlikely to run. There is also pace middle and high and those runners are going to have to use up plenty of early energy if they are to compete with Putting Green and Land Of Winter for the early lead.

Only a couple of the low drawn runners appear likely to be dropped out early, potentially forfeiting some of their draw advantage, and one of those includes the well fancied Buzz.

Given there is a decent amount of early pace in this on paper I wouldn’t rule out the more patiently ridden runners from low and middle draws although they might be at a slight disadvantage against some other draw and pace combinations (mainly the two marked in the blue boxes on the pace map).

Cesarewitch 2021 Preview

It's not impossible to build a case for many of these but I had four runners, all relatively well found in the betting, in mind for this from an early stage.

I’m never quite sure what to do with the Willie Mullins runners in these races. He’s won this for the past three years and runs five this year. In general they are difficult to weigh up from a form perspective but you know they should usually be respected because of the powerful yard they represent.

MC Muldoon is one of the easier ones to work out because he ran in the Ascot Stakes in June. He was runner up in that contest, and an unlucky runner up at that. I was really impressed with how he made up ground that day, going from around five or six lengths off the pace turning for home to about two lengths off the pace by the time they reached the 2f marker. This long straight will allow him to make up the ground in his own time and his draw in stall 15 is more than fine. He’s up 4lbs and the form of that Ascot Stakes race could certainly have worked out better so there are negatives but he’s clearly been campaigned with this in mind all season and has to be the one to beat.

Elysian Flame was one place behind him that day on ground that would have been plenty fast enough. He then did best of those held up at Glorious Goodwood over a similar trip. He stays all day and would have preferred more rain but what rain they’ve had will suit, as should the long straight. He’s entitled to push MC Muldoon close from a similar draw, with a similar run style, but you get the impression that MC Muldoon is the classier rival.

The horse that finished ahead of Elysian Flame at Goodwood was Calling The Wind, who has been extremely progressive over staying trips this season. He was runner up in the Queen Alexandra Stakes in June but it’s not always best to take that form at face value. He came out of that and won at Goodwood though, cruising through that contest and only needing to be shaken up in the final furlong to win comfortably. He was put up 6lbs for that but probably put in his most remarkable effort to date last time out over just 12f. Despite that distance looking far too short for him based on this season’s exploits he once again cruised through the race, showing more speed than any other rival, only to go down by a head to a well handicapped winner. His performance needs to be watched to be appreciated and he has looked well ahead of his mark on his last few runs. The problem here is stall 27, which admittedly will effectively be stall 25 assuming the two reserves don’t make the cut. That stall would make him slightly higher still than the preferred cut off for win purposes but just about within the cut off for placing.

If Calling The Wind had been granted a much lower draw I don’t see how this horse would have finished out of the places and would have backed accordingly. As it is he still has a fair chance of placing at least but the market hasn’t reacted enough to his draw (meaning he should have drifted more) so I’ll have just a small each way bet on him instead.

Platform Nineteen was four places behind Calling The Wind at Goodwood and followed that up with a strong 3rd at York over two miles.

What is interesting about that form is the 2nd, 5th, 6th and 7th have all won since making Platform Nineteen look well handicapped still off a 1lb higher mark. Unfortunately he has fared just as badly as Calling The Wind when it comes to the draw having been handed stall 28. From very similar draws I’d expect Calling The Wind to finish maybe a couple of lengths ahead of Platform Nineteen but Calling The Wind is only around 8/1 at the time of writing whereas Platform Nineteen is around the 25/1 mark. I’d much rather back Platform Nineteen to place at around 6/1 than Calling The Wind to place at around 2/1!

I think this quartet will all run well in this race and begrudgingly admit that MC Muldoon is the most likely winner but he offers no value, nor does Calling The Wind who the draw has hindered. I’m reluctant to get too involved in PLATFORM NINETEEN given the draw but he has to be considered the value play in this for all his draw has probably cost him a winning chance, making a place only bet the most appealing wager – you’d still get paid at similar odds as you would on MC Muldoon winning.

Coral Sprint Trophy Preview

From eighteen furlongs to six. Over at York, at 3.15pm, another extremely tough handicap will be run - the Coral Sprint Trophy.

The draw advantage at York probably isn’t what it used to be, they largely come up the middle and that seems to be just about the best place to be, making it a pretty level playing field as far as stalls are concerned.

Pace still has a huge bearing on York sprints though. It’s often a huge advantage to be on the speed over both 5f and 6f but is that still the case on testing ground?

The above shows the pace bias in big field York sprints on good or good to firm ground.

Meanwhile this is the pace data for sprints on good to soft or soft ground.

Front runners actually do marginally better in softer conditions for both win and place percentages. With front runners doing even better on testing ground we see a slightly poorer performance from those that are held up.

In this year’s race Gulliver will be going for a hat trick having won this in both 2019 and 2020. Despite being held up more often than not, which isn’t a great run style for this venue, all four of his turf wins have come at York. For 99% of the race in 2019 he looked like an also ran having been first off the bridle but he kept responding and got up late. A year later things were far more straight forward. Despite being settled at the back of the field he made up ground more comfortably this time, winning by over 2 lengths against a runner up that would be rated 10lbs higher within 6 months.

He also ran in a 6f handicap this season, on good to soft ground, but it appears the ground wasn’t quite soft enough as he was never going quick enough and finished a never nearer 6th. He did second best of the hold up performers that day and it’s worth noting that the best of those hold up performers was Mr Lupton who won the race. Mr Lupton is 3lbs better off with Gulliver in this having beaten him by 4.75 lengths so even though Gulliver looks likely to run well again off the same mark he carried to victory last year, it’s difficult to argue he is any sort of value against Mr Lupton who is the complete outsider of the field whereas Gulliver is the favourite. Like Guilliver, Mr Lupton also has four wins on the Knavesmire so is just as much of a course specialist.

You do have to forgive Mr Lupton four poor runs on the bounce, which is why he is such a big price, whereas Gulliver looks much more likely to run his race.

I do like Gulliver’s chances but the ground isn’t going to get any softer there now and that might count against him.

There are some interesting Irish runners in this race. Laugh A Minute was rated as high as 109 when with Roger Varian and placed twice here (good previous York form is always a huge bonus in any of these races). He comes here rated 92 having gone close last time despite never really getting a clear run. His better form has generally come on better ground though and he was well beaten in this last year.

Verhoyen could be the most interesting Irish raiders though. Three of his four wins have come over 6f but he’s been running over 5f recently. Last time out he got within half a length of the now 100 rated Strong Johnson, off level weights, meaning he’s feasibly handicapped here off 92 with the step back up in trip looking likely to suit.

Magical Spirit looks overpriced at 16/1 with most bookies. He ran a solid 4th in the Ayr Silver Cup last time out despite the ground not being soft enough and he was also 4th in this last year off a 5lb higher mark.

Magical Spirit ran very well over a slightly inadequate 5f on his penultimate start at Ascot’s Shergar Cup meeting but what is interesting about that race is he was 2nd in the near side group and the other runners who came near side have let that form down repeatedly since.

However the race that took place on the far side is far more interesting. The winner of the entire race, and therefore first home on the far side, was Tis Marvellous who has won two listed races since and placed in a Group 3 since. The runner up on the far side, beaten 2 lengths, was King Of Stars who has won two handicaps subsequently. Then third home on the far side, beaten a length by King Of Stars, was Snazzy Jazzy who is now a massive 7lbs lower and runs here. On that form alone he is 8lbs better off with Magical Spirit.

That was one of three strong efforts Snazzy Jazzy put in during the summer over 5f and the other two came here at York. The first of those was a 4th in a listed contest won by subsequent Nunthorpe winner Winter Power. The runner up has finished 2nd in a Group 3 since and the 3rd placed in a listed race next time out.

Snazzy Jazzy was also 7th in the above race, that I highlighted as hot form ahead of the Portland Handicap a few weeks ago. The 3rd and 5th have both won twice since and the 1st and 2nd have both finished as runner up since giving that form a really solid look. Snazzy Jazzy was only beaten 3 lengths in this race and is now racing off a 5lb lower mark.

His two subsequent runs haven’t been quite so good but he was held up in the centre of the course in the Ayr Gold Cup which was absolutely not the place to be from both a draw and pace perspective. He was then outclassed in a listed race last time out. His runs at 5f on good or good to soft ground in the summer read very well given all his best form previously had come on soft ground at 6f, the scenario he faces on Saturday.

He could easily bounce back to form back at York, pitched into more suitable company on a lenient handicap mark, and although his hold up style isn’t tailor made for this course, he’s already run well here against pace biases. There is also plenty of pace likely in this (four habitual front runners) which will boost both his, and Gulliver’s chances. SNAZZY JAZZY looks far more interesting than Gulliver though given the 33/1 on offer.

Good luck whatever you are backing!

Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases

/in /by

In my first two articles in this series revisiting run style bias in National Hunt racing I looked at run style bias in hurdle races, handicap and non-handicap; for this third piece I will perform a similar study on handicap chases.

What I mean by pace (or run style) is the position a horse takes up early on in the race, normally within the first furlong or two, which often defines its running preference. The first few seconds of any race see the jockeys manoeuvring their horses into the early position they wish them to take up. Sometimes, of course, the horse has other ideas (!) and you may see a horse being restrained as it wants to press forward but the jockey is keen to hold it up. Horses ‘fighting for their head’ often pay the price later in the race as they have used up too much energy fighting their jockey early.

geegeez.co.uk has created some powerful resources and the "pace" section is probably the one I personally use the most. The stats I am sharing with you here are based on the site’s pace / run style data. These data on Geegeez are split into four sections – 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 section. 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 or fight for the early lead (e.g. "pressed leader"). 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.

Overall Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases

As with the previous two articles - which you can read here and here - I have only looked at races with eight or more runners: this avoids many falsely run races which often occur when there are small fields. The first set of data I wish to share with you is the overall run style stats all National Hunt handicap chases races in the UK from the beginning of 2009 to the end of July 2021, a large dataset of around 65,000 scored runners*:

*the run style of some horses is indeterminate from their in-running comments; such horses are excluded from the sample

 

As I mentioned last time, 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 more important to look at the 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. If you're not familiar with them, I'd strongly encourage you to check out that article: it may just change the way you look at racing form!

Looking at the table we can see that the early leader goes on to win approximately one race in every six, which is a solid performance, and leaders clearly have an edge as a whole. Prominent racers have proved the next most successful group of runners. These figures are very similar to the hurdle results we saw previously. Hence, as with hurdle races, when betting on handicap chases we should be looking for horses that potentially will lead or at least race close up to the pace.

The run style bias has remained relatively consistent over the last dozen years or so as the following bar charts show. I have split the handicap chase data into two time periods in order to compare 2009 to 2014 results with those for 2015 onwards. The bar chart below compares the A/E values over these time frames:

 

There is excellent correlation across all four run style categories showing that the profitable edge to front runners has remained consistent over the years, perhaps even increasing in more recent years. Comparing strike rates give us a similar picture:

 

Before moving on I would like to share with you the front runner performance data in handicap chases (8+ runners) by year.

 

I have discussed in previous articles how being able to accurately predict the front runner(s) would be a license to print money – this illustrates the point perfectly – just look at the Win PL (and EW PL) column(s)! Unfortunately, as discussed in some of my previous run style articles, predicting the front runner is far from an exact science – however if one could find a method where you could correctly predict it around 65 to 70% of the time, that would almost certainly suffice for long term profitability. I am fairly certain this figure is impossible to achieve if trying to find the front runner of every single race; however, some races are easier to predict than others pace wise and if you concentrated on a select few races it may well be possible. Remember, these returns are at starting price. Better could be achieved using exchange prices.

Answers to me and Matt on a postcard, please, if you are able to achieve the pace predicting ‘holy grail’! [Though I suspect you'd keep that to yourself!]

 

*

Let us now start narrowing down the stats into different datasets to see whether the front running bias is stronger or weaker under more specific conditions. With the data being consistent across the years I will analyse these areas over the whole time period (January 1st 2009 to July 31st 2021).

 

Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases by Distance

Time to see if race distance affects the run style biases at all in handicap chases. I have split race distances into three groups as I did for the previous pieces: the groupings are 2m 1f or shorter; 2m 2f to 2m 6f; and, 2m 7f or further. A comparison of strike rates within each run style group first:

 

As we can see there is little discernible difference in the run style data by distance in terms of strike rate. Leaders enjoy a strong edge at all distances while hold up horses struggle regardless of the length of the contest.

Onto comparing the A/E values now:

 

An excellent correlation once more showing that, regardless of distance, front runners enjoy a strong (and profitable) edge.

Finally, a look impact values:

 

Again, unsurprisingly given the previous two charts, the Impact Values continue showing a similar linear pattern: the closer to the front of the race a horse is in the early strides, the more likely it is to win.

 

Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases by Course

Next stop is to analyse which courses seem to have the strongest front running bias. I analysed the highest front running strike rates and the highest A/E values to come to a consensus. If a course made the top ten of either list it made it onto my final list. Overall 12 courses made one of the two the final lists, and those eight courses noted in blue bold font were in the top ten in both:

 

Let's look at some of these courses in more detail.

 

Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases at Doncaster

Doncaster has shown the strongest front running bias at the 2m 4f trip. The stats are quite remarkable and I had to triple check the data to make sure I was correct. There have been 28 races with the following run style splits:

 

As you can see 15 of the 28 races (54%) were won by horses that led or contested the lead early. Below is a pie chart showing the percentages of winners to races across each run style section.

 

What you also have to remember is that early leaders provided just 14% of the total runners. Hence, runners taking the early lead provided 54% of the winners from just 14% of the runners.

 

Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases at Hexham

Hexham’s figures for front runners are particularly strong at the shorter distances. They race at both 2 miles and 2 miles 1 furlong and the combined run style stats are as follows:

 

These figures indicate how vital it is to be on or close to the early pace at Hexham over these distances. 40 of the 47 races were won by early leaders or prominent racers which equates to 85% of all races. It is also worth noting that if the favourite or second favourite led early they went onto to win 13 races from just 22.

 

Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases at Perth

The majority of Perth handicap chase races are run over 2m4f or 3 miles. They do race over 2 miles and very occasionally at longer than 3 miles, but I want to focus in on the distances that have decent data sets. Over 2m4f there have been 52 qualifying races and over 3 miles there have been 73 races. The two charts below compare strike rates and A/E values at these two distances and as you can see the run style bias is virtually the same for each:

 

Perth, at these two distances, offer a strong front running bias and one that we should be able to continue to take advantage of in coming seasons.

 

Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases at Plumpton

The Sussex course of Plumpton favours front runners strongly at 2m1f and 2m4f, but at distances of 3m2f or more there is no edge at all.

 

The strike rate for front runners at the two shorter trips is more than double compared with the marathon handicap chases. A/E values show the same pattern with high figures of 1.91 and 1.87 for the shorter distances and just 0.88 for the longer trip.

 

Run Style Bias in Handicap Chases at other tracks

There are some courses and distances that do not favour front runners in handicap chases and here are a few stats which should steer you away from what you may have thought were potential betting opportunities:

  1. Over 2m / 2m 1f Chepstow has seen just 1 win from the front from 30 races;
  2. Over 2m2f to 2m6f Ffos Las has seen just 3 front runners prevail from 53 races;
  3. At Musselburgh the strike rate for front runners is the lowest of all courses with a figure of just 8.8% over all distances (SR% of under 6% at distances of 3 miles or more);
  4. At distances of 3 miles or more only four courses have seen more combined winners for horses that raced mid division or were held up, compared with combined winners for leaders / prominent racers – these were Aintree, Newcastle, Plumpton and Worcester.

 

Jockeys showing a Front Running Bias in Handicap Chases

Next I want to look quickly at jockeys and to specifically peer at those who go to the front more than the norm. Below is a table of the top ten jockeys in terms of percentage of front running rides compared with all rides. Hence if you had 1000 rides and went to front early in 200 of them your FR% would be 20%.

 

To give some context, the average figure for all jockeys stands at 13% in terms of leading early.

 

Charlie Deutsch not only likes to lead more than most, but his strike rate on such runners is impressive at 22.7% (A/E 1.52). Nico De Boinville and Harry Cobden are also worth mentioning as they are both very successful when taking the early lead.

De Boinville’s figures are as follows:

 

He is a jockey who seems to excel when close to or up with the pace. In contrast his record on horses that come from off the pace is poor.

Meanwhile, Harry Cobden’s figures are similarly impressive.

 

These numbers are, I think, quite enlightening.

 

Before moving away from jockeys I wanted to mention a stat that unfortunately is not relevant for today, but is one worth sharing, because to me it emphasises how good a jockey Tony McCoy was. When he was riding in handicap chases his win strike rate on horses that raced mid division / held up was just under 15%. The average figure for all jockeys whose runner had an early position in the back part of the pack stands at a measly 7%.

 

Trainers showing a Front Running Bias in Handicap Chases

The final section of today's article shows trainers' performance with front runners. Here are the trainers who have the best win strike rates from front runners – the chart below includes all trainers with a SR% in excess of 20%:

 

There are some big names here including Messrs. Henderson, Skelton, Hobbs and O’Neill. Seeing Jonjo O’Neill on the list is interesting because he rarely sends his runners out into an early lead as the pie chart below clearly illustrates:

 

I am not sure why O’Neill favours hold up tactics so much as he is more than twice as successful in strike rate terms with his front runners compared to his hold up horses. It might be that some owners prefer their runners patiently ridden...

It is clear that some other trainers have a greater understanding of the importance of early run style, as illustrated by the stats for Donald Mc Cain and Charlie Longsdon:

 

There are boundless possibilities in terms of researching micro-angles from run style in handicap chases, this article only scratching the surface to that end. Hopefully this article has again demonstrated that if you are not considering run style when making your selections, it might be a very good idea to start doing so. I also hope you are inspired to use the Query Tool on Geegeez to crunch some data and find your own pace / run style angles.

Thanks for reading,

- Dave

Monday Musings: 72-1 Arc Winner? It was obvious, really… 👀

/in /by

It was obvious really. It often is after the race and if we had looked deeply enough, we should have found the clue, writes Tony Stafford. Anyway, here we go. Last year Barney Roy won the race in question, one of four Group 1 wins among eight career victories. The previous year Ghaiyyath, the highest-rated horse in the world during the 2020 season, was successful.

Go back then to 2013 when Novellist, already the  King George hero at Ascot two months earlier, picked up the prize, his fifth consecutive victory before heading off to stud in Japan. A son of the great German stamina influence Monsun, the sequence began for him after a fourth behind another German star in Danedream, the 2011 and 2012 winner of our race. She sandwiched in not only her 2011 easy Arc win but also her own King George at the expense of Nathaniel (and Novellist) at Ascot in July 2012.

The Grosser Preis von Baden, run at the spa town of Baden-Baden in South-West Germany has a historic roll-call of celebrated winners, the latest of them a month ago being Torquator Tasso. So little did the betting public, the media, writers on racing and ITV experts – thanks for showing it by the way – give credence to his chance in the race of the season in terms of class, that nobody bothered to mention him.

Well actually ITV did, but only in regard that he shared the same recently deceased German sire as Alenquer, William Haggas’ three-year-old who had beaten Derby winner Adayar, one of yesterday’s favourites for the Prix de l’Arc de Triomphe in the Sandown Classic Trial. That stallion was Adlerflug, winner in his racing days of the German Derby at Hamburg and sire additionally of In Swoop, runner-up to Sotsass in the 2020 Arc.

After eight winners in a single day on Saturday the Haggas stable had to be hopeful and that was rider Tom Marquand’s very cheerful pre-race assessment. But his bullish expectation that testing ground would be right up his colt’s autobahn did not materialise, Tom afterwards reporting the horse hated it.

When is heavy ground not heavy? The ITV coverage, enjoyable as it was, compared the time of the opening Group 1 fillies’ race with last year’s and declared it faster ground than in 2020. They repeated the truism after the big race, again a second quicker, when the reality was that it was still desperate going.

They neglected to remind their viewers that the 2020 Arc was the slowest this century. The way this Arc was run, with Adayar refusing to settle and making much of the running, set him up for the stronger stayers coming home. He was the assumed Godolphin number one (although Charlie Appleby suggested that on the ground Hurricane Lane might prove the stronger) and so it proved.

For a while it looked like Hurricane Lane and then Tarnawa would secure the prize but the dogged Torquator Tasso, on the outside of that pair having started his run alongside and soon moving ahead of Snowfall and Ryan Moore, kept plugging away.

It was with a mixture of disbelief and celebration that Richard Hoiles, ITV’s highly accomplished commentator, told us of possibly the biggest shock in Arc history, and the 72-1 Pari-Mutuel return is certainly right up there.

I love watching races right up to the line and at that point the German horse, ridden very calmly by his 34-year-old jockey Rene Piechulek, was actually drawing away from a high-class and tough Irish five-year-old mare and the St Leger winner, a rare feat of stamina. Then there was quite a gap to Adayar, a brave fourth in the circumstances, with Sealiway, runner-up to St Mark’s Basilica in the French Derby in June, next in fifth and Snowfall sixth.

As the exultant female assistant trainer told Matt Chapman, on his best form (and behaviour) in that and several other interviews, Marcel Weiss, who runs the stable of Gestut Auenquelle quite close to Cologne, has held his licence for only two years having been the assistant for the 70-horse string for two decades.

Gestut Auenquelle is a stallion station, standing the highest-priced sire in his country in Soldier Hollow (€30k this year) and also has Best Solution, the first of three consecutive Godolphin winners of the Grosser Preis von Baden in 2018, at the farm.

No doubt Torquator Tasso is destined for that location when he retires. His class has been evident from early as a three-year-old for after winning his maiden at Cologne he stepped up to be a close second to In Swoop in a one-two Adlerflug finish to last year’s German Derby. In 2021 he has progressed rapidly, avenging a narrow defeat by the Camelot filly Sunny Queen in an autumn Group 1 to the tune of five lengths when dominating a Hamburg Group 2 this summer.

After yesterday’s race the very astute Kevin Blake had the answer to the amazing SP, saying it was the defeat by Sir Mark Prescott’s filly Alpinista in the Grosser Preis von Berlin at Hoppegarten which preceded his Baden-Baden success that threw everyone off the scent.

It possibly did, but Sir Mark collected another German Group 1 preis with Alpinista at Cologne last weekend, while third-placed Walton Street was hardly letting the side (or the form) down when making a cakewalk of the Grade 1 Canadian International at Woodbine under Frankie Dettori two weeks ago.

Another easy to check labour I enjoy is trying to find reasons why a horse bred a certain way might do what he does. Before that minor investigation I had never heard of another German runner that enjoyed a lot of success on the track and subsequently became a stallion.

He is called Toylsome and was foaled in 1999. He is a son of the talented UK sprint/mile stallion Cadeaux Genereux and was sold as a yearling at Tatts for 320,000gns to the bid of German International Bloodstock. His daughter Tijuana did nothing on the track but is the mother of Torquator Tasso.

The purchasers could hardly complain as he won 16 of 36 races, so one for every 20k he cost. Crucially, the last of them came on his penultimate start 14 years ago to the day and on the same Parisian racetrack that his grandson chose for his day of greatness. The race was the 2007 Group 1 Prix de la Foret and among the opposition that day were the star French sprinter/miler Marchand D’Or (in third) as well as US Ranger, Dutch Art, Jeremy, Lingari, Arc winner Found’s dam Red Evie, and Red Clubs.

No wonder he started at 100/1 for his only victory at the top level in an unexpected performance that was something of a portent for yesterday’s amazing events.

*

There are many other things we could talk about from an exciting couple of days, but I will restrict myself to two. It was satisfying for his owners that Trueshan was able at last to have the shot at Stradivarius in the Prix Du Cadran on Saturday on his terms. He possibly could have been meeting the veteran and multiple champion as that one starts to feel his age, but Trueshan’s penchant for heavy ground was probably the bigger factor. I doubt Alan King would pit Trueshan against Bjorn Neilsen’s valiant performer on firm ground if the Gosden horse stays in training as an eight-year-old.

He is comfortably past £3 million in earnings and even in defeat got a nice top-up on Saturday – easier than topping up the horsebox fuel tank no doubt. As a son of Sea The Stars there is no reason why he would not make a decent stallion.

The other great result on the same afternoon was Saffron Beach’s emphatic all-the-way success in the Sun Chariot Stakes at Newmarket where she avenged her 1,000 Guineas defeat by the tough Mother Earth.

This was a top-class renewal and once William Buick decided to make the running there was never a time when the red and white colours of Lucy Sangster and James Wigan, augmented at the end of last year by Lucy’s son Ollie, looked likely to be denied.

Unbeaten at two, Saffron Beach was giving Lucy’s step-sister Jane Chapple-Hyam her first Group 1 win as a trainer almost a decade after Mull of Killough, owned by Invictus, a syndicate headed up by two of the younger Sangster step-nephews won three Group 3 races and a Listed up the same Rowley Mile.

Jane Chapple-Hyam stands on 25 wins for the season and not far short of half a million in prizemoney, a figure which thanks to Saffron Beach’s exploits is almost double her previous highest. She was already looking forward before Saturday’s race to the possible programme for the daughter of New Bay next year. Judged on Saturday, there is plenty more celebrating to come.

There’s also a feast of top-class racing in prospect during the rest of the month with the Future Stars (or is it Champions) meeting at Newmarket next week when the Dewhurst Stakes is the top attraction. Handicap fans will be just as interested in the Cesarewitch the market on which I have been monitoring for any movement in Burning Victory’s price.

I must report though that I heard some alarming news last week. It was that Ruby Walsh, still a big factor in the Mullins yard, reckons M C Muldoon, narrowly denied in the Ascot Stakes by 50-1 shot Reshoun, has improved out of all recognition. If that’s correct, then 6-1 isn’t a bad price. But then it’s not 72-1 is it? Let’s hope we see more of Torquator Tasso, he’s a star!

- TS

Ascot and Redcar Straight Course Draw Biases (Plus More Chester Hot Form)

/in , /by

Take your pick this weekend when it comes to top racing – there is Group 1 action from Newmarket in the form of the Sun Chariot Stakes, Ascot hosts a couple of Group 3s and some class 2 handicaps and even Redcar has two listed races including their well funded Two Year Old Trophy.

We saw last week at Newmarket that the near side rail was once again the place to be but the stalls will be on the far side for this meeting which will nullify that bias in most races.

I’m going to look at a couple of draw biases this week, at both Ascot and Redcar, with a couple of handicap races in mind.

Ascot Straight Course Draw Bias

Let’s first take a look at data from the straight course at Ascot on ground that is between good and soft.

A huge sample size as we include a variety of distances and the data implies a slight advantage to being drawn middle to high rather than low.

High performs best for win purposes, middle is narrowly ahead of high for places and middle and high both have a PRB of 0.51, compared to 0.48 for low. The lower draws come out the worst across every metric.

From spring to summer I’d nearly always prefer a high draw on anything I’m backing but things begin to change at this time of year. One factor that affects the draw now is a false rail is used at this meeting to save the ground for Champions day. This results in reduced field capacity this weekend and slightly different parts of the track being explored for some runners.

At this meeting in the past there seems to have been various draw biases, or perhaps no draw bias depending on which way you look at it.

We lost this meeting to the weather last year so the last time we had this meeting was back in 2019 and Kynren won the big 7f handicap from stall 17. That same stall was successful in 2018 when Raising Sand won and 16 was the winning stall in 2016. Accidental Agent won this from stall 8 in 2017. These recent wins seem to suggest the high stall bias remains for this meeting.

Just as important as simply looking at where the winners came from is to watch the races back and to see what parts of the course were explored and where on the track the placed horses were. In 2019 they came middle to near side in the ‘Challenge Cup’ and near side seemed to dominate. In a 5f handicap later on in that card they explored the same part of the track and although stalls 1 and 3 both placed, they actually passed the line on the same part of the track (near side) that Kynren won on earlier that day.

Although this is only two races worth of evidence, it does suggest two things. The first is that there seemed to be an advantage to racing near side (high numbers). The second is that without massive, 30 runner fields at this meeting the lower drawn numbers are still able to get over and race on the better ground. So whilst a high draw might be an advantage of some sort again this year, it doesn’t mean you can rule out the low numbers.

What about other recent years? In 2018 high numbers dominated the Challenge Cup but the winner largely raced in the middle of the pack and there didn’t seem as much of an advantage as the placed stall numbers would suggest. There was also a big field that year in the 7f listed race and again the winner came down the middle.

In 2017 the winners were coming middle to far side but then in 2016 they were coming middle or near side.

The overall point here with the draw at this meeting is that if there is a draw bias it’s not the easiest to predict and if you can predict it’s almost certainly not as strong a draw bias as you often see earlier in the season, partly because the field sizes as smaller.

If I could pick the ‘perfect’ draw here I’d probably go for something just on the high side of middle as it’s almost certain you’ll have an excellent chance of winning from there, if good enough. I’d prefer not to be drawn very low but I wouldn’t rule anything out solely because of it.

Challenge Cup 2021 Thoughts

First of all, a note on the ground/weather. Judging by the weather forecast the ground will be just on the soft side of good when racing on Friday finishes and the ground come race time on Saturday (3.50pm) depends very much on how early the heavy rain comes. At the time of writing heavy rain is forecast to hit the course an hour or two before this race. If it comes earlier than that the ground will almost certainly be soft, or if the rain is delayed this could be run on something closer to good to soft.

So it might be an idea to hold your bets unless your bet has no fears on anything the soft side of good.

Ascot is generally a fair course in terms of pace and the most important thing to consider is the individual pace setup in each race.

There really isn’t a lot of likely pace in this race which is automatically going to draw me towards something that likes to race prominently and something that is a bit more speed over stamina.

I’d have concerns over Al Rufaa and Arastus if the ground softens at all. Al Rufaa won a maiden on soft as a 2yo but ran flat last time he encountered cut whilst Arastus was pulled out because of good to soft ground in July.

Fresh is a horse I have a lot of time for, I fancied him strongly in the Wokingham here in June when 2nd to Rohaan. He’s only 2lbs higher now and seems to get on well with cut in the ground  and enjoys this course so clearly isn’t handicapped out of things at all. I just have reservations about this distance. He’s been strong at the finish on recent starts but he’s also a smooth traveller and whilst a muddling 7f won’t be the strongest test of stamina, this will be run at a very different tempo to what he’s used to and he’s unlikely to be ideally placed. There are enough negatives to put me off.

Escobar is another who likes it here and he too is feasibly handicapped. He was 3rd over course and distance behind River Nymph in May in a race that wasn’t strongly run and he found that a bit too much of a speed test. He’s 3lbs higher here and prefers a stronger gallop so he appeals more as one for the Balmoral Handicap later this month, a race he won in 2019.

River Nymph is only 1lb worse off with Escober for that win and has already proved he can operate over course and distance, on soft ground, in a relatively slowly run race. He’s still only raced 12 times and should still have some improvement left in him. There was nothing wrong with his listed 4th last time out when he was given plenty to do and it would be a surprise if more prominent racing tactics aren’t employed here. There is lots to like except the price. He’s shortened plenty since the ante post markets were put up but he should still be a fairly safe each way play with stall 7 not looking too bad.

Aldaary is one that has plenty of experience here. He’s been running in the big 7f handicaps here this summer and hasn’t been getting his ground so he promises to improve on his 5th in both the Buckingham Palace Stakes and the International Stakes now that he does get his ground. He’s a strong stayer at 7f though so whilst he’s one I like from a form and ground perspective, the pace make up here might not suit him and stall 2 probably isn’t the perfect draw.

It’s impossible to put that pace map up and not talk about Tomfre, who could get his own way out in front. He completed a hat trick on very testing ground towards the end of last season, wins that took him from a rating of 93 to 105. You could argue that rating has found him out this season but he was runner up in a listed race on seasonal debut when conceding race fitness to the rest of the field and then he was runner up in a York handicap when far more patiently ridden than usual. His 9th on very fast ground in the Buckingham Palace Stakes here was a fair effort considering he is an out and out mudlark and after that he missed 92 days, presumably due to the dry spell we had. On his return he was 1.75 lengths behind River Nympth at Newbury, admittedly that horse shaped better and was also returning from a break, but again Tomfre would have appreciated softer ground that day. If the ground turns soft Tomfre would rate a good each way bet at around 16/1 and if it managed to come up heavy he'd be a strong bet – although those odds would probably be long gone.

A drastic softening of the ground would also suit Ascension, who will appreciate this drop back in trip and his racing style could be well suited to this race, as well as Young Fire who was 2nd here over a mile at the Shergar Cup meeting in a race that has worked out well enough. He doesn’t really get on with York so he’s forgiven his effort last time out but he appreciates a good gallop as well as plenty of rain and he’s unlikely to get the former.

No prizes for suggesting River Nymph and Aldaary are the most likely winners of this. The former is a bit more versatile tactically speaking so is preferred from the pair however if the heavy rain comes early afternoon it should get into the ground pretty quickly and that would make TOMFRE great value. His draw in stall 11 could be just about perfect too.

Redcar Draw Bias

There seems to have been a huge shift in draw bias at Redcar this season. Here is the data for straight course handicaps in larger fields between 2009 and 2020.

Then here are the same filters just for this season.

Low drawn runners are winning more often, placing more often, and beating more rivals home than ever before.

Now I’m not sure why this is the case but on Saturday we have the 14 runner 2yo listed race and a 15 runner sprint handicap where low draws are likely to be advantaged in a way the bookies don’t quite appreciate and I also think it will have an impact on the 12 runner mile handicap, due off at 4.45.

Straight Mile Series Handicap Final Thoughts

This is the series final and it’s attracted a good field of runners with plenty of course form that has got them into this race.

The pace map shows that Delgrey Boy is likely to get an uncontested lead and if his jockey has much sense he’s going to pop out of stall 1 and head over to the far side rail. There is very little between him, Copper And Five and Sucellus on their course and distance clash a couple of weeks ago and the first two of those are both drawn low but Sucellus is drawn in 11 so the latter could come off worst of the trio this time. Neither Delgrey Boy or Copper And Five look particularly well handicapped anymore so whilst both should enjoy the run of the race, both from a draw and pace perspective, they could be vulnerable to other low drawn runners.

Those two runners may be Give It Some Teddy and Scottish Summit. The latter continues to outrun his odds but is frustrating in that he struggles to get his head in front. He’s only 1lb higher than when 3rd at York, not getting the run of the race, behind two subsequent winners, so he’s well handicapped and should go very well but he may be the bridesmaid yet again.

Give It Some Teddy has won this race for the past two renewals (no race last year) and has managed to turn up this year 2lbs lower than his last win here.

From 11 runs here he has a record of 5 wins and 7 places so he’s very much the course specialist in the field and trainer Tim Easterby could hardly be in much better form – his win strike rate in the past year in handicaps is 11.88% and in the past 14 days that has risen to 15.18%. It’s also worth noting that as well as winning this with Give It Some Teddy in the previous two renewals, he’s actually won four of the last five runnings of the race. He admittedly runs three others here (Delgrey Boy, Perfect Swiss and Al Erayg) but Give It Some Teddy holds those first two runners on recent course form and Al Erayg is 5lbs out of the handicap.

Give It Some Teddy, despite being 2lbs lower than his last win here, comes into this race in good form. He won comfortably at Thirsk in August, beating a next time out winner, and he followed that up with a narrowly beaten 3rd here off a 1lb lower mark than he races off here. That race has also worked out well with the runner up winning by 6 lengths on his next start and the 4th and 5th going on to win soon after too.

Give It Some Teddy has an excellent chance of making it three in a row in this with Scottish Summit feared most.

Hot Form At Chester

Last week at Chester I highlighted some hot form, which admittedly didn’t translate to such good performances on the day for a variety of reasons, but there is a good chance on Saturday for one of those strands of form to receive another boost.

I shared the above form line as a reason to why Muntadab might run well last week. As it was he doubled in price throughout the day and didn’t run to form but there is enough evidence to suggest The Kodi Kid could run a big race on Saturday in the opening race at 1.55pm.

The 2nd and 3rd both came out of that above race and won, as did the 7th, and it was The Kodi Kid who very much emerged from the race as the one to follow. He was weak in the betting, wide throughout and ultimately shaped as though he’d come on for the run – his first for two months and his first for Charlie Fellowes having previously raced for Andrew Balding.

The Kodi Kid has a previous course and distance success to his name on good to soft ground, where he beat a subsequent triple winner, and he still seems to be well handicapped off a 5lb higher mark here. There is a fair bit of rain forecast at Chester and it’s worth also noting that whereas the formbook says his last effort, shown above, came on good ground but the ground was actually changed to soft immediately after that race so it seems plenty of cut suits.

Master Zoffany has won two from two at Chester this season, both wins working out well, and he’d rate the main danger on ground he’ll likely enjoy but he does have to bounce back from a poor effort last time out at Goodwood (he’s been off for two months since).

Good luck with whatever you are backing this weekend.

[Belated] Monday Musings: Of Arc and Opel

/in /by

Suddenly the Arc is upon us and Charlie Appleby couldn’t have set a more difficult conundrum, writes Tony Stafford. In the blue corner is the Epsom Derby hero Adayar, ridden by stable jockey and championship contender William Buick.

In the red corner the Irish Derby and St Leger winner Hurricane Lane. Both have added Group 1 races since their Derby triumphs, Adayar collecting the King George at Ascot from Mishriff, later conqueror of Sunday’s rival Alenquer and a possibly regressive Love in the Juddmonte International.

In all the appeal of a tussle between the best of Irish females, Love, her better-fancied stable-companion and successor in a triple of Oaks wins, Snowfall, and the early-in-the-week favourite, Tarnawa, the 2021 Arc is as much a feature of two stars we won’t be seeing.

Mishriff, whose race planning you could hardly gripe at, with more than £10 million safely in owner Sheikh A A Faisal’s pocketbook even before the Flat season started in the UK, waits for the Champion Stakes two weeks later, but you have to think he would have been a prime contender had he turned up.

More obviously, given that Tarnawa is as short as she is, the news that St Mark’s Basilica is drawing stumps on his stellar career so misses all of the Arc, Champion Stakes and even the Breeders’ Cup, makes for another unfortunate absentee.

Aidan O’Brien did his job to perfection, winning the Dewhurst last October to make him the champion 2yo in Europe in 2020; then two French Classics, the Poulains and the Jockey Club, to reinforce his appeal to a French breeding industry that is finding its feet on the back of the exploits of St Mark’s Basilica’s sire, Siyouni.

It needed one more win after a breath-taking dismantling of the older globe-trotting pair of Addeybb and a tiring Mishriff in the Eclipse and, when he was unable to go to the Juddmonte, there were those ready to suggest the Mishriff of that day might have beaten him.

So thence to the Irish Champion Stakes and in another small field it was vital he restored the glamour. He edged into a lead in the straight and dealt decisively with another dangerous duo, Tarnawa and multiple Group 1 winner and new Iron Horse, Poetic Flare.

The Irish race did not result in any rise in his official mark of 127, established after the Eclipse, and in the meantime that figure was afforded Adayar by dint of his comfortable defeat of key horse Mishriff (who was conceding 11lb weight-for-age, let us not forget) and a Love fresh from her fifth Group 1 win in the Prince of Wales’s Stakes at the Royal meeting.

Adayar was the nominal third string for the Derby, not that you would have known it as his odds tumbled from 40/1 to 16/1 in the closing moments leading up to the race. His near five-length demolition of Mojo Star, with best-fancied Appleby runner Hurricane Lane only third, had Buick wondering how he could have got it so wrong.

Since then the 30-year-old has ridden both colts to four more Group 1 triumphs. Adayar at Ascot did enough to convince Buick he should renew the partnership next weekend even though Hurricane Lane had won the Irish Derby, Grand Prix de Paris and St Leger, the last two in imperious wide-margin style since Epsom.

Mojo Star also had to be content with another second place for Richard Hannon and free-spending football agent Kia Joorabchian in the St Leger. Their colt is 66-1 and, with the horse’s penchant for running on well and the stamina shown at Doncaster, he might be the one to pick up the pieces and nick a place in the extra place markets.

Mishriff is undoubtedly the horse that ties in with most of the big horses in this fabulous contest and another who can be gauged with him is the better of the two Japanese entries as far as world form is concerned, Oisin Murphy’s mount, Chrono Genesis.

With career earnings well past £7 million she is almost in the Mishriff class for prize money and she ran a brilliant race when only a neck adrift of Mishriff in the Sheema Classic at Meydan in late February. That followed an easy win at home with a £2 million prize having got to within three quarters of a length of her country’s even more illustrious mare and great champion, Almond Eye.

Chrono Genesis’ only run since Meydan was in a Group 1 race at Hanshin in midsummer when an easy victory was her sixth in 13 career starts. Oisin has a great record riding Japanese horses and it is worth reminding punters that betting on horses from that country on the Pari-Mutuel on the day would be rather foolish if value is your credo.

One big factor in her favour is that her sire, Bago, won the race as a three-year-old for French-based English trainer Jonathan Pease. She is joined in a double Japanese challenge by recent course winner Deep Bond who saw off Broome on Trials Day by a couple of lengths. He is another possible place contender.

I’ve thought Snowfall would win the Arc, seeing as she has all the allowances, ever since her Epsom cakewalk and it would be to her advantage if the rains came. Her latest unexpected reverse has been treated as an irrelevance by the market but dangerously so. It is hard to see why Roger Varian’s filly, Teona, should be four times the price of her Longchamp victim and her trainer has always had a high regard of her talent.

It is no foregone conclusion that either will match Tarnawa after her excellent run over a shorter trip than ideal last time, splitting the winners of a hatful of 2021 Group 1's. Dermot Weld would love another step back into the big time, but I stay with Snowfall and Ryan Moore and take Adayar and Chrono Genesis to fill the places.

Until last weekend the name Westerberg alongside Coolmore runners has not made for a particularly happy association but within ten minutes on Saturday they clicked twice and the winning pair are respectively 8/1 for the 1,000 Guineas and favourite for the Derby.

Throughout the tenure of John Magnier at Coolmore/ Ballydoyle, initially as a 23-year-old with father-in-law Vincent O’Brien on the back of Robert Sangster’s Vernons pools fortune, through the Tabor/Smith heyday in the first two decades of this century and onward, the need is always for new blood and above all new funding to cope with opposition that owns countries, have fortunes within the bottomless pit of cash of the Saudi Royal family, or is a religious leader backed by wealthy adherents.

The Westerberg name disguises the identity of Opel Cars heir Georg Von Opel but until Saturday his appellation on several of the more expensive sales acquisitions of the past two years has been almost a jinx. One source close to the Coolmore action told me the other day: “I feel sorry for George, he’s such a lovely man, but he never seems to get any luck.”

Whether it was out of superstition or business commitments, Herr Von Opel was not at Newmarket on Saturday and missed an explosive last-to-first performance in his maroon and light blue livery (imagine West ham or Aston Villa) by Tenebrism, on her first start since March.

Her win that day six months ago at Naas had been similarly emphatic, prompting favourite quotes for the Queen Mary at Ascot, however she injured her pelvis struggling through the mud. Aidan worried he had not done enough with her to challenge for the Group 1 Cheveley Park Stakes first time back, but she answered most emphatically drawing away late in a romp.

A daughter of the already repatriated Caravaggio, to Ashford Stud, she carries all the Scat Daddy speed and with Pivotal on the dam’s side, she will be an interesting contender next year.

Just ten minutes later, George’s, or Westerberg’s, colours were to the fore again atop the similarly once-raced Luxembourg, and with even more significance with the 2022 Classics in mind. Started off at Killarney in a midsummer maiden O’Brien often targets with his potential Derby horses, the trainer sent the son of Camelot to the Curragh’s Beresford Stakes and won that Group 2 in a hack canter.

That made it 11 victories in succession in the race and a 21st in all for O’Brien and, given that history, why even 8-13 was available is a mystery. Luxembourg is free of Galileo blood, being by a son of Montjeu out of a mare by Danehill Dancer – entirely Coolmore breeding and ideal as an outcross for all those Galileo mares that will continue to come on stream for a few years yet. How Georg, not to mention John, Michael and Derrick, would love him to put another notch on the Derby Roll of Honour for the team next year.

- TS

Run Style Bias in Handicap Hurdle Races

/in /by

This is the second instalment in my latest series on run style bias in National Hunt racing. After analysing non-handicap hurdles last time, it is time to move onto handicap hurdle races.

Pace, or the running styles of horses, has long been an area of interest as any bias can potentially give us an edge when analysing a race. It is still an area that many punters ignore, and the longer that goes on the better as far as I am concerned!

Apologies for the regular readers of these pieces, but for new readers I must give a quick explanation of pace (or run style, which for our purposes are interchangeable) and how Geegeez can help you.

The first furlong or so of any race sees the jockeys try to manoeuvre their horses into the early position they wish them to adopt. Some horses get to the front and lead (referred to as front runners); some horses track the pace just behind the leader(s); other horses take up a more middle of the pack position, while the final group are held up near to, or at the back of the field. Geegeez racecards have a pace tab which is split neatly into four sections which match the positional descriptions above. So we have: Led (4), Prominent (3), Mid Division (2) and Held Up (1). The number in brackets are the scores that are assigned to each run style, which for a mathematician like myself are really helpful as I can make easy comparisons between different runners, courses, trainers, jockeys, etc.

As with my previous research I have only looked at races with eight or more runners – this avoids many falsely run races which are more likely to occur in a small field scenario.

The first set of data I wish to share with you is the overall run style dataset for all handicap hurdles races in the UK from 1/1/09 to 31/7/21. I have used the Geegeez Query Tool for all my number crunching – the pace section on Geegeez is another area on the site where you can gather individual course run style data from:

 

These figures are far more even than we saw in the non-handicap hurdle research. In non-handicap hurdles we saw front runners (early leaders) win roughly 18% of the time, form the smallest run style group. Here, though, leaders have won only around 12% of the time. That is to be expected given the generally more competitive nature of handicaps when set next to non-handicaps. Further, before we write off a leader / front running run style bias, it should be noted that the A/E figures still give front runners a positive market edge (1.06), as does an impact value (IV) of 1.35 - meaning early leaders are winning about a third more often than the overall population of handicap hurdlers.

That said, it is clear that the front running bias is weaker in handicap hurdles compared with non-handicap hurdles.

The success for each run style section has stayed extremely consistent over the last 12 years or so, as the following bar charts illustrate. I have split the handicap hurdle data into two in order to compare 2009 to 2014 results with those for 2015 onwards. The bar chart below compares the A/E values over these time frames:

 

That's an amazingly strong positive correlation across all four categories in market influence (A/E) terms.

 

Comparing the strike rates give us a similar picture of consistency:

 

Now it is time to start narrowing down the stats into different data sets to see whether any stronger edges emerge. With the data being consistent across the years I will review the following over the full time period (Jan 1st 2009 to July 31st 2021).

Run Style Bias in Handicap Hurdles by Distance

Let us first look to see if race distance affects the strike rates or A/E values. I have split race distances into three parts as I did for the previous article: the groupings are again 2m 1f or less; 2m 2f to 2m 6f and 2m 7f or more. Here is a comparison of strike rates within each group:

 

These are a remarkably consistent set of figures for each run style group, regardless of distance.

Below are the Actual vs Expected (A/E) figures*.

* A reminder that you can read about all of the metrics we publish on geegeez.co.uk in this article

 

Once again, there is correlation across the board: perhaps slightly poorer front running stats for the longer distances, but that is probably not statistically significant. All early leader / front running A/E values are in excess of 1.00, which is noteworthy.

 

Run Style Bias in Handicap Hurdles by Course

The second area to analyse is by racecourse.

Normally I like to concentrate on positive front running courses but to give readers more useful information I feel it is also worth sharing the course records where front runners perform relatively poorly. These tracks have all seen front running win strike rates of under 10% in the past 12 seasons, which may only partly be explained by field size:

 

We need to be wary about Cheltenham’s low figure as this is skewed by the fact that the average field size there has been a huge 16.5 runners. Hence, as front running tracks go I would liken it to Wetherby – below average, but nowhere near as poor as the raw strike rate performance implies.

Moving onto to the positive courses in terms of front running (early leaders) performance, and below is a look at those tracks with a handicap hurdle race front running win strike rate% greater than 13%:

 

14 courses make the list and I want to compare this list to the course list with the highest front running A/E values, with the hope (and expectation) of seeing most of the courses in both graphs:

 

As can be seen, 13 of the 14 courses appear in both graphs / lists – Leicester and Ayr are the ones to appear just once. This is extremely positive, implying the run style advantage to those who go on from the outset is still not fully factored into the market (insofar as it is predictable before the race begins - nobody said this was an exact science!), and it makes sense to look at a couple of these courses in more detail.

Bangor on Dee

Bangor-on-Dee tops the front running list in terms of strike rate and lies second when comparing A/E values. You may recall from the first article in this series that Bangor also topped the front running charts in non-handicap hurdles over 2m 1f or less. I did not look in detail at other distances at Bangor in that piece but I can reveal that the 2m4f trip in non-handicap hurdles saw a front running win strike rate of 32.6 % with a huge A/E value of 1.79. This add further confidence to the very positive looking handicap hurdle data here.

Let me break the Bangor handicap hurdle data down. I am going to be looking at percentage of winners from each run style section. Here is how the percentage split looks for all courses. This will help us when trying to appreciate the strength of any bias:

 

Over this trip the front running bias is moderate – the percentage figure for winning front runners is 16% compared to the all courses average figure of 15%. The one group that has performed above the norm here is the mid division group – 23% of the winners at Bangor compared with 18% for all courses.

Over two and a half miles, we see a big difference with front runners winning roughly a third of all races: 33% compared with the overall course average of 15% is a very significant finding and a very strong looking front running bias.

 

Onto the longest Bangor hurdle distance now of three miles:

 

Again, a decent enough front running bias over this trip. 22% of all winners have been front runners which gives them a solid edge of around 50% on the average front running strike rate at all courses across all distances. The A/E value for front runners over this trip is an attractive 1.66.

At Bangor therefore, potential front runners over 2m4f and beyond are definitely worth noting.

 

Ascot

I was quite surprised to see Ascot as giving front runners such a clear edge in handicap hurdles. I had perceived Ascot handicaps to be very competitive and thought front runners might actually struggle. However, at all distances Ascot’s front runners perform extremely well. Below are the two mile data:

 

23% of two mile Ascot handicap hurdle races were won by front runners – remember the average all courses figure stands at 15%. The A/E value is strong at 1.68.

 

I have lumped the intermediate 2m 4f and 2m 6f data together as they are similar distances and give us a bigger collective data set:

 

There is a stronger edge here with 27% of races won by front runners and fully 60% won by front runners or prominent racers. The front running A/E value is a huge 1.83.

 

Over the longest Ascot hurdle range of three miles, the figures are thus:

 

Again, there is a really solid front running edge (A/E 1.70) and, related, it seems harder for hold up horses to prevail (22% strike rate compared with the all courses average figure of 32%).

 

I have one final stat to share regarding Ascot handicap hurdles: fancied front runners, whose price was 6/1 or shorter, won 15 of 41 races. If you had been able to predict that these 41 horses would lead early, backing all of them would have returned you an impressive 88p in every £1 bet. Oh, for a crystal ball!

 

Other strong course / distance front running biases

Below is a list of other course / distance combinations where front runners have done especially well in recent years:

Sedgefield 3m 4f

The marathon distance of 3 miles 4 furlongs at Sedgefield would not necessarily be a track and trip where you’d expect handicap hurdling front runners to thrive. However, the stats suggest otherwise – the bar chart below compares the win strike rate percentage for each of the four run style categories:

 

Front runners have enjoyed a massive edge, backed up by a huge A/E figure of 2.26. It also can be seen that hold up horses have a miserable record showing that is extremely difficult to make up ground here over this distance. Most lower class marathon handicap hurdlers lack a gear change: who knew?!

 

Haydock 3m

Not quite as strong a bias as the Sedgefield one, but a significant advantage to the front again nonetheless:

 

Front runners with this kind of strike rate coupled with an A/E of 1.92 is not to be sniffed at!

 

Cartmel 2m 1f 

The final course/distance combo to share graphically is Cartmel's 2m 1f win strike rate, which demonstrates another strong looking front running bias:

 

Front runners in this context have produced a very satisfactory A/E value of 1.63.

 

Sticking with Actual vs Expected, there are five other course and distance combinations whose A/E value for front runners is in excess of 1.50 – they are:

Catterick 2m

Ffos Las 2m

Newbury 2m and 2m 1f

Exeter 2m 1f

Musselburgh 2m 4f

 

Those are well worth noting, and may provide a starting point for your own Query Tool research should you feel so inclined.

 

Hold up horses

For fans of hold up horses, there is a handful of course and distance groupings where the late runner A/E sneaks above 1.00. The A/E values are in brackets in the table below:

 

In races at these tracks and over these distances, front runners do not enjoy the advantage, conceding that to hold up horses. For the record, the Lingfield Park data in each grouping is very small indeed so caution is advised.

 

Run Style Bias in Handicap Hurdles: Summary

To conclude, front runners enjoy far less of an edge in handicap hurdle races when compared with non-handicap hurdles, but there are still a number of courses (and/or specific course/distance combinations) where we need to be aware of a possible edge.

Elsewhere, there is a smaller number of track/trip combinations that tend to favour hold up horses.

Knowing how a race may pan out from a running style perspective is always an important factor to consider, and the knowledge of any potential biases a significant bonus. Hopefully the information above, allied to specific race pace maps found on this website, will give you a leg up with your handicap hurdle betting.

- DR

Newmarket Cambridgeshire Handicap Draw and Pace Bias

/in , /by

The big meeting this weekend is hosted by Newmarket as it’s Cambridgeshire day. The Cambridgeshire itself is certainly one of the toughest races of the season but I’m expecting to highlight some fairly strong course biases in this article so perhaps the race isn’t as difficult to figure out as it initially seems.

Cambridgeshire Draw Bias

On initial inspection, it might seem as though there isn’t much of a draw bias in the Cambridgeshire.

There is virtually nothing between win percentages and PRB data for the low, middle and high draws whilst the place percentages hint at high being slightly favoured over low and middle. The highest third of the draw has a place percentage of 16.67% whilst middle and low have place percentages of 14.35% and 14.14% respectively.

The individual stall data may reveal more of a Cambridgeshire draw advantage though.

The first thing to catch the eye is the fact that 8 of the top 9 PRB figures belong to double figured stalls and 6 of those are 19 or higher.

According to the draw data line graph, which is showing PRB3 data (PRB3 is a rolling three-stall average percentage of rivals beaten), there is an increase in performance around stalls 20-24 so perhaps that is the sweet spot.

There is no rock solid trend here but it does seem a trend has been developing in recent years. It seems more often than not runners are favouring the stands’ side (high draws) and four of the last five Cambridgeshire winners have finished very close to the near side rail. All of those last five runnings have been won by horses drawn between 21 and 29.

Looking only at big field, 9f races here since 2016 there is now a clear bias towards those drawn high. Low draws have a PRB of just 0.42, middle draws have a PRB of 0.52 and high draws have an impressive PRB of 0.56.

The PRB3 line graph representing individual stall performance now shows what seems to be an increasing advantage towards those drawn high. There is though a slight peak in performance around the 12-14 stall mark as well for some reason.

The important points to note with this more recent draw data are that the top 21 stalls for PRB3 are all double figure numbers and 9 of the worst 13 performers are single figure draws. This strongly suggests we want to avoid low draws in the Cambridgeshire.

Cambridgeshire Pace Bias

Here is the data from the Pace Analyser for Newmarket’s 9f course in big fields.

It's a fairly small sample, as you’d probably expect, so take win percentages with a slight pinch of salt but it’s interesting to see that front runners dominate for win percentages. Early leaders have a very impressive win percentage of 9.38% which is more than twice the next best win percentage of 4.65% which belongs to mid division.

Given the sample size, the place percentages should give us a stronger idea of any likely Cambridgeshire pace biases. The top place percentage belongs to front runners as well but the difference in place percentage between front runners and mid division is negligible. There is also only a small drop off for prominent but the figure that really stands out is the place percentage for held up. That place percentage is just 11.65% and the win percentage is just 2.91%.

It seems that we want to avoid hold up performers in this race just as much as we want to avoid single figure stalls.

Cambridgeshire Draw and Pace Combination

This is the heat map, sorted by PRB since 2009.

And this is the same data but only for 2016 onwards.

The more recent data seems to be the data we should concentrate on but some of the trends should be cross referenced with the overall data as we are dealing with a limited sample size for this recent data.

Logic would dictate that if front runners getting the near side rail are at an advantage then leading from a high draw should be the best combination but it actually seems as though front runners are doing extremely well from middle draws. Leading from a high draw is also an advantage , but possibly not quite as much of one.

A higher draw does seem to suit prominent racers better than a middle draw though but that switches back again when dealing with those racing in mid division. Perhaps those on the near side rail that are settled in mid division find it too difficult to get a run through.

We’ve established that those that are held up do struggle to run into the places and it seems there isn’t much difference whether they are drawn in the middle or drawn high.

Cambridgeshire 2021 Pace Map

Any talk of pace biases is irrelevant without looking at the pace map as course pace biases can always be reverses depending on the pace setup in a race.

I often use pace maps that only show the last two runs but the majority of these are seasoned handicappers who have seen plenty of action so the above pace map takes into account their last four races. It’s worth noting this suggests there isn’t likely to be a pace burn up but no less than eight of these were early leaders last time out and three of them have led on both of their last two starts so it is probable there will be a bit more of a contested speed than this pace map initially suggests.

I’ve added two blue boxes and a green box to the pace map. The blue boxes show groups of runners that are likely to be disadvantaged by draw and/or pace whilst the green box highlights where the winner is most likely to come from. Based on the data from more recent years you could easily put a line through anything drawn 18 or lower so feel free to be more harsh with your own calculations.

Back to the pace setup, there is some pace amongst the lower numbers but three of the more likely pace setters are drawn in stall 29 or higher. With the ground possibly faster on the near side plus the majority of the pace this side too, I’m becoming more and more confident that the top half of the draw, and probably the top third, is the place to be.

How Well Handicapped Do You Have To Be To Win The Cambridgeshire?

This is an important question to ask. In these big handicaps you often hear about the ‘group horse in a handicap’. That’s not crazy talk either, in 2019 subsequent Group 1 winner Lord North took this race and the year before future Group 3 victor Wissahickon landed the spoils.

Last year’s winner, Majestic Dawn, is back again this year off a 10lb higher mark. Lord North, eventually rated 25lbs higher than when winning this and his stable mate, Wissahickon was rated 10lbs higher than his winning mark for this race within 6 months.

The 2017 winner, Dolphin Vista, was rated a stone higher than his rating when winning this within 5 flat starts whilst Spark Plug, winner in 2016, went up 8lbs for his victory and never rated higher.

Third Time Lucky (2015), subsequently rated 11lbs higher whilst Bronze Angel, who won this twice off marks of 95 and 99, also won handicaps later in his career off 104 and 105 with his rating going as high as 111.

Meanwhile Educate, the 2013 Cambridgeshire winner, went up 8lbs to a mark of 112 for his victory and although never rating higher, he did run to that mark of 112 several times in the next year.

So ideally you are going to need a horse to be capable of running to at least an 8lb to 10lb higher mark in the near future if they are going to have a chance of winning this.

On the subject of the official ratings, it’s also interesting to see what sort of rating does well in this race. You need a runner well enough handicapped to win but also classy enough to get into the race in the first place. This year there is 24lbs between the top weight and the bottom weight.

In the past 11 years all winners have been rated between 107 and 87 – difficult to rule many out on that for win purposes (only the top weight and two bottom weights).

Nine of the last eleven winners have been rated 94 or higher which would rule out the bottom thirteen horses as likely winners. A relatively big six of the last ten winners have been rated between just 94 and 99 and only a third of the field fall into that ratings band this year. Four of those are drawn in single figures if you wanted to narrow those runners down further. That would leave just the following runners:

Does The Cambridgeshire Suit Milers or Ten Furlong Horses?

This intermediate distance of 9f means we’ll see a mix of milers stepping up in trip and ten furlong horses dropping down in distance. Very few of these will have run at this distance last time out, or possibly at all in their careers.

Eight of the last eleven winners of this raced at a mile just before taking this contest and five of those subsequently won a race over ten furlongs or further. This probably suggests this is slightly more of a speed test than stamina test and milers definitely have a good record in this, or at very least horses with the speed for a mile (some may have raced over 10f previously as well).

Cambridgeshire 2021 Thoughts

A lot is made of John Gosden in this race. Yes he has won two of the last three renewals but he’s also only won two of the last ten, just as many as Marcus Tregoning. Gosden’s two runners both head the betting having both been given seemingly favourable high draws, although being drawn 30+ isn’t statistically as much of an advantage as being in the mid to high 20s.

Uncle Bryn didn’t make the grade to be a Derby horse this season but he returned from a 113 day break to win an average Ascot handicap last time out. He got the run of the race on a day where front runners dominated and he’s 2lbs badly in with his penalty. Frankie Dettori seems to have chosen stablemate Magical Morning over him and I think I’d agree with Frankie’s choice.

Magical Morning brings some really solid handicap form into this but he very much got the run of the race when winning off a 7lb lower mark at Sandown in July and he’s been beaten in his other five handicap starts. Given most runners need to be 8lbs to 10lbs well in to win this, I just can’t see him being a 114+ horse.

Astro King is one I had in mind for this for a while. I backed him in the Royal Hunt Cup and this 9f trip on fast ground might be perfect for him off just a 4lb higher mark than at Ascot. Had he been drawn ten stalls higher he’d be a fairly strong fancy but 17 is a bit low for me to get involved, certainly at single figure odds.

In the last six years there have been three 3yo winners, a 3yo runner up and a 3yo third so younger horses clearly go well in this. Anmaat is an interesting contender for this and has the right sort of profile. He’s 2lbs well in having beaten the probably well handicapped Faisal last time out at Doncaster and he definitely looks the sort who could be at least 8lbs to 10lbs well in. He’s maybe drawn a little lower than ideal in 22 and does have to prove he’s speedy enough for this having raced over 10f on his last three starts but he’s certainly place material at the very least.

Irish Admiral is still feasibly handicapped and has seemingly now got his act together but stall 15 is a bit low for my liking. Given stall 2, and his overall form level, I’m also against Montather and surprised he’s as short as he is. Long Tradition could be anything but the form of his recent runs isn’t that strong and he has a little to prove in first time cheekpieces on handicap debut.

Bedouin’s Story is one I am tracking closely. He did second best of those held up at Sandown in July, best of the double figure stalls in the Golden Mile at Goodwood and then again was best of those held up at Chelmsford last time out. He stays this far, even though most of his runs have been over shorter and he’s going to win soon when getting the right set up. This should be run to suit but whether or not his hold up run style will allow him to get involved is a big question mark.

I’m finding it very difficult to make a case for much else, for varying reasons, but one does standout for me at a price of 100/1 at the time of writing with a couple of bookies. Naval Commander ran in a hot race at Sandown last season on ground that was probably a bit soft, on a day where he was a bit too patiently ridden to feature. He was 6th and those in front of him that have continued to race this season have rated 18lbs, 16lbs and 13lbs higher. Naval Commander is just 1lb higher here.

He did win on his next start after that Sandown run. That was his seasonal debut this year in June. At Ascot on his next start he was third – the winner and runner up both won next time out and the 4th has been beaten by a short head since. He was then 6th, beaten a length and a half at York – the winner, runner up and 7th have all won since and the 3rd and 4th have placed since. His only run since was a close third at Epsom when not getting a clear run. He’s still lightly enough raced to prove better than his current rating. I’m not convinced this horse should be any bigger than 33/1 and even at that price I’d have made him a small bet. First time cheekpieces could do anything to him but it’s worth remembering first time blinkers did the trick for Majestic Dawn last year.

All things considered I’m probably sweetest on Naval Commander as well as Astro King and Anmaat. I can’t completely rule out Astro King based on a draw of 17 and then strongly fancy Anmaat from stall 22 but Anmaat is just about on the cusp of how low I’d be willing to go whilst Astro King is unfortunately a bit too low for me (and a shorter price than Anmaat). So my two against the field would be ANMAAT and NAVAL COMMANDER, both each way, at around 12/1 and 100/1 respectively.

Hot Form at Chester

There are a trio of horses that are interesting from a hot form perspective in the 2.35 at Chester on Saturday which is a 7f handicap.

Muntadab’s course and distance success (from stall 8) two weeks ago has been well boosted since with the 2nd, 3rd and 7th all winning next time out. The 5th and 6th also reoppose here but they were well enough beaten to not be of interest here. Muntadab is only 2lbs higher here and is much better drawn in stall 2. He’s unlikely to get quite as easy lead this time though.

The Kodi Kid was an eyecatcher in that race and he’s previously run in hot races at Chester already this season. He’s not entered here but is one for your trackers.

Mossbawn’s last two wins at Thirsk have both worked out well, particularly his latest victory. The 3rd, 4th and 7th have all won since whilst the 5th, who reopposes here, was 2nd on his next start. That 5th, Strongbowe, did best of those held up when behind Mossbawn and he should be marked up for that. He’s 3lbs better off than Mossbawn for a 1.5 length defeat and he should get closer this time around.

Muntadab, Mossbawn and Strongbowe are all well enough drawn and should all be prominent if reproducing their run styles from last time out. I’d be surprised if all three didn’t run well and there is perhaps a tricast, or at the very least a decent single amongst them. Slight personal preference would be for Mossbawn who is lightly raced and on a roll but Muntadab does have that important Chester form.

Pace Bias in Non-Handicap Hurdle Races

/in /by

With the evenings now sadly drawing in, many punters will soon begin to think about the upcoming National Hunt season, writes Dave Renham. So Matt and I felt it was the right time to revisit pace bias in National Hunt racing. In the past I have written several articles for Geegeez on the topic of pace and for this piece I am going to take an in depth look at non-handicap hurdle races.

I appreciate many of you reading this will have read some or all of my previous articles, but for new readers it is important to explain what pace in a race means and how we measure it. Pace in this context is connected with the running styles of the horses. When I look at pace bias my main focus is the initial pace in a race and the position horses take up early on.

geegeez.co.uk has an excellent pace analyser tool and the stats I am sharing with you in this article are based on that tool’s pace data. The data on Geegeez are split into four styles and accompanying points – Led (4), Prominent (3), Mid Division (2) and Held Up (1). The numbers in brackets are the pace scores assigned to each section.

For this article I have only looked at races with eight or more runners – this avoids falsely run races which often occur when there are small fields.

The first set of data contains the overall pace stats from all 8+ runner National Hunt non-handicaps in the UK from 1/1/09 to 31/7/21:

 

It is important to keep in mind that the number of runners in each pace group varies: there are far more runners in the prominent and hold up categories as you can see. 'Leaders' is the smallest group as usually you only get one early leader in this type of race, occasionally two when there is a contested early lead. Hence although raw strike rates have relevance, it is more important to look at Impact Values (IV) and the A/E index (Actual winners/Expected winners).

Leaders clearly have an edge as a whole, with prominent racers the next most successful. Therefore, as a general rule of thumb, in non-handicap hurdle races you want to be focusing on those horses that are the most likely to lead early (or at least race prominently and close to the front end).

When we have looked at draw biases on the flat we became aware that such biases can evolve and change over time. In terms of pace bias, though, I have always hoped (or assumed) that they are less likely to change much, if at all, over time. To check this theory out I decided to split the non-handicap data into two and compare 2009 – 2014 with 2015 onwards. The bar chart below compares the A/E values over these time frames:

 

Excellent correlation across all four pace categories so, because A/E is a measure of market performance, this gives increased confidence that the value in any pace biases is likely to replicated in the foreseeable future. Comparing the strike rates shows a similar level of consistency across the two time periods:

 

So we have a good starting point from which to start narrowing down the stats into different data sets to establish whether front running bias is stronger or weaker under more specific conditions. As the data seems consistent across the years I will analyse these areas over the whole time period (2009 to July 31st 2021).

 

Impact of Run Style by Race Distance, Non-Handicap Hurdles

I always feel distance is the best place to start when drilling down into pace data. A look first at the shorter distances.

2 miles 1 furlong or less

 

These figures are similar to the overall stats for all distances, so let us review by course. The chart below compares A/E values for all courses (min 50 races) – courses with A/E values of 1.00 or bigger are shown:

 

Bangor On Dee has the highest front-running A/E value at 1.48 and when we break the overall course stats down, we can see other metrics which point to that extremely strong front running bias:

 

Not only does the front running edge strengthen, it is clear that hold up horses struggle even more than the norm. For the record, if you had been able to predict the front runner(s) in each race at Bangor you would have made an SP profit to tune of 38 pence in the £. If only it was that easy!

The next chart shows the courses with the lowest A/E values for front runners over this trip:

 

Doncaster racecourse has the poorest figures for front runners and the overall stats for the course are as follows:

 

I think what this shows is that the course and distance stats are definitely worth drilling down on. The difference between Bangor and Doncaster at this distance range is very significant.

Before moving distances I would like to share some stats around performance of "the favourite" based on their running style:

 

Again, this shows clearly the importance of pace and running style. It still bemuses me how certain trainers continue to hold up their runners, when surely it is generally worth pushing them up with or close to the pace.

 

2 miles 2 furlongs to 2 miles 6 furlongs

It is always difficult to group National Hunt distances ‘perfectly’ when analysing large data sets, but for this article I wanted to split the full gamut of race distances into three parts and this seemed like a sensible middle distance grouping.

Here are the pace data for all courses for all non-handicap hurdle races over the 2 mile 2 to 2 mile 6 trip:

 

The figures are similar to the shorter distances though possibly the front running bias hass very slightly diminished. In terms of courses, amazingly Bangor on Dee is top again from a front running bias perspective – there is unquestionably a marked advantage to those horses that lead early at Bangor.

 

I thought for this interim distance group I would investigate some run style trainer data. I wanted to see which trainers had been the most successful when sending their runners out into the early lead in non-handicap hurdle races of 2m 2f to 2m 6f.

To that end, below are two graphs – firstly, trainer performance with front runners in terms of win strike rate; and secondly, looking at their respective A/E values.

 

 

As you might expect there are a high proportion of trainers that appears in both charts. Nicky Henderson tops both lists but this does not mean he sends a huge proportion of his runners to the front early; it shows, however, that when he does they fare extremely well. For the record here is Henderson's breakdown by running / pace style over this distance block:

 

His front runners clearly do best in terms of win strike rate, A/E value and IV. It is interesting though that only 11% - one in nine - of Henderson's horses actually take the early lead. But nearly half of them win!

It does make me wonder if trainers are really aware of pace bias... Below is his 'pace pie chart' in terms of percentage of runners that demonstrate a particular pace or running style.

 

44% of his runners raced off the pace early which is far too large a number in my opinion.

 

2 miles 7 furlong or more

The third and final grouping are the longer distance non-handicap hurdle races, from just shy of three miles upwards.

 

There are far fewer longer races as can be seen, but the same pattern emerges. Front runners perform best with prominent runners next best.

 

Trainers by Run Style (All distances)

I have already touched upon trainers but thought it might be interesting to create some trainer pace figures. To create the trainer pace figures I have simply added up the Geegeez pace points for a particular trainer and divided it by the number of runners. The higher the average the more prominent the trainer tends to race his charges. I have created trainer pace figures which cover all distances in non-handicap hurdles. Here are the trainers with the highest averages:

 

Rebecca Curtis tops the list and clearly favours positioning her runners nearer the front than the back. Her 'pace pie chart' below demonstrates this even more clearly:

 

As you can see 25% of Curtis's runners take the early lead, while another nigh on 50% race prominently and close to the pace. Ms Curtis is a trainer who understands the importance of forward run styles. It should come as no surprise therefore that you would have made a profit backing all of her runners ‘blind’ during this time frame. For the record, 53 of Curtis's runners were held up, and only 4 won (SR 7.55%). Compare this to 23% and 21.83% win strike rates for her early leaders and prominent racers.

Let us now review Alan King’s pace pie chart as a comparison to Curtis.

 

His pace average stands at 1.99 with a measly 2% of his runners sent into an early lead. Overall losses for King have been significant especially with runners that raced mid division or near the back early.

*

I do believe that pace in a race is something which must be factored in to your betting. Pace biases vary from race type to race type, distance to distance, course to course, etc. However, if you are prepared to do some digging that other punters are not, you will give yourself a significant edge over the crowd.

This article has hopefully offered a good chunk of information to digest, but in reality I have barely scratched the surface. If you really want to profit from run style/pace then the Geegeez tools are there for you to test your own ideas and crunch pace data to your heart’s content.

- DR

Your first 30 days for just £1