PACTOLUS ridden by Callum Rodriguez in The Betway Winter Derby Stakes (Group 3) at Lingfield 23/2/19 Photo Ian Headington / Racingfotos.com

Run Style in Smaller Field Handicaps

It is time for me to revisit one of my favourite areas of research, namely the run style of horses, writes Dave Renham. In case you didn't know, run style research is often linked with draw analysis, as one can positively impact the other depending on the course, distance and field size in question. For example, if we look at data from 2014 to 2022 for Chester handicap sprints (up to 6f) with 10+ runners, we can see that the highest third of the draw are at a disadvantage in terms of taking the early lead:

 

 

Your first 30 days for just £1

Of the 92 early pace runners, just 11 were horses from the top third of the draw. Working out the percentage chance of which third of the draw is most likely to lead given those raw figures are as follows:

 

 

So a horse from the top third of the draw manages to take the early lead just under 12% of the time. This equates to less than one race in every eight. Compare that to horses from the lowest third of the draw who are able to lead in more than half of all races. Why this happens is simply due to the nature of the Chester track. Horses drawn low are drawn on the inside nearest the rail, and at both sprint trips, as we can see from the racecourse map, the turning nature of the track means that if a horse can grab the rail they will be going the shortest route for well over half the race.

Horses drawn wide have a very difficult task therefore to get to the early lead in front of a lower drawn rival, especially so when all jockeys (and trainers) know the value of a forward position.

 

 

So, when combining draw and run style at Chester over sprint trips with 10+ runners, it should be noted that a low drawn early leader is a horse that has a better chance of winning than any other draw / run style combination. These horses have won 26% of the time going back to 2014, whereas high drawn held up horses have won 0% of the time (0 wins from 135).

Bigger field sizes in handicap sprints almost always strengthen any draw bias – I rarely concern myself with the draw in races with small fields, and all my draw research / article writing is based on field sizes of at least eight or more. Hence in big field handicap sprints at certain courses I will use draw and run style biases in conjunction with each other to look for potential betting opportunities. The Chester stats shared above are a good illustration why I do this. At this juncture, it is worth mentioning the blindingly obvious: I don’t ignore other race reading factors, I just perceive draw and run style as often the most useful.

However, in recent years, the average number of runners in handicap races has been dropping. This means that fewer races provide the opportunity to use draw and run style biases in tandem.

To illustrate the fact that smaller field races are becoming more prevalent, take a look at the table below. This illustrates the percentage of races that have taken place within different field size brackets in 5f handicaps, comparing the period from 2015 to 2018 data with the past two full seasons (2021-2022).

 

 

As you can see the very smallest fields (2 to 6 runners) have seen an increase from 18.7% to 21.3%; there is also an increase in the 7 to 9 runner bracket. In 10 to 12 runner races there has been a small decrease, but in 13+ runner races we can see a bigger reduction.

A similar pattern can be seen when we delve into 6f handicap data over the same two time frames:

 

 

Races of 2 to 6 runners occurred roughly one in every nine contests between 2015 and 2018, but this has increased to roughly once in every six races in the past two seasons. This is not ideal as races with fewer runners gives me less opportunity to potentially factor in draw bias. However, we have to move with the times, so in the remainder of this article I will look in more detail at small field sprint handicaps, honing in specifically on run style.

From extensive past research I know, and regular readers of my articles will know, that early leaders in handicap sprints tend to have a decent advantage over other run styles. At some courses the bias is stronger than others, and as a general rule front runners have more of an edge over five furlongs than six. As I mentioned earlier my draw based articles use eight runners as a minimum, so it makes sense therefore to concentrate here on races with seven or fewer runners. I have analysed data from the past seven full seasons in the UK (2016 to 2022) looking solely at 5f and 6f handicaps.

To start with let's look at the run style win strike rate splits for all 5f handicaps with 7 or fewer runners. I am splitting the results in the same way that Geegeez does, into four sections – Led (4), Prominent (3), Mid Division (2) and Held Up (1). The number in brackets is the run style score that is assigned to each section. These scores can be found in racecards, on the Pace Analyser tool and on the Query Tool on the site.

 

 

As we can see, early leaders / front runners (L) have a definite advantage over prominent racers who in turn have an advantage over horses that race in mid division or are held up. The A/E indices correlate too – A/E (Actual vs Expected) is an indicator of value where a figure of 1 or more is a positive:

 

 

Early leaders/front runners have an A/E index of 1.2 which is strong. Indeed, if your crystal ball for predicting the front runner in these 5f handicaps had been in tip top order, then backing all these runners would have yielded a profit of £346.62 to £1 level stakes giving returns of 22p for every £1 staked. That is at starting price, the figures to BSP are roughly double that.

This front running bias can also be seen when we look at the run style win strike rates for favourites:

 

 

Favourites that led early or raced prominently both made a profit to SP assuming we had been able to predict their running style pre-race. Mid-division favourites lost 11p in the £, with hold up jollies losing double that at 22p in the £.

A look at the official going now to see if that has any effect in small field 5f handicaps. Here are the stats for front runners / early leaders by going:

 

 

Other than on good to soft going the win strike rate has exceeded 20%. It seems that front runners have a decent edge regardless of ground conditions in small field five furlong sprint handicaps, with potential profits across the board and A/E indices of 1 or greater for all.

Jockey data for front runners in these races is a little limited (only four riders led early in 30 or more races). However, I do want to mention Jason Hart as he has won with 12 of his 30 front running rides (SR 40%). Hart's A/E index stands at an outstanding 2.48. On prominent runners he has a goodish record scoring just under 18%, but on mid div / hold up horses he managed just 1 win from 29 (SR 3.4%). Hart also has a very good record from the front in 5f handicaps with fields of eight or more runners (SR 29.9%), so he clearly is a good judge of pace when taking his horse to the front early. Hollie Doyle has a good record on these 5f early leaders, too, with 12 wins from 32 (SR 32.4%; A/E index 1.89).

Time to go up a furlong and look at the 6f handicap stats in races of 7 runners or less.

 

 

Front runners are once again clearly the most successful, but the other three groups are much more even than in their five furlong equivalents. Prominent racers are no longer in a clear second place over this extra furlong. Checking the A/E indices we see a correlation once again:

 

 

Early leaders / front runners hit an impressive 1.18, virtually the same as the 5f handicap figure of 1.20. The other three are fairly closely matched, as their win strike rates were.

Below is a bar chart showing the fate of 6f handicap favourites in small fields by run style.

 

 

The front running bias remains when focusing on favourites only, with over 40% of front running favourites winning, and they would have been profitable, too. The other three groups would have yielded loses.

A look at the going now. Over 5f the figures for front runners / early leaders were relatively even and positive across the board. What about at three-quarters of a mile?

 



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

 

Once more, we see positive figures across the board with strike rates all above 20% and A/E indices all above 1.10. It should be noted that for both five- and six-furlong handicaps the 'soft or heavy' A/E index was the highest as was the win strike rate. Maybe the front running bias is slightly stronger on soft and heavy ground but I would personally need more evidence to be confident of this.

A quick mention of jockeys: I noted earlier that Hollie Doyle had decent figures on 5f front runners, and she has a similar record over this extra furlong with 14 wins from 38 rides (SR 36.8%; A/E index 2.19). She must be a very good judge of pace in small field sprint handicaps.

Before I close, allow me to share some front running data for trainers. I have combined 5f and 6f handicaps to give us bigger samples (45 runs+ qualify, ordered by strike rate):

 

 

Some impressive figures here especially for Archie Watson, Kevin Ryan and Tom Dascombe. Indeed, 13 of Watson’s 25 winners were ridden by Hollie Doyle and this trainer/jockey combo scored 43% of the time with front runners.

 

CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

It is clear that even in smaller field handicaps over 5 or 6 furlongs, horses that grab the early lead have a definite advantage. Over 5f the bias is stronger, but the edge over six is still playable. The age old problem is being able to predict the early leader before the start of the race. From previous articles that I have written on this site, we have seen that the run style / pace scores found in the racecards are a definite help. Horses with the highest last four run pace totals do lead more often than those with lower pace totals.

Before I finish, here is an example of a six-runner handicap from earlier this year, so not a race within this article's sample data, where the last four pace totals seemed to indicate a very strong candidate for a horse that would lead early:

 

 

Bare Necessity had led in three of his previous four runs and had a four-point advantage over the second highest pace scoring horse, and he had the inside stall. Not only that, of the 20 runs of the other horses combined, just one of these races had seen a horse take the early lead. Now we can never be certain pre-race that a horse will lead, but this is about as good as it gets. As it turns out Bare Necessity did lead early and made all the running to win:

 

 

As I am sure you will agree, 28/1 winners are not to be sniffed at! It goes without saying that races do not always pan out perfectly like this, but ultimately if you could predict the front runner most of the time in such races, you would not really need to do much else: no need to check the form, whether the horse goes on the ground, how fit is the horse, etc, etc. Maybe we should have a challenge for members – to find a method to predict the highest percentage of front runners. I’m in!

- DR

Other Recent Posts by This Author:



Try Tix for Better Tote Returns

Your first 30 days for just £1
5 replies
  1. mick
    mick says:

    I think you’ve flogged this low draw/lead theory to a slow death over the last 4 years, time to seek other avenues or pull stumps.

    • Matt Bisogno
      Matt Bisogno says:

      Hi Mick

      Perhaps you’d like to stop reading the stuff on our site. Nobody is forcing you to consume every word!

      Respectfully, each time there is new information in Dave’s posts which most readers – including me – enjoy factoring into their betting.

      I presume you are already aware of the subtleties and nuances of draw and run style bias – in which case, feel free to read the other stuff and ignore these.

      Best,
      Matt

  2. Monsieurbernie
    Monsieurbernie says:

    Enjoy the draw and pace work, i use it alot for my betting

    im in on the predicting ha

  3. Gallou
    Gallou says:

    Is/will the run style become more of a factor because of BHA rules governing use of the whip?
    As the penalties for whip use become more stringent I envisage horses that are help up/midfield will become more victims of their run style when the jockey can’t risk a ban. Front runners success should increase as a result
    Thoughts?

    • Matt Bisogno
      Matt Bisogno says:

      Hi Gallou

      This is certainly my expectation: a small, but material, improvement to the chance of prominent racers. In the short term this should favour those of us playing early speed, but in the longer term – when it becomes more widely known – it might end up producing more overly-fast run races.

      For now, I’m definitely playing up early pace.

      Dave may have a different view, of course.

      Matt

Comments are closed.