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.
After a short hiatus where, in truth, not much of note was happening across the courses our sectional data covers, Clock Watcher is back. In this week's instalment, I'll share the top performer in his Newcastle seven furlong peer group; a win machine who arguably ran her best race in recent defeat; and the first in a new sub-feature, Pick of the Pile, where we look at the top sectional performers over a specific course and distance.
Sanaadh a King of the Sand
We start with the outstanding performance of the week from a combo (time figure plus upgrade) perspective, that of Michael Wigham's Sanaadh in a valuable Class 2 handicap on Newcastle's straight track. The image below shows Sanaadh's performance (red line) against par (black line), with more detail in the result table beneath the graph. Waited with early, Sanaadh was a nine length last at the first call (five furlongs from home) and was still only 11th of 14 with a quarter mile to run; but from there he quickened up smartly - last two furlongs in 22.73 seconds - to record a narrow neck verdict.
Topspeed awarded him a rating of 77 to which a sectional upgrade of 18 is added (see right hand column in the results table), for a combo figure of 95. That is, by some margin, the biggest time/upgrade figure we've seen over Newcastle's seven furlong piste since TPD started tracking there 285 7f races ago.
Sanaadh's overall all-weather profile is rock solid but he looks a better horse on the straight track at Gosforth Park, where his record reads 141, the '4' being when given too much to do.
That's the nature of his hold up run style so there is always the chance of a frustrating 'should have won' effort; but there's little doubt about Sanaadh's ability. He's one to follow.
In his other all weather runs, he hung left at Wolverhampton on his sole try there, and was pulled up at Lingfield on his only spin there. He did also win at Kempton, so it might be that he just doesn't want to go left-handed - I'd be prepared to take that chance if he rocked up at Sunbury in the near future.
Agent Due More Fortune?
When Christine Dunnett sent her then four-year-old mare, Agent Of Fortune, to the Newmarket Autumn Sales she must have felt that there was nothing more to be gained from the three-time winner of the previous year.
Nobody turned a hair as Gary Moore's hand waved the winning bid at a lowly 3,000 guineas, and six weeks later the 50-rated Agent lined up in a Classified Stakes at Lingfield for which she was sent off 7/4. Clearly the vibes were good - not 'arf - as that was the first leg of a December hat-trick.
January's five runs yielded another three wins, and February has added one further victory to the score sheet. With a remarkable seven wins on the board, and now rated 83, it would be reasonable to assume that Agent Of Fortune's winning has come to an end. But in fact there is an argument that her most recent spin, when third to Crimewave over a mile and a quarter at Lingfield, was her best yet.
Bred for a mile, this was her first attempt at a longer distance and she was ridden to get the trip, finishing with gusto to be a length and a quarter behind the winner. The image below shows the respective furlong-by-furlong distance behind the leader of the winner (Crimewave, red line) and Agent Of Fortune (violet line) and needs little explanation.
Her 22 upgrade figure is added to a Topspeed rating of 54 for a composite 76. Most effective when patiently ridden, she is drawn 10 of 14 tonight up in class and it might be that she has to wait until Saturday and an engagement at Lingfield before returning to winning ways if lining up there as well.
Regardless of tonight or Saturday or another day, it will be a shock to me if Agent Of Fortune doesn't add to her seven wins already this winter before the spring arrives. What a remarkable buy!
Pick of the Pile: Lingfield AW 6f
In the first of a new mini-feature, Pick of the Pile looks at the sectional/time ratings of all runners over a give course and distance. We start with the six furlong range at Lingfield, where the best performance was recorded in the 2017 All Weather Championships 3yo Conditions Stakes.
The William Haggas-trained Second Thought won six of his seven all weather starts, beaten only on his final run when narrowly failing to double his AW Finals tally, placing second over a mile.
The son of Kodiac came from a long way back in that 3yo Championship race, leaving those contesting a fast early pace (see top colour line for the race speed) and rattling past his rivals in the final furlong where he made up 3 1/2 lengths and five places.
The most noteworthy recent performance at this track and trip was produced by Harry's Bar, who quickened well off fair fractions on 15th February in a race which will become infamous for the very sad demise of the talented and extremely likeable Kachy. Harry is a tough and consistent all weather sprinter, his form string off turf reading 23111323131.
That's all for this edition of Clock Watcher. Tune in next week for more meritorious performances and sectional insights. In the meantime, if you've any questions, please do add a comment below and I'll be sure to get back to you.
Matt
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/AgentofFortune.jpg319830Matt Bisognohttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngMatt Bisogno2020-02-26 12:16:402020-02-26 12:55:48Clock Watcher: King of the SANaaDh?
I have discussed pace angles in numerous Geegeez articles – see this list – and once again I would like to revisit this key area, this time in conjunction with draw, writes Dave Renham.
I have noted before that if you were able to predict the front runner in certain types of races it would amount to a license to print money. For example, going back to 2011, if you managed to correctly predict the front runner in every all-weather UK 5f handicap race with 8 or more runners, you would have profited by over 60p for every £1 staked!
Indeed at Kempton Park the profit would have been £1.04 for every £1 staked. For the record, in 6f handicaps on the sand you would have also profited from front runners to the tune of 33p for every £1 staked, while in 7f handicaps you still would have made 17p per £1 staked.
Naturally, and unfortunately, predicting who will lead in all-weather sprint handicaps is not as easy as all that.
In the past I have looked at different ideas to help increase the chances of predicting the front runner. For example, looking for horses that had led LTO, or looking for horses that have the highest pace score average over the past four races. I have also studied going conditions, the effect of field size etc.
One area though that I have yet to look at in real depth is the position of horses in terms of the draw. For this piece I have collated some all-weather handicap stats from the draw analyser on Geegeez, which also contains draw / run style data.
The draw can have a significant effect at some courses in both a positive and negative way. Races where the first bend is close to the start should offer lower drawn horses some advantage as they are berthed closest to the inside. At the tight turning course of Chester for example, this low draw bias is well known and documented.
Just as there can be a potential draw bias due to being drawn closest to the inside rail, one would assume that these horses have a greater chance of leading early. This is simply due to the fact that they have less distance to travel to the rail at the first corner than horses drawn wider. Of course, not all horses will try to lead early, but I felt it was time to crunch the numbers as I believed the data would back up my theory.
For the record, I have included Irish course Dundalk along with the six UK all weather tracks.
All weather 5f handicaps (8 + runners)
Let us begin by looking at draw / run style combinations over 5f. The draw is split equally in three – low, middle and high - and hence one would expect, given a level playing field, that the ‘led early’ percentages would hit around 33.3% respectively from each section.
It should also be noted that 5 of the 7 course and distances are run round a bend with only Newcastle and Southwell run on a straight course. A look at Newcastle and Southwell first:
[wpdatatable id=1]
The Southwell figures are relatively even which is what I would have expected. However, the Newcastle stats are interesting with higher drawn horses far less likely to lead than those drawn low to middle. I cannot give a reason why this is the case, but it will be interesting to see if this pattern continues in the coming years.
Onto the other five courses and for the remainder of this article I will just focus on these as all distances are on a turning strip:
[wpdatatable id=2]
This table shows that at all five courses the early leader is more likely to come from the lowest third of the draw – those drawn closest to the inside rail. I am pleased the stats seem to back up my original theory. In addition, horses from the middle stalls lead more often than those drawn high, suggesting there is a correlation between draw position and likelihood of leading.
The following table gives another way of illustrating how much more likely low drawn horses are to lead than high drawn ones – this has been very simply calculated by dividing the low draw led% by the high draw led%:
[wpdatatable id=3]
This table illustrates the bias to lower drawn front runners quite neatly with four of the five featured tracks’ minimum distance handicaps seeing lower drawn horses more than twice as likely to lead early as higher drawn ones. Dundalk seems to have the strongest low drawn front running bias and it is also worth sharing that horses drawn 1 and 2 at the Irish venue have provided the early leader 31% of the time.
Combining the data for all round-course 5f handicaps on the all-weather, and increasing the field size to 12 or more runners, there is an even stronger bias to low draws leading early. There are over 170 qualifying races which is a decent enough sample:
[wpdatatable id=4]
Under these circumstances the lowest third of draw are around 3.5 times more likely to produce the early leader of the race. This stronger bias makes sense as higher draws start even further away from the inside rail in bigger fields.
Another assumption I wanted to validate was that when higher drawn horses lead early they are less likely to go onto win: the reasoning behind this is that I perceived it to have generally been quite an effort to pass so many horses to get to the lead from a wide draw, as well as the fact that such runners would probably have had to travel slightly further to achieve this. Combining these factors, it would be logical to deduce that the horse might tire late on due to its earlier exertions in getting to the lead.
However, the stats do not back this up. Below are the win percentages for early leaders from each third of the draw at the five round-course all-weather tracks, firstly focusing on 8+ runner handicap data:
[wpdatatable id=5]
Horses that lead from high draws at Chelmsford manage to go on to win three races in eight; those at Dundalk and Kempton prevail better than one in four. Only at Lingfield does it seem a negative to lead early from a high draw.
A similar pattern emerges when we look at the 12+ runner handicap data. Combining the courses we get these win percentages:
[wpdatatable id=6]
I concede these stats have really surprised me. However, in many respects this is good news if you like backing front runners. In the past I may have been put off by a potential front runner drawn wide as I would have assumed if they did manage to lead they were less likely to win. This is not the case –over 5 furlongs at these courses anyway!
Conclusions
This article has shown that in all-weather 5f handicaps contested on a round course, it is easier to lead from a lower draw than a higher one, BUT… in terms of winning the race you may prefer your potential front runner to be drawn high!
Food for thought I hope, and if you have enjoyed this piece you will perhaps be pleased to know that I plan to look at 6f handicaps in a follow-up article.
DR
p.s. if you want to understand the impact of draw and pace in combination, Geegeez Gold's new Heat Map underlay within the pace tab does just that, for the specific course/distance/field size/race type combination in question - example below. Click here to join Geegeez Gold >
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Lingfield5f_GraciousJohn_830x320.jpg320830Dave Renhamhttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngDave Renham2020-02-24 05:42:182020-02-24 05:49:39Dave Renham: A Synopsis of 5f AW Draw/Pace
I’m worried about gambling. Not my own gambling per se, though a couple more winners would always be appreciated, but where the whole pursuit is going, writes Tony Keenan.
The 2010's were the decade when gambling in Ireland and beyond became normalised. It was hardly an illicit, back-street hobby in the early 2000's but recent years have seen it become utterly mainstream through its ubiquity, from TV ads to football sponsorship, odds making their way into conversations like never before. Technology was the great enabler of this expansion: why go to a betting shop when you could have ten of them in your pocket?
Today, where there is sport, there is betting. It was ever thus for racing and indeed this has been its primary attraction for many (myself included) but it is something new for many sports. This normalisation of gambling may have been the greatest achievement of betting companies, opening up markets and customers that were hitherto unavailable to them, but it seems that a tipping point is about to be reached if we are not already there; have they been too successful in this process and about to be hoist by their own petard?
Sympathy for bookmakers has always been in short supply, the profession ranking close to politicians and solicitors in the public’s eyes, but the last few years have seen a sharp swing in sentiment against them. Our society now demands transparency when much betting market activity is cloudy but campaigners like Brian Chappell and Paul Fairhead, and newspapers like The Guardian, have done sterling work in bringing abject abuses into the light.
They are to be commended for this and have played their part in forcing welcome regulatory changes in the UK, from reduced stakes on FOBTs to banning the use of credit cards for online accounts, with limitations on VIP programmes perhaps to come. Self-regulation by betting companies doesn’t work, such attempts inevitably at odds with commercial concerns and there has been a certain acceptance of this from the firms themselves, publicly at least. They have had to take some pain and there will be more to come but while they needed a kick, a kicking even, do they deserve to be kicked to to the kerb?
Punters need bookmakers unless the whole model of betting in these islands is going to change drastically, and my worry now is that gambling will be used as political capital by those who don’t really understand the area. Gambling and betting companies (and, by extension, punters) are the easiest of targets for politicians looking to score points.
To the forefront of all this is the very real issue of problem gambling. It is a difficult topic to write about, not least because I have thankfully never been there and hope I never will be. The fear of losing everything is something that lurks in the background with most if not all serious gamblers. That fear is not necessarily a bad thing either; fear can be a great motivator first of all but also act as a regulator if tempted to stake too heavily when we may believe we have a huge edge; racing punters are still betting on animals running around a field.
Nor am I any expert in the statistics of problem gambling which seem to throw up mixed messages and, in any case, those numbers could be wrong: losing a lot of money, often in the most private of fashions, does not seem like something people would want to disclose. It is a concern for society as a whole, perhaps even a public health issue, but most figures seem to bear out the truth that it affects a minority of gamblers and how we deal with the whole gambling area should not be dictated totally by the few when the many it brings joy to many.
I love gambling, particularly gambling on racing, which remains the ultimate betting puzzle with all its variables. I won’t pretend that every aspect of it is good. It can be a self-inflicted emotional roller coaster with losses hard to take, while it comes at a significant time cost if doing it seriously; there are other more productive and beneficial things we could alternatively be at. But, for me at least, the positives outweigh the negatives: among other things, it teaches us how to lose (frequently) and can make us learn to be disciplined, while I have made some of best friends through gambling and racing.
There is also the issue of freedom. Irresponsibility is present in most aspects of life from eating to drinking to driving to internet use; there are many things that aren’t particularly good for you when done to excess and a life spent gambling is hardly contributing much to society. But it is fun and if the majority of people who partake are enjoying it without doing significant harm to others, they should be allowed to continue.
This freedom may well be curtailed in the near-future however, perhaps significantly so. Unlike the UK, Ireland has no Gambling Commission yet but it is coming in some form and how quickly it is expedited will be determined by the next government, which may be less than sympathetic to betting interests. The most popular party in the most recent elections on some measures, Sinn Fein, stated in their manifesto that they would "conduct a short review of the gambling sector and introduce reform to the sector", allowing that these manifestos are often not worth the paper they are printed on after the voting is done.
Any new laws would surely aim to protect the vulnerable which is both a worthy and necessary goal, but should also be cognisant of the fact that not all gambling is problem gambling. The concern would be that regulators could be people with an anti-gambling agenda or may have no grasp of the area and thus the rules could be badly thought out or too draconian.
What form these regulations may take is unclear. An increase in betting tax (perhaps passed on to the punter) would be an obvious one, especially as Horse Racing Ireland have been lobbying for it for a while now. But any new rules seem likely to be more wide-reaching than that - some sort of source-of-funds/affordability check perhaps on the cards. This could be applied on or soon after registration for an online account or appearance in a betting shop and would make it virtually impossible for people to bet beyond their means but at the same time prevent people betting at a scale they are comfortable with.
The amount a punter can bet may be linked to their salary. So a person earning €39,000 (the average industrial wage in Ireland at the end of 2019) may be allowed to lose 10% of that in a year; I am guessing completely here, the figure may be much lower or higher. There is obviously a big difference between turning over that €3,900 in a given period and actually losing it all, but would the regulators know that? A punter can make a tank of that size go a long way in terms of time and they might, heaven forbid, even increase it.
Staking is a very broad church and I would not describe myself as remotely high-staking but nor do I want to do this for fivers and tenners at a time; there has to be some tangible reward for success. I realise gambling regularly can inure you to the value of money and you probably need to be a little loose, not thinking about stakes in terms of cups of coffee, nights out, even holidays. Bookmakers telling you what you can and cannot stake is one thing as there will always be ways and means of getting around their restrictions but government regulation might be something different entirely.
One thing that seems certain is that winning punters of any sort, whether they be making a living or simply getting a few quid, won’t be considered in this. That group have a tendency of finding a way but this could present yet another stumbling block with any sort of increased customer due diligence likely to work against them.
Ultimately, these laws in some form seem inevitable. One would hope that they will be constructed by people who have a real sense of subject matter and that punters won’t get caught in the crossfire between politicians and betting companies where betting volume just gets driven underground, which brings a wealth of other potential problems. Perhaps gambling should never have been allowed to become so utterly normalised but I would not want to see it demonised either.
- TK
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/bettingshop.jpg319830TonyKeenanhttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngTonyKeenan2020-02-17 20:36:452020-02-17 20:36:45Tony Keenan: Why I’m Worried About Gambling
We're at the start of a busy period of development within Geegeez Gold just now, and an early part of this work is to bring a couple of rather clunky elements of the visuals into the 21st century.
Specifically, we've smoothed our draw and pace chart curves; and we've made the pace heat map a bit less 'blocky'.
There is also a new view on the Pace tab - and a very interesting one at that.
Gold users can now see which parts of the draw are favoured by the respective run styles, as well as which horses sit where against that draw / run style underlay. It's quite difficult to explain, so have a look at the short video below and see what you think.
Plenty more coming soon!
Matt
p.s. the user guide has been updated accordingly and you can download the latest version from your My Geegeez page.
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/drawcurves.png320830Matt Bisognohttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngMatt Bisogno2020-02-12 13:34:512020-02-13 11:46:30New and Improved: Draw / Pace Display
Oops, we did it again, as Britney Spears never quite sang. With the results just in from the 2020 Smart Betting Club Awards, I'm delighted to announce that geegeez.co.uk has won the Best Betting Website category... for the fourth year in a row.
Here's how the SBC Awards report broke the news
GOLD - GEEGEEZ RACING
For the 4th year running, racing website, GeeGeez.co.uk did the business by winning the coveted Gold ‘Best Betting Website’ Award with an impressive 33.47% of the vote – increasing their share by nearly 10% from last year.
Scooping more than a third of all votes is something we're immensely proud of, as is beating the likes of Oddschecker, ATR, Racing Post, Betting.Betfair, and so on.
We've never been able to compete with the massive budgets of those major media houses; but that has never stopped us punching above our weight. The ethos of geegeez.co.uk is simple: highest quality data-driven content presented in an easily consumable format.
In other words, we aim to deliver key punting messages in bite-sized snippets, whether that's through our Gold racecards and form tools, or in the insightful research-based editorial produced by the likes of Tony Keenan, Jon Shenton, Dave Renham, Chris Worrall and myself.
This is how the votes were distributed:
Of course, we'll never win an 'industry' award, because we're never nominated. We're not part of that club where members take it in turns to back slap each other. Nope, we rely on your votes - you know, the actual users of our site (ahem) - to express your feelings about the value you get. Thank you for validating the effort we put in to building the best product/site/service we can.
And we're not done yet.
Not by a long chalk.
Here are just a few of the things we have planned for 2020:
- Betfair Starting Price data in our reports and cards: so you can see profit and loss against exchange prices (with commission deducted)
- Percentage of Rivals Beaten (PRB) and PRB2 metrics: so you can deploy this professional's barometer of performance
- Draw / Pace heat map underlayed within the pace map: so you can see how stall position and run style might impact today's field.
- Query Tool v2.0: a brand new, much more functional, system builder tool. Planned for the second half of 2020.
- Headgear and 'DSLR' (days since last run) reports
- 2nd time in a handicap and 2nd time for a new trainer (HC2 / TC2) reports
...and a bundle more besides.
As always, if you have any suggestions, please do let us know via the Contact form on site. That's how some of our best features - including the heat map one above - come to life.
*
On behalf of the entire team - developers, backroom staff, writers and myself - thank you so much for your ongoing support - it means the world to us to know that the hours we put in are appreciated by you, our highly valued readers and subscribers.
p.p.s. I personally won a prize, too: the inaugural Best Betting Writer. That really is too kind. Indeed, I'm not even convinced I'm the best betting writer on geegeez.co.uk these days, something about which I'm delighted. Healthy competition at a high quality level is what I've always aspired to for readers of geegeez. It's a thrill to be a part of such a great editorial team.
Elsewhere in cyberspace, the likes of Kevin Blake and Lydia Hislop, as well as the excellent pair of Joseph Buchdahl and Paul Krishnamurty, are all writers well worth your time if you're as yet unfamiliar with them.
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/GoldSBC2019a.png60468Matt Bisognohttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngMatt Bisogno2020-02-11 15:20:472020-02-11 15:28:37Geegeez Notches Best Betting Website Four-Timer
In my last article I discussed the relative merits of graded novice hurdle races in the UK and Ireland based on how well the horses involved performed over the next calendar year, writes Jon Shenton. You can find that here: https://www.geegeez.co.uk/novice-hurdles-whats-the-form-worth/
It wasn’t planned to be a two-part double header, but sheer volume of interesting takeaways has merited it, thus a sequel was hastily commissioned and here it is.
Before commencing it’s worth noting that I won’t be going into details regarding methodology of race scores, rankings and the like. All of that can be found in the original article, linked to above.
First things first, then: let's catch up on the two races from Part 1 which were highlighted as the most accomplished based on my race rankings. Both events have been contested since publication. Of course, it will only become apparent if the usual abundance of talent was present in a few months', or perhaps years', time but we need to have a better idea before then!
This race was comfortably the strongest novice hurdle based on the historical average race rating of 96+. This year's renewal had a very impressive winner who appears to have a strong chance of living up to the general quality of the race. Asterion Forlonge made easy work of, well, Easywork to win by over nine lengths from the Gordon Elliott-trained 5/4 jolly, extending Willie Mullins’ stranglehold on the race by extracting his seventh victory from the last eight renewals. The full result is shown below.
Both Asterion Forlonge and Easywork disputed the lead from the get-go, giving each other little peace throughout. The eventual victor galloped relentlessly, breaking his field one by one and finishing powerfully. A credible case could be constructed to even upgrade the performance given the contested pace and the seemingly tiring nature of the track on Sunday.
The Chanelle Pharma is a proven stepping stone for Mullins charges prior to tackling Cheltenham and it will be of significant interest to see where the winner rolls up in a few short weeks. Ordinarily the Supreme would be top of the list (the route taken by Klassical Dream, Vautour and Champagne Fever). However, the Donnelly’s, owners of Asterion Forlonge, have a decision to make given that the head of the Supreme ante-post market is fronted by their own Shishkin. Add in another Donnelly novice hurdler, The Big Getaway, and possibilities abound. It would be no surprise to see the yellow and black checkerboard silks in the winner's enclosure on more than one occasion, with Al Boum Photo adding a significant further string to connections' Cheltenham bow.
2020 Classic Novices' Hurdle (Cheltenham)
The second race that was discussed in Part 1, as it was ranked 2nd overall (with an average rating of 78) was the Ballymore Classic Novices' Hurdle on Cheltenham Trials day run at the end of January. The result is below:
In truth, it’s hard to assess the strength of this renewal at this stage. Overall, it seems fair to assert that the Irish novices appear to have to an edge over the British crop as things stand. Harry Fry, trainer of the second placed King Roland essentially confirmed this view by questioning his charges participation at the Cheltenham Festival based on not conceivably being able to defeat Envoi Allen. Of course, trainer talk should be often taken with a good pinch of salt and whilst beating the Envoi may be a stretch based on evidence thus far, there is still a case for the King to reign in the future.
Watching the race again, the horse was virtually left standing at the start and gave the early leader, House Island, a 20-length head start. More importantly, the eventual winner, Harry Senior, had a few lengths in hand too. King Roland then breezed into contention on the home turn but didn’t see it through, finally succumbing by three lengths.
The winner barrelled up the Cheltenham hill despite coming under pressure earlier than virtually every other horse in the race. Trained by Colin Tizzard, Harry Senior gave a strong impression that the longer three-mile test of the Albert Bartlett would suit. Consequently, this 6-year-old is on the dauphinoise end of my scale for the potato race shortlist.
***
Next time out races to follow
There are other races from Part 1 that are worth delving into, notably the Navan Grade 2 run in December, the Nathaniel Lacy (2m 6f) run at Leopardstown as part of the Dublin Racing Festival (both won by Latest Exhibition), and any other novice hurdle ran at Cheltenham. However, this time I want to assess the same races but in a slightly different way. Rather than following the races for a calendar year (like in Part 1), I thought that it may be of interest to appraise by only considering the horses' next time out (NTO) performances.
An important distinction is that Part 1 contained five years' worth of data, whereas the table below relates to the entire history of the race contained in horseracebase.com’s database, going as far back as the late 1990’s in some cases. I’ve used the “follow” capability from the big trends page on HRB to then manually compile this output.
The table below presents the data for next time out performances.
The columns starting with the notation “Win” show the fate of only the horses who won the race in question on their next outing. The columns beginning with “All” represent the performance of every runner that competed in each race on their next visit to a track. The data is sorted by the AllNextPL which shows the £1 level stake return if you’d backed every horse from the race next time out. The data is complete for races run up to January 16th 2020.
National Hunt Novices' Handicap Hurdle Final (Grade 3, Sandown)
Reviewing the “All” data in the first instance, perhaps surprisingly, at the top of the tree is the Grade 3 March Novice Handicap Final from Sandown. Contested over 2m 4f, this event usually attracts a large field. In terms of measuring the subsequent overall form of the race it is on the lower end of the scale with a race rating of 46.6 (see Part 1) and isn’t generally a race to follow.
However, by checking race ranking data there are clues as to why this race might be of interest for NTO runners but not overall form. Using the same table format as part 1 here are the Sandown G3 Novice Handicap individual yearly race ratings and ranks.
Immediately, it can be seen that the ratings are relatively low due primarily to poor performance in subsequent Graded races: in total, 27 runs had followed in Graded company (GPrun), producing a solitary Grade 2 victory in 2017. However, it is clear from the OthrW column that there is a healthy abundance of future winners exiting this race. It may be a case of quantity over quality for this event from a Graded perspective, but it remains a solid barometer.
This all makes a degree of sense; after all it is the one and only handicap on our list and it is usually staged the weekend before Cheltenham. Ergo, it may be a fair assertion that “not quite top level” novices are targeted at this race as an opportunity to secure a sought-after Graded prize. It is also plausible that a greater number of horses than average are well handicapped improving types given the novice element of the contest. So, even if it is not their day at Sandown in early March, they may still be in a strong position to strike next time.
Evaluating next time out performance by the class of race competed in demonstrates that the vast majority of animals drop several rungs of the ladder to class 3 or 4 races, and by and large perform competently at this earthlier level.
The elite level G1 results notwithstanding, the rest are solid. It must be stated, however, that there is outlying SP of 50/1 (Time For Rupert who finished 10th in the Sandown race and then won a Listed race at Aintree the following month) which obviously gives a flattering edge to the overall P&L number.
I’m not sure that I’d advise backing all runners coming out of Sandown blindly but, with a strike rate of over 23% for next time outers, I will certainly be adding horses from this race into my geegeez tracker for further evaluation.
Rossington Main Novices' Hurdle (Grade 2, Haydock)
Another race worth quickly noting due its recent running and propensity to deliver next time out winners (again, despite its relatively uninspiring race ranking) is the Grade 2 Rossington Main staged at Haydock. Horses exiting this event are 26/109 with a profit of £24.79 to £1 level stakes on their next run; that’s a better than 20% rate of return. That needs caveating with the fact that pickings have been slim in the past five years with only a handful of short price next time out winners. However, in the 2020 renewal, run at the end of January, the trio of Stolen Silver, Thebannerkingrebel and Edwardstone fought out a tight finish with all three looking to be the type to keep on your side. The first two named are entered in the Betfair Hurdle this Saturday.
Cheltenham Festival Novice Hurdles
For this edition most of the focus on novice hurdlers has been on evaluating a Graded race with an eye to its future form. But, of course, at this time of year all roads lead to Cheltenham, so as a final set of analysis below is a brief appraisal of the three Championship Novice Hurdle races staged at the Festival.
By understanding the routes that the winners have taken through their novice campaigns there may be some clues as to where to start looking for this year's bounty.
Supreme Novices Hurdle – 2 miles ½ furlong
First up is the Supreme: in a few weeks' time the Festival will open with a spine-tingling roar as the Supreme protagonists take their first steps toward potential fame and glory. Given its opening berth I suspect that more time and effort is expended on predicting the winner of the curtain-raiser than any other race over the course of the week (or is that just me?!). Other (more qualified) people will commit their thoughts to paper with interesting and informative race form previews, but the below table may offer some historical pointers on where to start evaluating the contenders.
The table is fairly basic, illustrating the winners of the Supreme, their SP and a record of all graded race performances in the same season prior to the Cheltenham event. This campaigns winner has been added to build a ready-made shortlist for further analysis!
It is not a shock to note that there isn’t a single case over the past nine years where the winner of the Supreme has not already tasted Graded success during the same season. This is of interest, particularly as the head of the ante-post market at time of writing is the Nicky Henderson-trained Shishkin.
Shishkin has yet to dip his hoof into anything above Class 4 novice waters and, with only one entry before Cheltenham (a Listed race at Huntingdon), it’s very unlikely he’s going to get that Graded experience prior to the Festival. Stats and trends of course are there to be broken, and it may be that we have a trend buster in the making here. That said, whilst taking on a Hendo hotpot is not for the meek, I think I’d much rather side at the prices with a horse with greater experience - and winning Graded form - especially after referencing the data in the table above.
The Chanelle Pharma features prominently, three times in total, with the Mullins trio of Champagne Fever, Vautour and Klassical Dream all taking the Leopardstown G1 route to subsequent Prestbury Park glory. The complexity regarding the same ownership of Shishkin and Asterion Forlonge will play out in due course, no doubt. However, if they both line up on the big day my money will be on the latter: the Chanelle Pharma / Supreme double is historically compelling.
Ballymore Novices Hurdle – 2 miles 5 furlongs
Graded experience is again important in the case of the Ballymore. Aside from City Island last year, all winners have finished at least in the top two in a Graded event, the lone exception having taken the scenic route via an £11k Naas novice event. City Island's trainer, Martin Brassil, had had up to that point only two previous runners at the Festival which may explain the slightly unconventional path to victory.
In terms of the remaining winners, the Chanelle Pharma is preeminent again and, along with the Leamington, two victors have prevailed from each to take the Ballymore in the past nine years.
The current 2020 ante-post favourite, Envoi Allen, is a slim 5/4 poke largely due to being a dual-Grade 1 winner already this season. The market historically looks to be there or thereabouts too. It’s not a tip but in terms of ticking the boxes the Envoi appears to be an identikit winner
Albert Bartlett Novices Hurdle – 3 miles
Finally, the gruelling three-mile trip of the Albert Bartlett has borne witness to some Hollywood-priced winners recently. All bar two (Minella Indo and Very Wood) had already tasted Graded victory in the same season, and even both of the non-Graded winners ran second in such an event.
Two horses prominent in the Albert Bartlett betting are the Willie Mullins trained-Monkfish and Colin Tizzard-conditioned The Big Breakaway. Like Shishkin in the Supreme, both animals lack Graded miles on the clock, leading to a question on whether they can step up to the Festival plate. In fact, thus far, neither have competed in any race close to Graded level.
Unfortunately, it’s difficult to find commonality in the routes to Albert Bartlett glory, with seemingly the whole array of novice races listed above. As mentioned previously, the names in the 2019/20 column are essentially a shortlist of potentially where to start more detailed analysis; although it could easily be argued that checking the market gives a similar result. Nevertheless, given the propensity for unfancied horses to win, my starting point in the spud race will be to evaluate the chances of some of the unheralded names in the table above, Redford Road perhaps being a case in point.
*
That’s it for this novice hurdle deep dive. I’ve enjoyed putting it together and it’s been highly educational in terms of attaining a greater appreciation of the novice roadmap and its leading pathfinders. Hopefully, it will result in some punting improvements too!
- JS
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Asterion_Forloge_ChanellePharma_Jan2020.jpg320830Jonny11https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngJonny112020-02-05 09:49:522020-02-05 09:49:52Novice Hurdles: What’s the Form Worth? Part 2
It's Wednesday and time for another edition of Clock Watcher, a weekly roundup of interesting performances from a sectional timing perspective. In focus this week is an impressive middle distance newcomer to the Nottinghamshire beach; a perfect example of upgrades in action; and an explanation of the concept of OMC. Plus, a new column in your Gold form denoting sectional upgrades. Woof!
We start with a couple of noteworthy efforts on a deeper-than-normal Southwell circuit last Thursday. While geegeez.co.uk eyes were on Forseti, one of our syndicate horses, who was recording a double at the track, clock watchers were treated to a brace of striking efforts for contrasting reasons.
One for the All 'Weather'
The first was in a three-runner Class 3 three-year-old handicap over a mile, where Forseti's stablemate at Mick Appleby's yard, Merryweather, was given a peach from the front by Ali Rawlinson. Where he'd been patient aboard Forseti half an hour earlier, riding our lad efficiently and coming through late, here he took ownership of the pace, dictating a pedestrian overture.
Thereafter, Rawlinson and his willing partner turned the screw, accelerating markedly in the final three furlongs. His Topspeed figure of 45 is moderate but an upgrade of a whopping 43 gives him a composite score of a more than useful 88. This is a fine illustration of how understanding how the race was run in a more objective, granular manner gives us a handle on what might have otherwise been considered a muddling affair.
The race time was unimpressive - 1.1 seconds slower than Forseti in the preceding contest - but the finishing effort of all three runners, most obviously the winner, was rapid. That final three furlongs was completed in 35.53 seconds, compared with 39.69 for Forseti's closing three-eighths.
On a perennially stamina-sapping strip at its most testing, direct comparisons may be unfair; nevertheless, Merryweather - who was completing a hat-trick for her owners, The Horse Watchers, the last two at Southwell - remains one to keep on side.
Wind Breezes By
The very next race was a cracker: three Southwell specialists - Blowing Dixie, Angel Lane and Azari - lined up, the first named sent off the strong 4/6 favourite (and about that price, if not shorter, in my book). As it transpired, Dixie had five-and-a-half lengths and more on his field... with the exception of fibresand firster, Calling The Wind.
A winner twice on the Chelmsford speedway for Sir Mark Prescott in 2018, the son of Authorized changed hands last summer for £32,000, heading to Richard Hughes's yard. He was entitled to need his debut spin for the barn at the very end of last year, but showed a ready alacrity for this marmite surface, breezing alongside Blowing Dixie before moving decisively ahead. Calling The Wind achieved a decent Topspeed of 64 to which is added a strong sectional upgrade of 31 for an impressive composite of 95. He will be very hard to beat over this course and distance in a similar pace setup: that is the fastest course and distance composite score in our database by a full five points.
A Claim to Fame?
Nothing much to note in the novice ranks last week, but there was a fascinating claimer run at Lingfield on Friday. The finish was contested by the 6/5 favourite, Lets Go Lucky, and 5/2 second market choice, Hong Kong Dragon. They finished in that order, the pair most of five lengths clear of the rest, and with the second looking a little unlucky in the run.
That was how the 'judges' saw it, too, with no fewer than eight claims made for the runner up, including his (now former) trainer, George Scott, and fellow handlers Tony Carroll and Mick Appleby - plus at least one twitter shrewdie. He was secured for the claiming tag of £5,000 by Gareth Maule, whose runners mostly race with Christian Williams.
What was interesting about this contest is that they went very quickly early before a war of attrition - the winner being the one who slowed down the least - in the final section.
The sectional percentage 'by furlong' chart shows how closely matched the two protagonists were:
The red line is winner Lets Go Lucky, green is Hong Kong Dragon, and black is par, an expression of how to optimally run a race at this course and distance. Their composites are similar, with the winner getting a marginally higher speed rating and the runner-up a fractionally higher upgrade number. Both performed above expectation for the grade and it is a mystery - to me at least - how the second took eight claims where the winner took none!
What does it mean: OMC
Who doesn't love a bit of sectional jargon? (rhetorical)
And, as if there aren't enough new concepts and terms to get ones head around, we invented (at least) one more!
Say hello to OMC.
OMC stands for Opening, Midrace, Closing and is simply a means of splitting a race into a beginning, middle and end in order to better understand what happened and roughly when.
You can see from the trios of colour blobs above a chart how races have been run, and from the same colour blobs in the result itself (when the 'show sectionals' button has been clicked) how individual runners have divided their energies. Thus, the two claiming pugilists were involved in a race that was fast early, even in the middle and very slow late.
The notion of fast and slow in this context is based on the percentage of the race time spent in each section, compared with those percentages for all races run over the same course and distance.
This is important because it means we are not interested in the actual times. Rather, we are interested in the ratio of time spent in each part of the race, or section. Hopefully that makes some sort of sense because there's more.
The notion of fast and slow is also not a specific percentage but rather a comparison of the par percentage against this race's/runner's sectional percentage. So, in the claiming race example above, the O(pening) section had a sectional percentage of 101.9%. That is to say that it was completed pro rata in 101.9% of the overall race time; but that was fully 6% quicker as a sectional percentage than par for this course and distance, thus our algorithm deems it as FAST. [Remember that horses race from a standing start in the stalls and, thus, they need to go from 0 mph to their cruising speed, so we'd normally expect opening sections to be below 100%, depending on how long that opening section is.]
What you actually need to know
That's somewhere between obtuse and downright baffling for many, no doubt, so here's what you actually need to know.
If the blobs are green, a horse, or race (and its rider, or leaders) went evenly, using their energies sensibly across the spectrum of the distance.
Where the early blob is blue (slow), expect one or both of the later blobs to be orange/red (fast).
And vice versa: where early pace is fast (orange/red), as in the claimer example, expect the late sectional blob to be blue or possibly greenish.
Horses that finish fast are useful allies in subsequent races that look to be muddling in pace terms. Horses that can run evenly out back off faster than optimum tempos may be interesting closers in such pace setups, especially on the straight track at Newcastle. (These comments are mainly, though not exclusively, in relation to all weather racing).
A New Number on Gold
You've seen various references to upgrade figures in the above: they are the traceable heartbeat of sectional timing. They quantify objectively - notwithstanding that different scales of objectivity will find different numbers, as with xG in football - the extent to which a performance should be marked up.
There is no marking down with upgrades: a horse either ran efficiently, in which case it gets a zero, or it ran inefficiently. The less efficiently it ran, the bigger the upgrade figure.
Naturally, there are all sorts of nuances - such as horses that need to be ridden inefficiently (speedball frontrunners), but which can still win by making their rivals act even less optimally - which time and experience will help us figure out.
No data element, or group of data, is the panacea to solving the puzzle; but each new element enhances our understanding of the actors and our ability to quantify the value propositions before us. Sectional data, and upgrades, are clearly no different.
Here's how they look in your racecard once switched on, UP column right hand side:
And in the Full Form, this time with the 'Show Sectionals' option checked:
They also appear on the right of the Full Result a couple of days after the race, once we've received the information from our provider, Total Performance Data.
To switch sectional upgrade figures on, go to the Race Card Options section on your My Geegeez page, and check the box in the Ratings sub-section.
That's all for this week. I appreciate there's a lot to take in - for those who wish to - but the key is not necessarily to understand the mechanics; instead, focus on the utility: what is this stuff saying about what happened, and how does that inform me going forwards?
Often the answer is very little or nothing; frequently it is 'only' an empirical confirmation of that to which the peepers already alerted us; but occasionally these numbers switch us on to an effort far more positive than at first sight. That's the real juice.
By the end of the year, we'll all be more comfortable around these ideas, so take your time and dip your toe in when the urge takes you. Don't force it, no good comes of that. Oh, and please do ask questions. Here in the comments is best, so that other people might see the answers.
Thanks for reading, and good luck.
Matt
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/LetsGoLucky_HKDragon.jpg319830Matt Bisognohttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngMatt Bisogno2020-01-29 08:46:562020-01-29 08:46:56Clock Watcher: Some Breeze from Wind
As regular readers of these Punting Angles articles will know, most of the focus is on the staple diet of UK day to day racing, writes Jon Shenton. This is at least partially deliberate. Firstly, there is lots of it and therefore more data to crunch. Secondly, it makes at least some sense that higher class racing is watched more, tracked more closely, better understood and that it is consequently harder to find an edge from data. After all, there is wall to wall coverage of the big days and events.
Better late than never, it’s time for us to get involved in the upper echelons of the sport. For one or two editions it’s going to be less about Plumpton, Sedgefield and Southwell (with all due respect) and more about Cheltenham, Leopardstown and the like.
This article, the first of two, is solely focusing on Graded novice hurdle races, exuding the mares' programme. I will be evaluating most of the key dates in the calendar from Chepstow in October up to the festival at Cheltenham in March, with one eye on trying to find contenders for those mega spring festivals. This means events such as the Aintree and Punchestown festivals in April are not included.
To do this, I’ve pulled together data on Graded (Grade 1, 2 and 3) novice hurdles from both sides of the Irish Sea. In all honesty, the process has been quite a long one, and painstaking at times, manually checking race data and inputting it into a spreadsheet. However, it’s been a fantastic education and ultimately a rewarding exercise. Whilst there are no usual point and click recommendations, I hope it’s of some use in your punting: the process has certainly opened my eyes to the world of novice hurdling.
Approach and method
Don’t worry, it’s not a science paper! However, I do think it’s important to outline the process that I’ve used as a basis for much of this article.
To the best of my knowledge every Graded novice hurdle race since autumn 2015 (run in October to March of those years) has been evaluated to establish how runners performed over the subsequent 365-day period. That intel has then been pulled into a data table. Based on key criteria a rating has then been generated to measure the quality of that race based on the future results of participants.
It only includes data up to 16th January this year so doesn’t contain any of the races from the most recent weekend, the Rossington Main, for example.
An example using the Tolworth
Sandown's Grade 1 takes place in early January and was won by Fidderontheroof earlier this month. It is run over a 2-mile trip and the question I’m trying to answer objectively is whether the race form is worth following or not based on the recent history of the race. The below table shows a breakdown, by renewal, of the subsequent performance of all competing horses over a 90-day and 365-day period. Horseracebase has been used to obtain the data.
Hopefully the column names make at least a modicum of sense. But, to explain further, the columns numbered 90 and 365 relate to form for that length of time, in days, after the Tolworth was run. So for example, the 6 in the 90run column for 2019 means that there were 6 runs from horses that ran within 90 days of the Tolworth in that year, the next column (90win) illustrates the number of winners from those 6 runners, 90pl the number of places and so on. Already this table gives a flavour as to whether this may be a race to follow in general terms.
The second part of the standing data shown in the table is evaluating the quality of the future form in terms of wins and places over 365 days, the column headers have “365” titles for clarity.
It is of intrigue that by backing every Tolworth runner blind for 90 days after the race at SP you’d walk away with a profit of £26.20 to a £1 level stake, a 72% return! (The P&L numbers are marked in yellow)
Volume of wins and places is interesting, but it’s helpful and important to understand the quality of those victories. So again, evaluating the Tolworth form in terms of the breakdown of those W’s and P’s in relation to the class they have been attained in, the below table gives the split.
The table shows the number of subsequent runs in Graded races at any level (GPrun) then working across from left to right:
G1W – number of G1 wins
G2W – number of G2 wins
G3W – you’ve guessed it, number of G3 wins
OthrW – wins in all other classes (inc. Listed)
G1PlOnly, G2PlOnly and G3PlOnly are the number of places attained in those grades, not inclusive of any winners
Summarising, the data paints a picture that, from 2015, there have been 49 runs from horses that competed in the Tolworth who then ran in Graded company during the following 365 days. Of those, there have been four Grade 1 wins, three at Grade 2, three at Grade 3 and the column OthrW represents 19 wins in Listed or lower classes.
For information, the G1 victories are;
2018 - Summerville Boy in the Supreme Novices Hurdle at Cheltenham
2017 – Finians Oscar in the Mersey Novices Hurdle at Aintree
2016 – Yorkhill in the Neptune (Ballymore) Novices Hurdle at Cheltenham and the Mersey Novices Hurdle at Aintree
These three animals prevailed in the Tolworth, all progressing to festival success and rubber stamping it as a race to follow. You’d be right in thinking that fancy data is not required to confirm that the Grade 1 Tolworth is a strong contest. However, understanding how the race compares against other quality races in terms of future form is of potential interest.
To contemplate its relative strength against other events, finding a way to rate or score each race is required. As a result, a relatively straightforward race rating has been constructed to do the job. The race rating system is highly subjective and there is a strong suspicion that if a hundred people did it, no two individuals would do it in the same way! The exact method isn’t too important though, as the objective is to evaluate without bias which novice races are best to follow. A relatively simple (even with flaws) rating system still should give enough detail to be a bridge to further analysis.
Below is a breakdown of the ratings for the Tolworth, 2015 to 2020.
Here is a quick run-down of the columns and what they represent;
365%Score – this relates to the general quality of the race. It’s calculated in the following way.
(The Win % of the race form for 365 days) + (the Place % of the race form for 365 days divided by 3)
A real example, the 2019 has 3 winners and 8 places from 19 runs (data in the first table), resulting in a winning percentage of 15.8% and the place percentage of 42.1%. Therefore the 365%Sc is calculated as below
15.8 + (42.1/3) = 29.8. All scores are rounded to the nearest number. A minimum of 10 runners in each race is required to generate a rating.
GPWScore – this represents a rating generated from the subsequent winners over the next 365 days from each race. The scores are comprised of;
Grade 1 win 10
Grade 2 win 6
Grade 3 win 3
Other Win 1
GPPLScore – this is the score value generated from the placed horses (excluding winners) over the following 365 days
Grade 1 place 3
Grade 2 place 2
Grade 3 place 1
GPScore = GPWScore + GPPLScore (i.e. a combined score from the win and place data)
RTNG = the overall rating for the race in question, adding 365%Score + GPSccore
RaceRNK – is the overall rank of the race in terms of quality from the 163 races evaluated. The lower the number the better.
Therefore, in the case of the Tolworth, the 2016, 17 and 18 renewals were relatively strong, with the 2016 renewal having the 7th best race rating in the dataset. 2015 and 2019 were disappointing with rankings of 122 and 97 respectively.
And that’s the process, fully transparent and easy to follow, I hope.
That’s quite a long scene set and explanation, but necessary in my view!
Onto the results...
Novice Hurdle Race Ratings
The below table is a consolidated summary of all of the analysed races from the years 2015 to present day and, as explained previously, only contests that have 10 or more subsequent runners are included in the data (the number of qualifying races is shown in the column titled QualR).
The table is sorted by the highest average rating of the race over the 5-year period.
There is unsurprisingly a large variance in quality based on subsequent 365-day form, from the Prestige, averaging a rating of 32.8, to the Chanelle Pharma, previously known as the Deloitte, averaging 96+ at the top of the pile.
It is at least mildly reassuring that the Grade 1’s feature in the higher end of the table in general. The Tolworth ranks in joint 7th confirming the view from the opening section that it’s a solid race to follow.
As someone who struggles to keep on top of the racing calendar and track the key movers and shakers, these data focus the mind. The bad news is that from here onwards there are no easy answers or instant takeaways: the only truly effective way to progress to a deeper understanding is good old-fashioned hard work and metaphorical elbow grease.
Having said that, interestingly, the 365P&L column shows in yellow where backing every subsequent runner from the events in question for 365 days post-race has been profitable to a level stake of £1 at SP. The fact there are so many is a pleasant surprise and worthy of more focus; there may be something to consider for building profitable angles, but ideally more than five years of race data would be needed to have the necessary confidence to invest.
For now, as a starter for ten, a quick dive into a couple of the prevalent races to follow seems a sensible path to follow.
Chanelle Pharma Novice Hurdle
This rating system shows that the Chanelle Pharma Novice hurdle (Deloitte until 2019) at Leopardstown is a clear and obvious winner with an average score of 96.2. That's higher than the second placed Cheltenham Classic Novices Hurdle by over 18 points! The Chanelle Pharma is now contested over a 2-mile trip since the newly-formed Dublin Racing Festival became reality in 2018 (it was previously run over 2m2f) and it is well known as a good pathfinder towards the Supreme and Ballymore in March.
This novice event has racked up 44 subsequent winners from 200 runs with a £1 level stake loss of £18 if you’d backed every one blind up to a year after the race.
Below is the view by renewal year, using the key columns described earlier. Immediately the eye is drawn to the RaceRNK column, confirming that this contest had the 1st (joint), 3rd and 6th best individual races in the novice sphere since 2015.
Significantly, 19 of those 44 wins were delivered in elite Grade 1 company. That’s a whole ten more than any other race on the list and obviously worth delving into.
On closer inspection, those 19 triumphs are attributable to 11 individual horses. Nicholls Canyon with 4 of the victories (from the 2015 renewal), Sharjah with 4 (2018), Le Richebourg (2018) & Petit Mouchoir (2016) with 2 each. With sole G1 wins secured by Klassical Dream (2019), Samcro (2018), Barcardys (2017), Bellshill & Coney Island (2016), Windsor Park & Identity Thief (2015).
Perhaps surprisingly, there are only a trio of same season Cheltenham Festival winners after competing in the Chanelle Pharma for the analysed races. Klassical Dream won the Supreme last year with the two other two Prestbury Park winners coming in the Ballymore, Samcro in 2018 and Windsor Park in 2015.
It is noted that the 2019 renewal has had a relatively disappointing outturn. The law of averages perhaps would nod to a better 2020 vintage.
The Ballymore Novices Hurdle (Classic Novices Hurdle)
The second race on the list by some distance is the Ballymore Novices Hurdle (Classic) run at Cheltenham on Trials Day, which is very much on the radar for the upcoming weekend. Arguably, this race is a better one for the trackers than its Leopardstown counterpart as it’s delivered a £1 level stake profit of £57, through backing all runners each time they took to the track over the subsequent 365-day period. That’s nearly a 36% return which seems utterly insane for 5 years-worth of renewals encompassing 159 total runners. Perhaps it is the fact that it’s a Grade 2 which may drive some of that potential future value. Whatever the reason it’s a race about which to sit up and take notice.
I’ve added the 365P&L column to this table showing the value of backing all runners blind at SP for each renewal of the race. This event has a solid feel in terms of consistency, and whilst there have been 12 fewer G1 wins than the Leopardstown race previously discussed, the overall number of winners is only one fewer at 43, from a much smaller number of runs too: 159 compared to 200 in the Chanelle Pharma. Each Classic renewal has generated its share of future winners, with the 2016 version being the cream of the crop with a RaceRNK of 7.
Considering it’s an event which occurs on Cheltenham Trials Day, a good starting point would be to check how horses go on to perform at the big event.
It’s no silver bullet based on the last five years' data, that’s for sure. Not a single winner has been drawn from this race at the Festival in the same year, although it must be stated that five years is not a significant sample size. Also, in fairness, the crossbar has been rattled several times with Yanworth and Black Op coming close in the Ballymore, and Santini, Champers on Ice and Wholestone hitting the frame in the longer distance Albert Bartlett. Black Op and Santini did go on to enjoy Grade 1 victory at the Aintree Festival a month or so later in the Mersey and Sefton respectively. Several horses have developed into Festival winners in future years too.
On the point of future winners, whilst trawling through the results it was very easy to spot some eye-catching names finishing in eye-watering places in this contest historically. It’s best represented by this result card from the 2015 renewal.
Whatever happened to some of those also-rans failing to complete or trailing in 60 or so lengths behind the winner (whatever happened to the winner too?!)?
Whilst it’s a stretch to claim this picture is typical there are a whole raft of horses in this event who go on win on much bigger stages, often chasing ones too. In no particular order, Topofthegame, Elegant Escape, Slate House, Poetic Rhythm, Royal Vacation, William Henry and, going back further, Whisper, Coneygree and The New One have all cut their teeth in this race. That is an impressive roll call, which bodes well for Birchdale, Brewin’upastorm and Jarvey’s Plate from the mildly disappointing up to now 2019 crop.
Originally, I planned to go into more detail, but the powder will have to remain dry for a second part (this is already too long!) where I’ll cover the potentially profitable races to follow in more detail; including analysis of a horse's next run only after competing in one of these Graded novice hurdles. I’ll also be evaluating the winners of the novice hurdles at Cheltenham to ascertain if there are any patterns linking back to the races included in this article.
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/fiddlerontheroof_tolworth.jpg320829Jonny11https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngJonny112020-01-23 11:12:352020-03-02 09:42:25Novice Hurdles: What’s the form worth?
Welcome to week three of the Clock Watcher feature, illustrating performances of interest from a sectional timing perspective. Geegeez Gold has a range of sectional data to assist curious bettors, including sectional percentages, finishing speed percentages, and running lines: we'll discuss the last named in more detail in this article. But first, a few races and runners whose efforts can be marked up from the bare ratings.
King Kaser A Keeper
The David Loughnane-trained Kaser is hardly a dark horse, having won five of his 15 - and three of his last five - all-weather starts, but the five-year-old still looks to be progressive based on the way he finished in his most recent victory. That one, like the other four, was achieved at Wolverhampton and, like three of the other quartet, over the extended nine furlongs.
A feature of this win, in a Class 3 handicap on 13th January, was his ability to quicken off a fairly steady gallop. Indeed that is the hallmark of all five of his wins, most notably in his penultimate run where he went from last to first in the final furlong and a half (making up more than six lengths off an even gallop!), an attribute which makes it hard for the handicapper to accurately peg his ability: since August last year he's won four times, starting off 75 then 78, 83 and 85. Now on a career high mark of 88 he may not be done yet, especially over that nine-and-a-half furlong range at Wolverhampton.
*
Novice to note: Tommy De Vito
It was a quieter week on the novice stakes front, with no Waldkonig's nor even a Union about which to eulogise. Nevertheless, Tommy De Vito, no relation to Danny, caught the eye when sprinting away from his rivals over six furlongs on Newcastle's straight track.
The chart shows how closely matched he and second-placed Never Dark were through the middle of the race before Tommy, red line, opens up, his final furlong almost half a second quicker than the odds-on favourite (see individual times inline below chart).
This performance represented progress from his debut second, over the same course and distance, where he again made a big move off a slow pace two from home before flattening out a little in the final furlong. He should step forward again and it will be interesting to see where he heads next.
*
What of Wanaasah?
Much was made of Wanaasah's all the way victory last Wednesday at Wolves, mainly because of the manner with which it was achieved. The running lines are unambiguous:
In this two mile race, we can see that Dylan Hogan was 16 lengths clear after half a mile (S-12 1,16). But the second horse, Fearless Warrior, was also clear of the third. Indeed, with a mile to go - 12-8 running lines - favourite Purdey's Gift was 47 lengths - FORTY-SEVEN - behind the leader.
The issue here is that, although Hogan went reasonably quick in the first quarter of the race, he then steadied things up quite a bit, leaving enough in the tank to comfortably repel his never-sighted rivals.
Georgia Dobie deserves some credit for sitting somewhat closer to the leader; but the rest of the riders got a beasting from Hogan here, the third-placed horse finishing 16.5L (officially, more like 18 lengths) behind the winner.
Amid the all-too-predictable cries of "hang 'em out to dry" from the kangaroo courts of social media, it should be borne in mind that a) this was an apprentice race where, by definition, riders are inexperienced, and b) this was a most unconventional setup over a trip which probably requires more tactical awareness than shorter races.
I'm personally of the view that the winning jockey deserves praise for his enterprise, the second should be recognised for being alive to the situation, and the rest will learn from this contest. That, after all, is the main point of apprentice races.
*
Follow Fizzy Feet's Foes
The 11th January, ten days ago, was a meeting for which the sectional data arrived to us a little tardily. Pity, as there were a couple of noteworthy sectional skirmishes on the Lingfield card that day, which are belatedly reviewed below.
First up, Fizzy Feet notched a good win in typical jump-and-run fashion. Representing the same Loughnane/Lowe/Hoyland connections as Kaser, Fizzy Feet dictated from the front and lasted out in this six-furlong Class 3 handicap. But the placed horses must be wondering what might have been as all of the second, fourth and fifth were given too much to do; again, in fairness, this was probably more about the Kingscote masterclass, bossing steady fractions and kicking at the right moment, than any major clangers in behind.
But each of Total Commitment, Lady Dancealot and Count Otto - perhaps even Second Collection - might have won this on another day. Third placed Typhoon Ten, under David Probert, was given what might be considered a slightly more optimal ride, the horse ultimately not good enough to either dictate the pace or quicken in the circumstances.
Count Otto has run once since, finishing runner up in a race he tried - uncharacteristically but as a result of it being paceless - to dominate from the start.
I'll be watching this cohort closely in the coming weeks.
*
Silent May Be Golden, So Too Goring
On the same card, a Class 2 mile handicap went the way of Silent Attack, resisting the strong challenge of Goring. Bought for just £10,000 at the Ascot August sale last year, the ex-Godolphin seven-year-old picked up very nearly twelve grand for this score alone, a fine piece of opportunism by trainer Tony Carroll.
This time I've highlighted the early pace-setter, Red Mist (light blue line), who faded to a long last, as well as the winner (red line). Ben Curtis, runaway leader of the all-weather jockeys' championship, was always in the right place here: tracking the favourite in a length or two second, he took control before the quarter mile pole and readily held off the late-charging Goring.
Both Silent Attack and Goring look highly capable at this level when the early tempo is steady, as does third-placed Ultimate Avenue, who came from further back and could never really land a blow. The trio all recorded sub-22-second final quarters.
*
What Does It Mean: Running Lines
A feature of every American formbook, as well as many others around the world, running lines in the UK have hitherto been confined to greyhound racing only. Historically, the main reason for that was the lack of availability of data. But Total Performance Data's accurate tracking of all horses' positions throughout a race has enabled us to display both the horse's race position and its distance behind the leader (or in front in the case of the race leader).
How running lines look on American racecards
We could provide this information on a 'by furlong' basis, but have instead adopted an American style 'points of call' (or POC) approach. This breaks races into five sections, the first of which always begins at the start of the race and the last of which always ends at the finish line. Unlike American POC, where there is more focus on the home straight - something which largely relates to the concentration of race distances of around a mile and shorter - we have elected to divide the sections somewhat more evenly, as can be seen from the table below.
What do running lines tell us? They can tell us things like run style preferences, or how much ground a horse made up and, approximately, when. They can help us piece together a pace map. They can help us better understand, largely at a glance, what happened to a horse in a race. Of course, they lack nuance with regards to things like trouble in running or wide trips, but so too does any data-driven snapshot approach. If you want the real fine detail, watch the replays! [But even then, don't trust your eyes exclusively; rather, corroborate/refute the visuals with the data]
Here's an example of a horse running today with a pronounced run style: Warrior's Valley is a one-dimensional speedball. He wants to get out first and try to stay in front. On days when the race lacks pace contention he has his best chance, all other things being equal. He has stall one this afternoon, and only one other likely pace horse; as he slowly drops down the weights his day ought to be close when he gets the run of things.Perhaps it might be today.
With Geegeez Gold running lines, hovering over the performance in question reveals more 'traditional' information. Here's an example, taken from Warrior's Valley's run on 21st December 2019. The blue box tells us the jockey, position/field size, distance won/beaten, winner/second, [odds], weight carried, equipment, and in-running comment.
As a completely new convention to most, it may take some getting used to, but running lines offer far more granularity on a horse's race position than the in-running comments generally do. The optimum, of course, is to use them in tandem such that any 'bad trip' incidents noted in the comment can be factored in.
*
That's all for this week's Clock Watcher. I hope there was something of interest in the above and, if you've any questions, do leave a comment below. I'll be happy to answer them.
Matt
p.s. a gentle reminder that there is much more intel on sectionals - and how they're laid out on geegeez.co.uk - in the User Guide. Click here to download the latest version.
The intent of this Clock Watcher series is primarily educational, though obviously with some entertainment value lobbed in as well. It is not really meant to be a tipping piece for all that example horses are generally presumed to have potentially more ability than immediately meets the eye. That said, when trying to extol the virtues of sectional data it certainly helps, from a credibility perspective as much as anything, if some of the mentioned animals win in their near futures.
It was heartening then to see National Anthem, flagged in the inaugural episode of Clock Watcher, win yesterday - and do so in similar vein to his bullet-from-a-gun effort ten days previously. To have doubled up after overcoming trouble at the start was more meritorious than a winning margin of three-quarters of a length implies. With a further four lengths back to the third and three more to the fourth it will be interesting to see how the handicapper reacts.
National Anthem was available at 5/2 overnight before returning a heavily-supported 11/8 favourite and, after two taxing runs in ten days following an absence of 471 days, he may need a little time before his next assignment.
Union one to follow
Onwards, and a horse who caught the eye last week, sectionally speaking, was Union, a three-year-old New Approach colt. Sent off at 6/5, it seemed that very few people had missed the finishing-strongly nature of his Kempton debut: that day he was held up before making up ground late. Sadly we don't yet have sectional data for Kempton but happily we do have them for Newcastle; and this is what they tell us about Union.
Let's start with the chart. The black line is par, an expression of what an efficient expenditure of energy looks like, furlong by furlong. Note that the opening section is always relatively slow because the field begins from a standing start. (This is different from, for example, America where there is a distance of 'run up' before the clock starts).
The red line is Union's sectional percentage by furlong, We can see from the comparison of the lines that the early part of Union's race was run on the slow side of even before he began to quicken from the half mile (actually from between the five and four furlong markers, as can be seen by the upward curve).
There was a notable injection of pace from the two to the one after which the race was in the bag, Union eventually coming away by a couple of lengths from two or three other promising types.
As can be seen from his sectional blocks below the chart, his final quarter mile was very fast against par. That, of course, is largely as a result of having gone steadily early; and he still recorded a Topspeed figure of 70 in spite of that inefficiency. Adding his upgrade of 19 gives a composite figure of 89, the largest such rating in the review period.
The second, Blow Your Horn, lays claim to an 81 for what was his debut. Given some greenness and keenness early on, he should at least nearly win a similar race next time.
Global makes Giant stride
Another name to note is one of John Gosden's high class winter team, this time a rare trainer switch into the yard. Global Giant won a small field conditions race at Wolverhampton over most of a mile and a quarter: in what was quite a slowly run affair, the son of Shamardal passed his three rivals in short time and accelerated right away in the final furlong.
Below are the OMC (Opening, Midrace and Closing) sectionals for the race (at the top) and the individual runners (within the result table). They tell us that three of the quartet finished 'very fast', with Global Giant's final three furlongs almost 10% above par.
The '44441' running line (which, confusingly - sorry, is based on the five Call Points) tells us that Gosden's new recruit went from near two lengths last to nearly four lengths first in the final quarter mile. His Topspeed of 61 is unremarkable - a function of the tactical nature of this race - but an uplift of 27 is chunky and aggregates to 88. He might be one for the Easter Classic on All Weather Finals Day, though he'll need to find more to be competitive in that winter season centrepiece.
What does it mean: Sectional Percentage
Sectional percentage is the time taken within a part of the race, in percentage terms relative to the total race time. It tells us how a horse was ridden: did it do too much too soon, did it finish with more to give, or was it ridden optimally throughout? The answer is normally one of the first two, though to wildly varying degrees.
There are racesectional percentages and runnersectional percentages, the former comprised of the sectional times for the race leader at the end of each section.
To calculate sectional percentage, you need to know the following:
- Length of race (A)
- Length of section (B)
- Time to complete race (C)
- Time to complete section (D)
Using Global Giant's 2-0 sectional percentage (note that any sectional percentage where the section runs to the finish, as in this case, is also known as finishing speed percentage) from the image above, we can give values to A, B, C and D.
A = Length of race = 1m 1f 104 yds, or 2084 yards
B = Length of section = 2 furlongs, or 440 yards [we're looking at the 2-0 section]
C = Time to complete race = 118.4 seconds
D = Time to complete section = 22.1 seconds
The formula is as follows:
(100 x B x C) / (A x D)
Applying values gives us:
(100 x 440 x 118.4) / (2084 x 22.1)
or
5,209,600 / 46,056.4
= 113.1
Here is the Call Points view of the result, with that 2-0 sectional percentage displayed.
This is a simple sum which can easily be configured in a spreadsheet program like Excel:
In the image above I've highlighted the calculation cell so that you can see the Excel notation for the formula. [The 'overall distance' field is a calculation of Yards/220 to get furlongs]
Things to note about sectional percentage
When looking at the coloured rectangles, deviation from green means inefficiency with stronger blues and reds implying a highly inefficient effort and, therefore, an upgrade figure indicating a horse is capable of significantly better. In the example above, Global Giant gets an upgrade of 27; but in the example below, Will To Win's rider, Jack Mitchell, has produced an almost perfect effort from the front.
One important footnote: whilst sectional percentages - and their ratings expression, upgrades - can point towards good or bad rides, such consideration should always be undertaken in the context of any known run style preference the horse has, and/or the way the race panned out.
For example, Rab Havlin could not be said to have ridden a poor race on Global Giant for all that the horse is presumed by its upgrade figure to have much more to give. It must always be remembered that the objective for a jockey is not to get a '0' upgrade but rather to win the bloody race!
More next week...
Matt
p.s. I encourage you to interact with the data yourself. Check out last week's post for more on how to get started.
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/seectionalblocks.png320830Matt Bisognohttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngMatt Bisogno2020-01-14 16:31:592020-01-14 16:31:59Clock Watcher: State of the Union
Welcome to a new weekly feature, Clock Watcher, where we'll shine a light on a few horses that might be interesting to follow from a speed and/or sectional perspective. It is my hope that this column will also serve to introduce, embed and reinforce various concepts which may be unfamiliar at this stage.
Generally speaking, a run considered of sufficient merit to appear here will have two components: the horse will have recorded a time which is at least reasonably quick for the conditions; and the horse will have recorded a noteworthy upgrade on that performance.
The first component is fairly self-explanatory even if defining what is "at least reasonably quick" is highly subjective. Geegeez.co.uk doesn't currently produce its own speed ratings (and there is no plan for that to change at this stage), so for our purposes we will use Racing Post's Topspeed figures, which are published under license on this site.
The second component requires a bit more introduction. What is an 'upgrade', how does a horse achieve one, and how is this quantified?
What is an upgrade?
Track and field athletes run at their most efficient level - enabling them to produce their fastest times - when they travel at a constant speed. For instance, when Kenenisa Bekele broke the 5000m world record in 2004, a record which still stands today, his 1000m split times - or sectional times - were as follows:
A few months later, in the Olympic 5000m final, they covered the first 4 kilometres in 648.62 seconds, almost 41 seconds slower than the world record pace. Bekele, overwhelming favourite for gold, was readily out-sprinted and had to settle for silver, the winner recording a final time of 794.39 seconds, 37 seconds slower than the world record.
In a race where they crawled (relatively) and then sprinted, Bekele was unable to produce his best form. He could not run inefficiently to the same effect as his vanquisher, the Olympic 1500m champion Hicham El Guerrouj, whose superior kick facilitated his victory.
We know what is 'efficient' based on the body of similar historical races, and we call this par.
In simple terms, any deviation from efficiency - or par - whether fast early then fading, or slow early with a rapid finish, earns an upgrade. Thus, in this case, both the winner and second - as well, indeed, as the third through to sixth placed finishers - would have received upgrade figures.
An upgrade, then, is a recognition of the degree to which a horse raced inefficiently.
It should be noted that racing inefficiently will not necessarily prevent a horse, or an athlete, from winning. Indeed, El Guerrouj 'got the run of the race' back in 2004, that slow time suiting his questionable stamina but stronger kick. The primary objective is, after all, not to break records but to win the race.
However, for the purposes of expediency, a quick line on par here. Par is the threshold against which all subsequent races over a course and distance are measured. From the User Guide,
Par is an assessment of the optimal energy distribution – based on relative time – between the sections of a race. It is not an average of all sectional times. Rather, it follows a fairly complex formula which uses an ‘nth percentile’ race as par. Further information can be found in Simon Rowlands’ excellent Sectional Timing Introduction report, available at this link. Indeed, that document is highly recommended for anyone keen to get a head start with the applications of sectional information.
So, in simple terms, par is a baseline, a means by which we may better understand the context of a performance.
Let's look at some examples.
An obvious one...
We'll start with a sore thumb, a horse on everyone's radar regardless of whether via visuals, sectionals or form. The very well related Waldkonig made his debut in a run-of-the-mill Wolverhampton novice stakes for two-year-olds on 7th December. A Kingman half-brother to Arc winner Waldgeist, he was sent off 6/4 favourite over the extended mile trip.
In the end, he won by nine widening lengths; the data offer some interesting footnotes to that emphatic victory.
There is a lot going on in this image, so let's take it step by step. First up, note that I have selected 'Call Points' (a five section breakdown) top left and I have clicked the 'Show Chart' button, which then changes colour and displays 'Hide Chart', the action that would happen upon a further click. So those are my selected parameters. (I also have the data view selected from my My Geegeez page, check the User Guide for more on that).
Beneath the blue buttons is a line of five coloured rectangles. These are the Call Points sectionals for the race. That is, they relate to the race leader at five points during the race, specifically the six-furlong, four-furlong, three-furlong, two-furlong and finishing posts.
The colour of the rectangles indicates the relative speed of each section, on a cold/slow/blue to hot/fast/red scale. Thus, this race was even (green) early, slow (blue) in the middle, and fast (orange) late. The OMC (Opening, Midrace, Closing) view below captures this more succinctly and is a better place for newbies to start, due to there being fewer data points.
Getting back to the main image, and the main part of it, we see a chart. This chart is highly configurable but the image shows the default, which is the sectional percentage data, by furlong, for the winner - and with the black par line also displayed. Any/all runners can be added or removed to/from the chart by clicking their name underneath or using the 'toggle' button top left.
Next to the toggle button is a statement of how many races comprise the par calculations and, therefore, the degree of confidence in par. In this case - indeed in the vast majority of all-weather race cases - confidence is high. At this stage, confidence is more limited elsewhere while the body of data grows as more races are run over various courses and distances.
The chart reflects what the coloured rectangles are saying: that the leader went even-ish (slightly above par) early, slowed up notably in the middle of the race, before finishing very strongly - well above the black par line.
Beneath the chart is the full result table, which has a familiar look to it. I have clicked on the winner's finishing position (i.e. on the text that says '1st') to reveal his sectional data - coloured rectangles for Call Points (including split times, aggregates time, and sectional time as a percentage of overall time, i.e. sectional percentage), running lines (the horse's position in the field and distance behind the leader, or in front if the race leader) - and in-running comment.
The rightmost column in the result table is 'UP', and it contains the upgrade figure. In this example, Waldkonig was calculated as having an upgrade of 29 by our algorithm. Again, in terms of quantifying ability, this tells us little more than that, like his father, Waldkonig is able to quicken impressively off a steady pace.
Waldkonig was given a Topspeed rating of 47 for his time performance in the race. That is far from a standout rating and would not highlight the horse's effort as noteworthy, though of course the nine length winning margin would be missed by nobody. By applying the upgrade figure to a representation of the time performance we get closer to an understanding of the merit of the effort: clearly it takes more ability to quicken off a fast pace than a slow one, with the degree to which a horse quickens also worthy of note.
We've been playing with combining various numbers to produce some sort of 'composite' time/performance rating, though I must declare at this stage that I'm not 100% certain that adding upgrades to Topspeed is a sensible thing to do.
We are currently trying to establish whether it improves the predictive ability of the raw speed figure: they are calculated on different scales so it is probably not entirely sensible to simply add the two together.
Nevertheless, there is some indication in the work done to date that this somewhat contrived 'combo' number has merit. In the case of Waldkonig, his 47 gets an extra 29 for a 76 overall. That is a better reflection of his performance, though probably not of his ability given this was a debut on a track that was likely not ideal. In any case, what it tells us unequivocally is that, in a race where the pace scenario looks muddling, Waldkonig is capable of a searing turn of foot.
A (slightly) less obvious one...
At a slightly less 'could be anything' level, trainer David Brown rewarded his and connections' patience when National Anthem, off the track for 417 days since running poorly at the same venue, blasted home in a six-furlong novice event at Southwell. Brown is the horse's third trainer in three career starts spanning 821 days and a wind operation!
Sent off at 15/2, fifth favourite of six but not completely unfancied, his performance was very different in sectional terms to that of Waldkonig, as the image below illustrates:
Here we see from the running line that National Anthem jumped very alertly and maintained that advantage, albeit that it was diminishing in the final furlong. He was better than four lengths in front after a furlong and fully nine lengths clear with an eighth to go. Little wonder that he tired close home. Also little wonder that he's entered over five furlongs at the same track on Monday where it will be very interesting to see how he goes in a handicap off a mark of 75, if taking up his engagement.
Far more speculatively...
Meanwhile, down in the basement, a horse called Disruptor might pop up at a price some time soon. He ran on 30th December at Lingfield, finishing third, and as can be seen from the below he ran an almost polar opposite race to par - based on the five Call Point sections:
This lad has had a few goes - twelve, including one since, to be precise - and has showed much improved form when leading or racing prominently recently. Prior to his run on Monday, where his inexperienced (14 rides) jockey shot up in the air as the stalls opened and then got sandwiched between two no-hopers for most of a furlong, he'd run his three best races from the front.
If/when he can get a slightly softer advantage - note the undesirable red zone section from five to four in his running data above - he has a chance to see his race out more effectively, albeit very likely in low grade company and with a more experienced pilot on top.
That said, looking more closely at the draw (DR) column below, it is worth noting that he has been consistently fortunate with his stall position in recent starts.
[NB note also that, in 'Show Sectionals' mode, races without sectionals have blanks. Hovering over the running lines segment displays details of the performance, including comments, position, distance beaten and jockey].
That's all for this inaugural edition of Clock Watcher. I hope it has provided food for thought and that, over time, it will support your understanding of the new data we are beginning to provide and how you might best take advantage of it for yourself.
Until next time...
Matt
p.s. as of Wednesday 8th January, sectional data is now live for Gold subscribers on geegeez.co.uk. You will need to enable it from the Race Card Options section of your My Geegeez page. On that page, you will also find a link to the most recent version of the User Guide, in which there is a comprehensive outline of sectional timing and how it is published on this site.
The current coverage comprises Total Performance Data tracks, as it is from them that we license our data. We hope to be able to integrate both Ascot and RTV (UK) tracks in due course. To be clear, we have no in house sectional aggregation function. Rather, we license 3rd party data as a publisher and aim to add value in the visualisation of that data. I very much hope by mid-year we have a far more comprehensive provision in terms of track coverage.
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/sectionalsquid.png320830Matt Bisognohttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngMatt Bisogno2020-01-08 16:32:262020-01-09 18:53:27Clock Watcher: Rise for National Anthem
It's the New Year and, depending on your reading of the calendar, a new decade, too. What better time then to commit to self-improvement and renewal? Out with the old and in with the new, resolve strengthened by the turning of the page.
That's the fantasy of a billion beings on Jan 1, only for the reality of the pain of change - in the midst of what are often the coldest, darkest, most financially stretched days of the year - to bite.
But some people do keep to their resolutions, and they do achieve their goals. Size 12, personal best 5k, profitable for the first time, whatever: the secret (such as it is) that separates the achievers from the make-believers is planning and execution.
Talk is cheap, thoughts are free; planning takes time and effort, but also locks in personal commitment.
I wish you whatever you wish yourself in 2020. If a part of it is to improve your betting, maybe you'll find some nutrition in what follows...
1: Understand generally where you are now
Why do you bet? Why do you bet win singles, each way doubles, Lucky 15's, or whatever? How often do you bet? How much? And why do you bet on horses rather than football, tennis, poker, roulette or bingo?
Is it to make a profit? If you're a Gold subscriber (or indeed pay for information from any source), it probably is, to some degree at least. But that's also very likely not the only reason.
From surveying readers on this site over many years, I know that any and all of passing time, solving puzzles/being proved right, and general engagement are common - and perfectly valid - reasons for betting. None of these, however, is specific to betting on horse racing. The same as betting for profit. So there must be more to it. Why racing? Why?
Perhaps it's the regular predictable availability of puzzles/profit opportunities; maybe it's the colour and pageantry; possibly it's the array of data enabling a deeper understanding and a chance of an edge. As with most things in life, it is almost certainly a combination of some or all of these elements.
Understanding ones general relationship with betting on racing is helpful because it finds a place for everything that follows: it offers a global context which, for many/most people, doesn't really have much to do with money at all.
Still, it is a legitimate question to ask oneself: am I betting on racing for profit primarily?
My answer is NO. There are lots of ways I could make a few quid (and a good few more quid than I do from betting on racing) in roughly the same amount of time I invest in looking for horses I like.
I bet primarily for enjoyment - for fun. But I do it with a profit expectation. Betting for fun and profit are not mutually exclusive. And don't let the dry arses tell you otherwise.
If you don't understand the underlying reasons for your racing betting, you may be chasing the wrong objectives and, consequently, a futile or frustrating relationship with the game.
Suggestion #1: Take time to understand the REAL reason(s) you bet on racing
2: Measure where you are now
If you can't measure it, you can't improve it
That quote is credited to Peter Drucker, a management consultant. It could have been uttered by a sports coach, a nutritionist, a headmistress, or a punter. It applies to any pursuit where we have a desire to move towards the right of whichever continuum consumes us.
But here's the tricky bit. What should we measure?
Again, the default is profit and loss, and that of course is something about which we all need a solid understanding. Doubtless these words contain enough pedagogy - pontification, perhaps - without a sermon on responsible gambling. So let us assume that we all understand those boundaries and operate within a range of acceptable loss to profit.
But how much are you losing, or winning? And how accurately do you know this? What is your method of calculation?
For me, I do an annual - six-monthly if I feel it's going especially poorly or well - review of account deposits and withdrawals. This tells me nothing about volume of bets, average stake size, race or bet types in which I excel or fail lamentably; but it gives me the most fundamental financial metric of up/down.
I've shared this info for previous years numerous times in the blog on this site.
Here's my 2019:
That's a good bit better than most years, due almost entirely to a couple of chunky wins in March. [The weird 'pence' figures relate to conversions from euro on Irish tote bets, in case you're wondering]
But note also the 'game of two halves' nature of the year. There is a reason for this, but I won't dwell on it here. Suffice it to say that betting when not in a sound mental state is more likely to lead to losses. On we go...
If I'd not had those spring draws, I'd have won about a grand. But it is important and fair to note that part of my betting approach is to tilt at windmills: to play 'gettable' multi-leg pools where there is the prospect of a disproportionate return on investment. As I've written elsewhere on here before, finding value is often more about fishing in the right (both literal and metaphorical) pools than backing the right horses.
My annual profit target, such as it is, is about £2,500; but really my target is to enjoy the process of finding bets. It's a time-consuming process and the investment of time is far more material than the cash (because the percentage of my time used for betting is more material than the percentage of my funds).
That's a verbose way of saying I have to enjoy it to justify the hours deployed. Maybe you have more time available than me, maybe you have less. Maybe you have more funds available, maybe you have less.
Therein lies the key to measuring success: choose the right metrics for you and measure where you are with them.
Time is always the kingpin metric for me, so if I don't have time I either won't bet or, more likely, I'll only make a casual action play. More on that in due course.
Suggestion #2: Understand your key metric(s) and quantify where you are against it/them as of the end of 2019
3: Pause for breath
There is a temptation at this time of year to decide to do something - lose weight, change job, et cetera - and then charge ahead on this new life-changing trajectory.
Generally speaking, that is probably sub-optimal. Better, once a new objective has been determined, is to establish how to get there. But before that it is good to mull quietly the what and why of the resolution.
For example, it might be perfectly acceptable to lose £1000 over the course of a year betting on a sport in which hundreds of hours of recreational time are enjoyed. After all, that's £20 a week, the price of not much beer and increasingly little caffeine and froth. Of course it would be nice to save the 'bag of sand' but if it involves upsetting the pleasurable equilibrium of perusing form, striking wagers and watching racing, then perhaps it's not a price worth paying.
Decide what is important for you, not what others might tell you is important.
It might be enjoyment before profit.
It might be winners (i.e. being right) before profit.
It might be profit at all costs.
And, again, it very well might be a combination of all three.
Suggestion #3: Before moving forward, take some time to allow your understanding of the current status quo to inform your next move
4: Set up to succeed
If, after pausing for thought, the route forward still looks different from the path hitherto then it is time to take action. Action works best when it is considered, informed and documented. I know, boring, right? All I'm really saying is that we have a better chance of success when we set up to succeed.
Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best
This quote, attributed to the German statesman Otto von Bismarck, could easily have supplanted the word 'politics' with 'Betting on horse racing'; but I don't suppose OvB was much of a punter, at least not of equines.
He was, however, a man of action; a man who believed that words were secondary to deeds. We probably all believe that, but we have to live it, too.
Getting back to it, betting on horse racing is the art of the possible, the attainable. It is very often the art of the next best. In other words, forget lottery win utopia (unless you play, and win, the lottery) and instead work on incremental improvement of approach.
For example, if you want to live off betting income but you're currently a losing punter, stage one is to either lose less or break even. It is not to live off betting income.
For example, if you want to look at more than four races a day but only have twenty minutes to do it, be aware that you will have to sacrifice the amount you can discern at the altar of covering much ground.
For example, if you need lots of winners to retain confidence, betting longshots more than occasionally is going to be incompatible.
For example, if you want to take a value betting approach (hint: you should if you want to improve your bottom line), failing to watch racing and/or use the best information sources will make it hard for you to know anything not already completely subsumed within the market.
Suggestion #4: Have time, bank, strategy and tools in place to optimise - and elevate - your desire outcome
5: Review, Review, Review
Your bet just lost. Or won. What now? On to the next one? No, not for the improvers.
Like everything in life, to be better we have to do more of what works and less of what doesn't. And, to do that, we have to understand what works and what doesn't.
A bet is a record of effort expended, of a decision made and, ultimately, of money won or lost. How often do you ask yourself whether the reasons for choosing a particular horse, one component of which should always be price for the value player, proved accurate? How often do you see a horse fail to win for a reason you predicted but which you felt was over-stated in the available odds? Was it then a good bet, or a bad bet?
Which other horse(s) caught your eye during the race? Were any unlucky in running? [NB ignore perennial hard luck horses: they're overbet and don't win nearly enough to legitimise the volume of trackers in which they reside]. What happened at the start of the race? [Plenty of horses cannot win after getting mangled at the start, such unlucky runners almost always missed by the in-running comment writers].
Use a tracker, and add horses - with comments - to it. Or use the notes feature in your chosen form tool.
Here is a snap of my Tracker for those entered in the next few days:
And a Tracker note, complete with dreadful pun for my own later pleasure, displayed when hovering over the gold star on the race in question:
As it turns out, Kraka has run four times since on the all-weather and lucked out hugely with the draw, see the DR column below. Now rated 64, he'll win soon (I hope), though I'd definitely prefer his chance at six furlongs rather than this seven panels affair.
Another great means of improvement is to review your bets as a body of work. I have to say I do not personally do this, mainly because of the time but also because of the nature of my betting (often incompatible with Bet Tracker constraints). Mainly, though, because I can't be bothered. This is what I mean by working within your capabilities. I have to measure all sorts of things for business reasons and, when it comes to my betting, I just want to know my bottom line.
Could I improve if I cut out areas of weakness? Of course! But the opportunity cost - the time spent recording, which could be spent watching races, or with my family, or reading a book, or kicking a ball, or in the pub - is too great for me.
Others will relish the opportunity to dissect their wagers by any number of parameters. Geegeez has a free bet tracker which allows just this. Introduced only last year, it has been wildly popular: the feedback - words - has been effusive and the number of users tracking their bets - actions - has actually taken me a little by surprise. Clearly many have a stronger desire to understand the nuances of their wagering set, and fair play and the best of luck to them. They give themselves every chance.
Here's an example - anonymous - of one geegeez.co.uk Bet Tracker user (a free subscriber as it happens), who has recorded almost 400 bets to date:
By Handicap or Non-Handicap
By Race Distance
Non-Handicaps up to 7 furlongs
Yes, of course it's a tiny sample size and possibly, maybe even probably, just noise. But there's a near 100% chance that this user previously did not know they might be quite good at identifying value in this context...
Suggestion #5: Review what you're doing, not just for signs of improvement but to ensure you're not sterilising something which used to be fun
6: Action vs Fancy: Enjoy the GAME
At the end of the day, the most important thing for me is to enjoy the game. To be involved, through this website, with sponsoring jockeys (David Probert, Callum Rodriguez, Rex Dingle, Mitch Godwin) and a training yard (Anthony Honeyball), and to syndicate racehorses (ten currently, with Anthony, Olly Murphy, Mick Appleby and Wilf Storey) so that other like-minded souls can also get closer to the action, is a genuine 24 carat bona fide 100% pleasure. To call it work is a truly great fortune.
Betting on racing is not incidental to me, but it is a pleasurable pursuit. I bet most days, some days more than others, and sometimes staking more or less.
When I have the time to really get stuck into a card, and I identify a sore thumb of a bet, I will wager accordingly. Never massive but big enough to justify the perceived opportunity.
When I have less time and/or I spot a few of mild interest, I'll have action bets.
I don't want to look at the card for an hour or two and not have a bet. That's what the arid bottoms suggest we do. No ta. If I don't have a strong view, or I think the market about has it, I'll make a cup of tea bet; and if I like more than one I might strike a sticky bun wager as well. But I will be invested in some small way in the outcome.
It is generally obvious whether a horse should be a cup of tea or a Dom Perignon stake; where it isn't, it should probably be somewhere in between erring towards the 'Rosie' urn. For me anyway.
The point: enjoy the ride. Or what is the point?
After all, if it's not fun, we might as well go and get a(nother) job.
Suggestion #6: bet in line with the strength of your fancy (and always in line with your means, obvs). And enjoy it: one day all this might no longer be possible
Matt
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/binoculars_cheltenham.jpg319830Matt Bisognohttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngMatt Bisogno2020-01-07 18:12:152020-05-21 11:14:512020 Vision: Some Thoughts on Betting Better
*IMPORTANT: the email I sent this morning opened with "Let me start with the caveat. Free, potentially, yes; but risk-free"
It should have said "Free, potentially, yes; but NOT risk-free" - sincere apologies. Matt
Last Tuesday marked the end of SotD's eighth full calendar year since its inception as a non-tipping piece back in November 2011, so thank you to those of you (including Matt) for putting up with me all that time!
The logic behind this daily feature is to take a slight step from the normal form book/ race card approach to betting, since form is temporary at best and race cards are still largely inadequate, although Matt's efforts here at Geegeez are the exception to the rule.
My brief is to give some statistical pointers as to how you could frame a bet from another angle and whilst we don't expect all of them to win, we do expect a decent run for our money and often the stats we quote will pinpoint winners elsewhere too. So it's really more than a tip, it's a way-in to a bet that you can use over and over again.
We attract lots of new members to the site every year, thanks mainly to the continual improvements made to the racing toolkit and partly due to SotD's success, and this is bringing in more savvy punters looking for better data, information and racecards than they'll find anywhere else on the 'net, so here's briefly how I "do my bit"...
My first port of call is find runners who fit a stat (or usually a number of stats) suggesting they will go well. I have quite a large portfolio of saved micro-systems and angles (our Query Tool is brilliant for this) and they generate a list of possibles each day. I also look at the Shortlist report and the qualifiers generated from the Report Angles facility and I end up with a fairly long list of horses/races to assess.
I then cross off the races that I don't even want to consider and only then do I start to look at a race card. Where I have multiple selections in a race, I'll then make a decision on which would be my preferred runner in the race. At this point, I should now have less than 10 races/horses on my shortlist, I then put them in an order that I think reflects their likelihood of winning and at this point, I look at the prices.
Once I've got the prices, I cross out those that don't offer me enough perceived value and then the one that now stands top of the list is the daily selection. We aim to have the selection online in the early evening before racing (preferably by 6.00pm) where possible but occasionally due to home-life, travel plans and/or holidays, it can be later, but there's a selection every day except Sundays and we don't take Bank Holidays, Easter nor Christmas off!
That said, we are currently trialling a morning of racing delivery of Stat of the Day, with the pick generally online by 8.15am.
I try to find runners priced around the 11/4 to 6/1 mark at BOG prices and look for some value in the odds achieved, but sometimes I have to stray outside those parameters a little. A large proportion of selections are sent off at much shorter odds than advised, and constantly beating SP is a key in making long-term profits. Basically, our profit figures aren't massaged by some freakishly long-priced winners, nor is our strike rate bolstered by a string of odds-on jollies.
What we do have is a consistent approach that aims to highlight one value selection per day and although this "one-a-day" stats-based approach to bet selection suffers all the obligatory peaks and troughs associated with betting on horses, we did manage to make a profit yet again in 2019, but it was a real tough slog towards the end of the year, if I'm brutally honest.
Normally at this point, I'm typing this out with a fairly satisfied smile on my face, but the final quarter of the year gave us little to smile about. Nevertheless, the bigger picture is that we managed to secure yet another yearly profit, our eighth on the bounce. We're quietly proud of our record of profit in every year since SotD's inception, for what is essentially a free add-on to the Gold toolbox package, but we're also aware that recent form has been below long-term levels... although I think I said that form was only temporary anyway!
Number of bets/selections/pts wagered: 290 (two fewer than 2018) Winning Bets: 66 (67 in 2018) Strike Rate: 22.76% (2018 = 22.95%) Average payout from winning bet : 3.93/1 (2018 = 3.57/1)
Yearly Profit: 35.46pts (2018 = 14.16pts) Profit on Stakes Invested: 12.23% (2018 was 4.85%)
From inception in November 2011 to end 2019: +531.87 points
The overall bottom line is still, we think, impressive and one that both Matt and I (it's a team game) are happy with; and, although I've been quite vocal in expressing my disappointment about the way 2019 fizzled out, a 12.23% return actually shows us in a good light against many of our peers.
We're already up and running for January, a month that has traditionally been kind to us, so fingers crossed for more of the same and a good year overall.
Many Thanks for being a part of Geegeez and SotD, Chris, Matt and the whole Geegeez team.
***Stat of the Day is just one component of the excellent package available to all Geegeez Gold Members, so if you're not part of our community already, why not take your £1/30-day trial now?
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/sotd-updates.jpg320830Chris Worrallhttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngChris Worrall2020-01-06 14:34:342020-05-02 06:51:16Stat of the Day: The 2019 Review
It's that time of the year, of the decade, when retrospectives are all the rage. So, while I appreciate you've probably had more than your fill of such self-congratulatory mush in recent days, what follows will add to the pile. For regular readers who have joined at any point after 2010, there may be some interesting factoids in the below.
geegeez.co.uk first saw the light of day in August 2008, as a one man - me - blog. Now, more than eleven years later, I still drive the bus, though with co-pilots, mechanics and conductors aplenty. This remains a boutique site, it remains funded by your Geegeez Gold subscriptions (as opposed to bookmaker revenue share, which is a different model from basically every other major racecard/form provider), and it remains privately owned with an ethos that focuses on you, our loyal reader/subscriber, rather than 'shareholder value'.
Right, self-righteous back-slapping out of the way, on with the show...
Before the decade began
As mentioned, geegeez.co.uk actually began life in the second half of 2008, when we were all a little younger and faster. It looked very much like this, and sat - for those of a vaguely techie nature - on google's blogger platform. High art it was not...
January 2010
Moving on, and the first of many failed cosmetic enhancements was applied in early 2009. The site retained this look at the beginning of the decade, having now moved from blogger to WordPress which, ten years later, is the de facto platform for such content hubs and used by the likes of cnn.com.
The red, white and blue banner was in situ at this point but the site remained a blog funded by affiliate commissions from products we reviewed, as well as those sold ourselves such as Trainer Track Stats.
July 2011
By July 2011, there had been another facelift - things were looking a lot more professional now - and we also had a small team of writers including Ross Birkett (amateur jockey and assistant trainer to his mum, Julia Feilden) and Mal Boyle, the placepot guru.
On reflection, that front page looks better than the current one - a job to be addressed early in 2020! - and the box bottom right hints at a change in direction for the site towards what you currently know and, hopefully, love.
January 2012
Inexplicably, to me at least, the previous look failed to appeal to site users, so we reverted to linking from the home page to bundles of content. At this time, Ian Sutherland was writing news articles as well as some 'what's in a name' insights on horses and lost racecourses, and we were still reviewing betting products as we continue to do to this day (albeit on a smaller scale).
The eagle-eyed amongst you will notice the third item down in the middle column, Stat of the Day. This feature was incepted in November 2011, meaning we recently passed eight years of service, every one of them profitable thanks, almost exclusively, to one man, Chris Worrall. He has been as important a member of the team as anybody during this past decade and I'm extremely grateful to him for his help and support, as well as his - generally - calm influence. Thanks Chris!
May 2013
This guy turned up in 2013, and I kind of liked him. But, in the end, he became a victim of the corporate culture as he was deemed not sufficiently professional looking for a site with upwardly mobile aspirations. Sigh.
Anyway, he was cool!
January 2014
In the middle of 2013, geegeez.co.uk published its first racecards. They were pretty basic and they were free. There was a problem with this: I couldn't afford the data and development costs to keep them going. So, after much soul searching, I decided they needed to be a premium product based on a monthly or annual subscription. The initial fee was set at just £12 a month, a figure that recognised both my discomfort at charging for something I'd expected to monetise in other ways and the fact that there wasn't a huge amount of depth to them at that stage.
Here's how a card looked back then:
However, what we did have - in its embryonic format - was Instant Expert. Here is a very early incarnation - at that time called Race Analysis Report, or RAR - of what has become a cornerstone of form profile punters' betting activity.
Of course, Alder Mairi won this race, and below are early images of both Full Form (Filter) and the Result.
To be perfectly honest, it was successes like this one that gave me the confidence to plough on with Geegeez Gold. The end of 2013 was a pivotal time for me and the site, as the stress of making a commercial go of what had become a significant cost base was leading me to wonder if I hadn't made a massive mistake.
I'd written this post - https://www.geegeez.co.uk/a-new-beginning-for-geegeez-co-uk/ - at the end of 2013 when it had "all come on top" as Arthur Daley used to say, and I was looking for a buyer. What an error that would have been, in so many ways, for me personally; and I'm glad that people didn't see the future value in the site that I did.
September 2015
By the end of 2015, the Gold service was very much the core of what we did, as it has been ever since. I tend not to blow my trumpet too much in public (though this article may contradict that!), but I had privately decided I wanted to make Geegeez Gold the best racecard and form tool service in Britain and Ireland. Five years from September 2015 - i.e. in nine months' time - I think I'll be happy we've achieved that.
Here's how the main features on Gold shaped up roughly four years ago:
January 2018
The site continued to provide cutting edge data driven editorial from incisive and pithy writers such as Tony Keenan, as well as Fleet Street denizens like Tony Stafford. And Geegeez Gold continued its feature accumulation, with the following being added since autumn 2015:
Meanwhile, geegeez.co.uk had evolved visually once more, into something close to its current aesthetic:
January 2019
And so to 2019. The 'look and feel' is fresher, with the red being dropped from the branding in favour of the white/blue combination. Content has been a little quieter this year, though where quantity has been limited we've deliberately focused on quality.
January 2020
And so to a new decade. Where are we?
From those humble beginnings as a little blog site with, as the excellent Robin Gibson of Racing Post's Surf and Turf feature once said, "a few serviceable posts", we've created a community of racing fans, and a betting information hub with few - arguably, no - peers.
During that time, we've syndicated horses and enjoyed numerous winners; we've sponsored jockeys such as David Probert, Rex Dingle and Callum Rodriguez, and the ever-brilliant Anthony Honeyball yard; and I/we continue to re-invest pretty much everything that doesn't put bread on my family's table into this website.
Whether it's top class editorial from the Tony's, Keenan and Stafford, Jon Shenton, Dave Renham, Andy Newton, and of course Stat of the Day Chris and myself; or new features within Geegeez Gold, such as sectional timing, additional reports, and greater user configurability (all built by the peerless Nige and our new database whizz, Jean-Francois), the subscriptions you pay contribute directly to the ongoing development of the service and the site.
*
December 2020
We've a very busy year of development planned. Here's what's on the menu for 2020 and where I hope we'll be by this time next year:
- Hiring some content and marketing people to help share what we have with existing and new readers
- Bringing sectional timing to life, an ongoing project
- A revamped Query Tool allowing for far greater depth and analytical tinkery-pokery
- Betfair exchange data and interface to wager directly into the exchange
- A raft of smaller upgrades including PRB (percentage of rivals beaten), a trainer 'days since last run' report, graphical race visualisations, overrounds, HC2 and TC2 (2nd start in a handicap or for a new trainer), ROI calculations in reports and draw/pace content, and plenty more besides
*
Finally, a very heartfelt word, directly from me to you.
For allowing me to live my dream for more than a decade now, I cannot thank you enough. Whether you've been here since the get go or have stumbled upon us more recently, THANK YOU. Thank you. Thank you. I hope that the content on these virtual pages attests to the sincerity of my gratitude.
Here's to the next decade!
Matt, and all of the team at geegeez.co.uk
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/geegeez10years.png320830Matt Bisognohttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngMatt Bisogno2019-12-31 14:40:062019-12-31 14:40:06A Decade in the Life of geegeez.co.uk
I’ve been penning on these pages for well over a year now, writes Jon Shenton. As a novice who has never written anything for public consumption previously, it’s been very challenging. It’s also been highly enjoyable, and I’ve learnt plenty regarding racing, and basic grammar, along the way!
For regulars, you'll know the form: a bit of data, a chunk of blurb and perhaps a few nice angles (and some occasionally less nice ones) on the journey.
But this edition is a bit different, a little more reflective and general in nature, aiming to mull some of the challenges associated with a systematic betting approach. I very much hope that it’s not too self-indulgent [it's not. Ed.] and is of some interest to the data driven bettor.
Angles and Demons
My name is Jon Shenton and I have 679 angles / betting systems saved in my portfolio. Many aren’t active but most are.
I’ve been building, maintaining and running angles since April 2016. Prior to that, an annual trip to Gold Cup day was my only exposure to racing and resulted in nine straight years without a hint of trouble for the bookies. However, three winners at Cheltenham on a Friday in March, using detailed but on reflection misguided study, changed everything. My success that day was without doubt 100% attributable to good fortune rather than skill, but in my mind I was up and running.
From that moment, I spent seemingly every spare second researching, analysing and listening in order to develop a deeper understanding of racing. I began betting only pennies (paper trading is not for me!) initially, but over time those pennies have turned into a few pounds as confidence levels and results have improved.
It all sounds perfect, doesn't it? Making a small amount of pocket money on the nags is something that never seemed to be a realistic proposition; having a leisure activity, that hands out a bit of spendo is a wonderful pursuit.
However, in recent times my enjoyment levels from racing, and betting on it, have been waning a little. I haven’t given it a huge amount of thought until now. But when I was challenged to write this article it became a catalyst to think about the bigger picture and to step back from the day to day noise. It was then that I realised that I haven’t really been plugged into the sport in the same way over the past few months.
Ultimately, I think it’s because the process of systematically wagering on racing through angles is exceptionally transactional in nature. Zooming out and evaluating from a distance it can feel - and had started to feel - in large part like a glorified admin function. And, frankly, there aren’t many people in the world who relish a good bit of relaxing admin in their own spare time.
A typical weekday starts in the evening when all the following day's qualifying bets are written down from the relevant website(s) and tools. Then, at 5.15am on the day of racing, the alarm delivers its familiar but always rude awakening. A quick shower, and with a cup of tea all bets are placed for the day. Then it’s out of the door bright and early to the day job.
Working full-time as I do, it’s nigh on impossible to keep across racing during working hours (deliberately avoided for obvious reasons hopefully) and I check the results when I get home. Then it’s the treat of recording all of the results on a tracking spreadsheet and repeating the process. Every single day.
Some days are quieter than others: in 2019 thus far there have been north of 3,200 angle-generated bets that have been struck. Not sure how I feel about that in the cold light of day - perhaps I need to be more selective - but it certainly illustrates the associated admin challenge.
The graph below shows the result of these type of wagers from that start point in 2016.
Predominantly, these numbers have been delivered through win only level stake betting (more on staking later): it’s non-emotive, low engagement wagering; and there is very little in the way of subjectivity or personal thought in the process. That process is rigid: identify a qualifier, write it down, place a bet, check the result and record the outcome.
The results are strong undoubtedly, with margin ordinarily 10-15% over the course of a year. At this point it should be noted that a portion of this return is attributable to best odds guaranteed. Transacting at early prices with BOG presents an element of 'natural value' with the relatively high volume of bets that are placed. The retreat of this offer to later in the day is creating a hurdle that in time will need to be overcome to maintain my current margin. Placing bets any later than 6am is not going to be possible due to other commitments, so I’m going to need to find a way to evolve or accept a lower rate of return.
Putting these thoughts to print has helped me to recognise that it’s the research, number crunching and theory testing that keeps the fire burning. Sure, the results have a certain satisfaction associated with them, but there is no doubt that the overall process is a little cold, clinical and mechanical. The highly structured, highly disciplined, admin heavy approach works financially but my level of engagement with the sport is lacking.
Action Man
The alternative to stuffy system/angle betting is the good old emotional roller coaster of traditional wagering: taking stock of all the usual elements and variables of a given race and pinning your colours to the mast around one animal.
I am partial to a “normal” bet too, the general parlance used on geegeez.co.uk is “action” betting so we’ll stick with that terminology from here on in.
Angle/system betting is the rhythm section of the gambling universe, whereas action bets might be seen as the freewheeling, edgy lead guitarist.
Here is a graph illustrating the outcome of my guitar licks over the past 2-and-a-half years.
Not exactly Slash or Hendrix is it?
The graph follows a profile like a Next Big Thing that burns brightly for a time before hitting the skids and hurtling back into relative obscurity.
2019 has clearly been the year of excessive drink, substance abuse, creative differences and a spectacular fall from grace (metaphorically, of course) for my action bets. For context, there have been 645 of them in 2019 to date with 81 successes (counting an E/W collection as 0.2 of a win). Depressingly, I’m not entirely sure why this year has been so difficult, though I suspect there is an element of attempting to be too smart and punting beyond my means and capabilities. A little knowledge can be dangerous, especially when there is a natural attraction to against the crowd punting and (ostensibly) generous prices!
A result of the downturn has been an easing back on the volume of action bets. Roughly speaking, I’ve had less than half the action bets over the past three months that I would have had based on the previous two-year volume averages.
Easing off on the action seems a sensible approach. A brutal personal assessment (stats don’t lie?) is that my race reading ability is not in the same league as the cold data-driven angle approach; so why bother wasting time trying to pick winners when the angles do it better? There is certainly limited financial reason to play in action betting, based on the recent numbers, and locking money away in a cash ISA would make more sense commercially. But not even Derren Brown could convince me that a risk-free return in a tax-free saving account was more fun than poring through race cards, form, pace maps and whatever else.
Through trying to get under the skin of a race and piecing it together, it affords an opportunity to further learn and to develop a deeper understanding of the complexities involved in racing - and in betting on racing. It is sport after all, and an action bet can solidify the link to it. The spectacle and sense of occasion obviously stands on its own merit but evaluating a race closely (betting or not) creates a deeper and more vested interest in the outcome. Most importantly, it generates interest, excitement, and fun.
My life has revolved around sport since I was knee high to the proverbial green jumpy insect. However, my career has generally revolved around the use of data. Racing is perfectly positioned to straddle both. The rational side of me struggles with undue risk and losing money; the sporting and emotional side connects with the characters, animals and theatre of the event, and wants to be financially implicated.
But a recent conscious choice to withdraw from action betting had resulted in less time invested in the sport and, as a result, my previously voracious appetite to consume as much information and knowledge as possible has ebbed a little.
On introspection, then, I know that action betting must be here to stay: I just need to get better at it! It’s a wonderful sport, and to measure the enjoyment of it by financial return and transactions alone is the wrong way of looking at it. Being less uptight about action bets is key. And keeping them separate / treating them as fun, rather than angle-driven investments, is a clear and necessary way forward.
Action Learnings
The single biggest challenge with action betting is finding the capacity to do it properly. Finding time to study in any depth is difficult for me due to other commitments, like - you know - work and family! Undoubtedly, that’s where the toolkit on geegeez assists hugely in cutting through some of the noise.
What geegeez cannot do is support with the mental challenges associated with a ticking clock and wagering. It’s a personal thing but occasionally in the evening I’ll put on ATR or Racing TV and decide to have a quick check of the card just before the off. The intent is to evaluate the race at high level and see how that goes. Who’s going to lead? Who has course form? And so on...
However, it’s hard not to get attracted to a bet even in that very short window. Each to their own, but over the past couple of months I’ve refrained from these type of wagers as, for me, they invariably end in disappointment.
A similar limitation related to time, laziness or general apathy is that once pinpointing a “good thing” it can be devilishly difficult to walk away without a wagering commitment. It is the potential opportunity cost of reversing from a successful bet where the problem lies. A race comprises of many possible winners, certainly not just the one identified as having the course form, front-running potential, good draw or whatever edge seems to be apparent. Finding contenders isn’t the main challenge. No, my main challenge relates to understanding how the highlighted horse compares against the rest of the field and knowing when to step back rather than ploughing in regardless.
I’ve committed to at least evaluating the top four or five in the market before making an action bet now. It sounds basic and obvious, but part of the process of trying to improve is assessing why things aren’t working. My hope is that, by implementing this basic rule, there will be an upturn in action-based performance. We’ll see.
General angle betting thoughts
Getting back to angle betting, I have a few other observations to share.
Firstly, should all qualifiers get backed blindly or not? A lot of people use an angle as a starting point and then apply subjective judgement to that qualifier in determining whether to put the money down.
This does not work for me. I am an advocate of backing blind. Here's why: the angle works because it’s not subjective, and it can throw up contrarian winners to which the market is largely blind. By applying a judgement filter there is a danger of conforming to the market view and losing the angle's edge.
Below is a case study that burns, even today.
This race from 2017 is taken from my 'I know better' phase where I’d evaluate each qualifier and exclude some from a bet based on my opinion.
The qualifier in question is Guishan from a Mick Appleby sprint angle, number 3 on the card above. This animal was discounted due to its sub-optimal draw in box 11 of 12. Everyone knows a horse can’t win from that draw over a sprint trip at Chester, don’t they? Anyway, as I sat down to watch it with a nice cup of tea and a smug feeling of avoiding an inevitable loss, I was gripped by unfolding sense of horror. Guishan tacked over from a high draw, secured a reasonable position and swept by all-comers in the home straight to win with a degree of comfort. At 25/1. There are lots of other case studies with resemblance to this one but I'll spare you - and me! - the details.
Moving on, if there is a good reason to adapt an angle I will. For example, certain trainers may qualify at specific tracks or under certain conditions but they have a poor record with horses first or second time out. In such a situation, I would have no qualms adjusting or improving the angle by excluding these, because that decision would be evidence-based. But those subjective, opinion-based exclusions need to be consigned to the wheelie bin of history.
Staking Plan
Before closing, a line or two on staking. There are countless words available on this subject and no doubt the vast majority are better informed than what follows. However, I hope my relative inexperience can be of some reassurance to those of you who are still finding your way.
Quite frankly, in terms of staking, keeping it simple is the most important for me. I have researched and read a fair amount on optimising stakes but, in all honesty, I don’t understand a great deal of it! I certainly have no real idea how much value there is in each bet to adjust stakes accordingly, and I’d be guessing if applying something like the Kelly Criterion in the real world. I’ve tried measuring value by creating my own tissue prices but I’m a million miles away from making that work for me effectively.
Basically, the less I think about from a staking perspective the better. In general, level stakes keep it a thought free process for me. That said, there is some room for manoeuvre, depending on the category of bet and my track record with them. My current staking plan is as follows:
2 points win – All-weather premium angle
1.5-point win – All-weather standard angle
1.5-point win – Flat turf premium angle
1-point win – Flat turf standard angle
1-point win – National Hunt angle
1-point win / 0.5 points EW – Action bet
The only subjective part is what makes a premium or standard angle. That’s down to performance and chi score (one for another day) which is a statistical measure to indicate the likelihood of results being attributable to chance or not.
An example of a premium angle is the Derek Shaw, Chelmsford Class 4-7 at 11/1 or shorter contained within the below edition of punting angles. That is proven over a period in a live environment.
I think staking plans boil down to understanding ones strengths and weaknesses, and betting accordingly. If you do struggle or worry about staking, then in my experience a level stakes approach takes a lot of the noise and confusion away.
In fact, I think that’s what this article is predominantly about. Strengths, weaknesses, likes and dislikes. Writing it has certainly helped me to think about my betting - specifically, what I’m good at and what I have as development areas (corporate speak).
Even if the experiences I've shared in this article don’t help directly, taking a bit of time out to reflect on your betting approach, strategies and performance is a sensible and pragmatic thing to do occasionally. And no better moment than during this break.
I hope you enjoy the festivities, and here’s to an exciting, fun and profitable 2020 racing. It really is a special sport like no other.
- JS
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Cheltenham_Rails_Bookmakers.jpg320826Jonny11https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngJonny112019-12-23 23:19:272019-12-23 23:19:27Jon Shenton: Some Thoughts on Action vs Angle Bets
geegeez.co.uk uses cookies to improve your experience. We assume that's OK, but you may opt-out from the settings. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
