Grand National-winning rider Patrick Mullins ticked off another course on his mission to conquer Britain when victorious at Chester on Friday.
Although only 30 miles separate the Roodee and Aintree, the two courses could not be more different in their make up, and only two months after winning the world’s most famous steeplechase, the amateur pilot switched codes to navigate the tight turns of Chester.
Mullins had finished third in the HRS Cladding Amateur Jockeys’ Handicap aboard John and Sean Quinn’s Red Mirage 12 months ago, but was handed the prime position of stall one aboard Ollie Sangster’s Profit Refused (3-1 favourite) this time around.
Away well over the seven-furlong trip, the 35-year-old had his mount in a handy position throughout and after kicking clear in the straight, just had enough petrol in reserve to hold off the fast-finishing defending champion Outrun The Storm by a neck.
Mullins, who celebrated with a flying dismount, said: “I was wondering if I had kicked too soon and he broke well and I did want to keep my powder dry as long as I could, but then there comes a time where you have to go or you are going to stall and we got home in front – stall one is a massive help here.
“It’s not quite Galway in reverse as Galway has a lot of ups and downs and Chester is completely unique – it’s a circle. I was keen to come back here after riding in this race last year and these opportunities you have to take when you can.
“The speed is a huge buzz. We get to race over this trip at Laytown, but that is a straight course, so to do it here round a bend is great.
“I’m so lucky to ride in a Grand National then to come here and ride over seven furlongs around Chester, not many people get the opportunity to do that.”
It was a close finish in the Chester opener (David Davies/PA)
On his ambition to ride a winner at every track in Britain, he added: “It’s been a magic day and there’s 25 more jumps tracks for me to go, I think Cartmel is definitely high on the list.”
Mullins’ victory came in the colours of the Pompey Ventures team, in which school friend David Byrne is a partner.
Byrne was thrilled to be able to provide his friend a rare opportunity on the Flat and told Sky Sports Racing: “We went to school together, we started school when we were 12 and have been pals ever since.
“He’s always been talented and this is great. Everything worked out that we had a runner in an amateur race and Paddy is trying to ride a winner at every track, so it was great that I could give him the call, we go a long way back.”
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/280633081-scaled.jpg12802560https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.png2025-06-13 14:08:442025-06-13 14:08:44Patrick Mullins checks Chester box in tour of British tracks
Spring has well and truly sprung in May, writes David Massey. The winter jumper has (almost) been packed away, the shorts are back on and will be until September now, and the cereal has been changed. By this I mean, for eight months of the year my chosen breakfast is Weetabix with hot milk on. A malty delight, I'm sure you'll agree. But from May to August it's the summer cereals - take your pick from bog-standard corn flakes through wholewheat hoops to Special K with red berries in. Fairly sure the last named counts as one of my five a day, along with the two segments of Terry's Chocolate Orange I allow myself with a yoghurt each evening. Orange is the key word here, ignore the other bits.
I have been to three of our most picturesque courses in the past few weeks. Newmarket for the Guineas meeting, followed by two days of Chester and, last week, three days of York. Newmarket and Chester also have something else in common, namely I have more wi-fi and connection issues there than anywhere else in the country, and that includes Fakenham, despite the Norfolk venue being in the middle of nowhere.
Anyway, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. Newmarket saw myself and the wife head down for two days of quality Flat action, although not before I'd been at Cheltenham for the Hunters evening. "You just can't leave it alone, can you?" said Vicki to me on 2000 Guineas Day as she caught me looking at Worcester's Monday card at the time. She's right, it's an addiction. "Hello, my name is David, and I'd like to start by saying I can't stop looking at poor quality jumps cards between May and September." Sympathetic nods from the rest of the room.
Vicki very much drives the Trackside bus during the Flat season and I take a back(ish) seat, although I'm more than happy to stick my oar in when it comes to the all-aged handicaps, as that's where I'm happiest. So the Saturday, for all we've a Group 1 on the card, backed up by some other class contests, is very much a game of two halves, Brian, with Vicki taking the first five and me the last four, as the World Pool want nine races today and by Jove they're going to have them. However, with the last four all being handicaps and Vicki doing other work on the day, I'm going to help out and cover as much as possible late on. But, those wi-fi issues. It means finding a sweet spot in the paddock and not moving, or I lose connection completely. Some repeaters around the paddock - as Cheltenham have done - might be nice. So not only am I struggling to relay information, it also means I can't get the live pictures from Uttoxeter. (There's no helping me. Save yourselves.)
The wife is having the same issues and is struggling to place a bet, so I'm pleased it isn't only me, in that respect. Newmarket's free wifi has all the signal strength of two tin cans and a bit of string, so that's of no help. I decide we're going into Newmarket tomorrow and I'm buying a dongle to solve our tech problems.
Our Airbnb for the night is in Cambridge, and it's a strange one. Normally you take a room in someone's house for the night and to an extent that was true here, but there were about a dozen rooms and seemingly someone living in most of them. The room and place itself were almost new, to the point where the stickers hadn't been taken off the appliances (it's fine, I know how to use a bath, thanks for the help) but it's the first time I've ever known twelve flats within one house. Only issue was the bed was in a corner, so whoever slept next to the wall is pinned in for the night. Unlucky if you need the loo at three in the morning...
We head back to Newmarket for a fancy breakfast in the Tack Room, which is attached to the Racing Museum in town. If you've never been, I recommend it; a touch pricey and you're paying for a bit of theatre (you can gaze lovingly at the statue of Frankel as you wolf your locally-sourced sausages down) but the food and service are always top-notch. Bellies full, we head into town and the EE shop for my dongle. Turns out it's closed on Sundays, which means another day of intermittent signal issues. Oh well. At the moment that's less of a concern than the freezing cold weather. The wind has really got up and you'd not think it was spring. It was warmer than this at Cheltenham on Friday night. The winter jumper makes an unwelcome, if brief, reappearance as the day passes by without much incident, the signal barely holding up again.
Chester is my next port of call. It's a lovely town, with beautiful Roman architecture, an incredible open-air theatre and, of course, those Grade 1-listed walls. What Chester isn't designed for is traffic, and God help you if you miss your turning in town, it'll add half an hour to your journey as you try and get back to where you were. But I finally arrive at the course with time to spare. I'm here for the first two days of the May meeting, and the sun is finally out.
Much like Newmarket, Chester is a lovely track to visit as a punter, a more sociable day out you'll struggle to have; although the queues for the ChesterBet pitches tell me this isn't a crowd here for a serious wager. On one of the hottest days of the year so far, lunch is chicken curry. I decide to pass, and go in search of a sandwich.
I'm not going to bang on about the wifi again, suffice to say Chester, in its own little valley, makes Newmarket seem like 5G Central. There are precisely three places I can stand and get a signal. Thankfully, standing still is very much a physical activity in my wheelhouse, so I get through the afternoon unscathed. Little Trackside hint here: I thought Aidan's Minnie Hauk, who won the Cheshire Oaks, would come on a ton for that, and she is most definitely top of my list for the Epsom version.
I've left dining arrangements for the evening to "Scoop" Linfoot from the Sporting Life and he's found us a decent Italian, he says. Not only is he right, it's superb, but we have the best result of the day as we're informed it's the Wednesday Special - two courses and a bottle of wine (each!) for twenty notes. And they say you can't eat value. I disagree, if only for tonight.
Having dined well, it's back to my digs, and I've lucked in here as well. Really comfy place and the lady that owns it is a photographer, and has loads of old cine equipment around the house. Also, a slight obsession with Monopoly memorabilia. She's also got a clapped-out TR7 on the drive she appears to be doing up. So, slightly mad, but in a lovely way, and I'll return here again. In fact, if it was twenty minutes nearer Aintree...
Finally, to York last week. Three days of top-class action and it does not disappoint. York was the first time Vicki and I have shared accommodation and the fact we're still speaking to each other tells you all went well. That, despite me forcing her watch the Eurovision semi-final on the Thursday night, which I think she secretly enjoyed (was all in the name of research, I'd volunteered to do the Eurovision preview for the Life and yes, I did put the winner up, thanks for asking).
It was also great to bump into some old friends I hadn't seen in a while, and have a catch up on the Champagne Lawn. Not that I was, obviously, with work to do and a clear head needed. The strongest thing I had on the week was a Coke Zero, as I'm trying to be good and cut a little sugar out recently. However, that all went out the window when, on the Thursday night, Vicki discovered The Sweet Lab, a place where all your magical sugary dreams come true. My heart-attack-inducing Galaxy Brownie, slathered in whipped cream, contained about a million calories and ruined all the good work of the day, but hey, it tasted amazing. When are we back here for the Ebor? 😉
I'm told there was a nice little profit from my first crack at the Tix ticket builder yesterday, so hopefully it wasn't just beginner's luck. Saturday's placepots can be played via Tix at Bath, Chester, Doncaster, Lingfield and Musselburgh...
Today's meetings, pools and minimum guarantees are as follows...
That's a huge pot on offer at Donny, but I'll leave that to the big boys and head the right side of the Pennines for a trip to the Roodee, where I'm expecting tricky contests on testing heavy ground for these races...
No previous winners on show, of course, but Noble Phoenix (3rd), Sir Peter Fossick (2nd) and Rock Diva (3rd) all finished in the frame and Tactical Plan has been placed in three of his last four including finishing third here in a nursery over course and distance two starts ago and was also a soft ground runner-up at Brighton in June and is one of only two runners (Itsneverjustone was 5th of 11 LTO) to have run on soft ground; none have tackled heavy!
The trainer snippets on the card show that Andrew Balding’s runners have a good record of making the frame on their second start, so that’s another tick for Noble Phoenix
…whilst on a track where front-running is often the key, I suspect the in-form Sir Peter Fossick will attempt to set the pace if his three career runs so far are anything to go by…
So, with all that in mind and a safety first approach, I'm taking runners (2) Noble Phoenix, (3) Sir Peter Fossick, (5) Tactical Plan and (7) Rock Diva.
La Yakel was a winner three weeks ago and like Star Harbour has two wins and a runner-up finish from his last four outings. Likely favourite Al Qareem might not have won any of six starts since landing this race last year and then a Group 3 at Ascot back in October, but he has been a runner-up in three Gr 3 races in that six-race cold spell, so I wouldn’t necessarily rule him out here based purely on wins.
His ability to make the frame is clearly the best on show here and all three runners mentioned above (plus Cristal Clere) have raced and placed on heavy ground already, but Al Qareem is the only one of the four without a heavy ground win…
La Yakel's hopes of making the frame are boosted by his yard's success with LTO winners with over 46% of them getting placed next time out...
...whilst the pace data points towards Al Qareem and Star Harbour setting the tone of the race...
There might not be much between shorties (1) Al Qareem and (6) La Yakel here on heavy ground, so I’ll have to take both for insurance, but I wouldn’t be too surprised if (7) Star Harbour ran a big race to outrun his fairly long odds.
It’s not a particularly good renewal of this race this year, but we do have last year’s 1-2 on show as Tashkhan attempts to see Emiyn off again and he’s actually better off at the weights this time around which will help, as will be hoped from his first-time visor. That said, Emiyn comes here in much better form having made the frame in each of his last two runs and three of his last five, making him one of the more in-form runners in a field containing just one LTO winner, Spirit Mixer.
Tashkan and Emiyn have both won on heavy ground before, a feat only matched by Goobinator from their rivals and it’s Emiyn who looks the pick of the pack from a 2yr place perspective, although Vera Verto now becomes of note too…
I’m also always looking out for stats pointing to a 50% or better place strike rate and for Tashkan the 30-day trainer/jockey combo have 7 wins and 4 further places from 22 runs, taking another box for this class-dropper.
So, it might be a little unimaginative, but I’m with (1) Tashkan and (4) Emiyn and wary of (8) Vera Verto. I could consider Spirit Mixer & Roberto Escobar, but then things start getting a little out of hand!
A really competitive looking sprint here where the top seven in a nine-runner market might be pretty closely matched on price, which does’t always help us.The two Invincible fillies (Song & Annice) both won on their last outing, but all nine runners have won at least once already, but Ardennes and Teej A have yet to win over this trip.
Teej A has, however, won here at Chester, landing a 6f maiden back in May, whilst Fuji Mountain is our sole course and distance winner, having won a Class 4 Novice event here in July and he now drops back to this grade after two Class 1 outings.
Invincible Annice is the only runner in the field to have raced on heavy ground, winning at Hamilton over 5f ten days ago and she’s got a great draw here in stall 2, but the pace in the race is likely to come from Invincible Song in the next stall or from Ardennes from out wide with Kodibeat and Fuji Mountain also handily placed. With stalls 7 & 8 having early pace, that’s likely to cut Teej A and Jm Jhingree out of things whilst the runners in stalls 2 to 4 will probably do likewise to Pont Neuf on the rail.
Of the top four on the pace chart, I’m not that keen on Kodibeat if truth be told, but I’m struggling to separate the other three and I do like Invincible Annice too, so it looks like the perms are getting bigger, as I think I need to take all of (1) Fuji Mountain, (4) Ardennes, (5) Invincible Song and (9) Invincible Annice!
Another competitive-looking affair (I think I've picked a tough meeting here!) where more than half of the field seem like they'll go off in the 3/1 to 6/1 price bracket. None of these come here on the back of a win, but both Paddy The Squire and Stressfree have been in the frame in each of their last three races (five in fact for Paddy!), so they’re the ‘form’ horses, I suppose. Again, we’ve little experience/success on heavy ground as referenced by Instant Expert…
…where City Streak, Paddy The Squire and Stressfree are the standouts and it’s the latter who is our only heavy ground winner. And if we're looking for stat pointers (50%+ place SR), then Stressfree comes to mind again...
...making it really hard for me to ignore him, so it's going to be (5) Paddy The Squire and (7) Stressfree for me here, but I might regret omitting City Streak.
And we round off with a big field handicap which again looks like being a tight contest. Paws For Thought and Transitioning both won last time out, the latter as recently as yesterday here over course and distance and both of them have won two of their last four, making them of immediate interest. Yermanthere also won last time out, albeit for just his second win in three years, whilst Phoenix Passion was 5th of 11 on the A/W at Kempton, ending a run of five straight victories and his career Flat handicap form reads 14111, including a heavy ground success at Goodwood back in May.
A quick look at the 2-year win records also show Paws For Thought, Transitioning and Phoenix Passion in a good light…
...whilst I've used the place stats to narrow the field down to...
...and with the top end of the pace chart looking like this...
...it makes sense for me to take (1) Paws For Thought, (12) Transitioning and (13) Paws For Thought in the finale, giving me an overall selection of...
Leg 1: horses 2, 3, 5 & 7!
Leg 2: horses 1, 6 & 7
Leg 3: horses 1, 4 & 8
Leg 4: horses 1, 4, 5 & 9!
Leg 5: horses 5 & 7
Leg 6: horses 1, 12 & 13
...and here's how I'd play them, whilst trying to stay close to a nominal £20 total stake...
Good luck, everyone and I hope you have a great weekend. I'm travelling from Legian to Ubud today and I'll be back with you all on Monday morning.
In the previous article I shared my personal views regarding some of the top draw biases in the UK and Ireland, focusing there specifically on the 10th ‘strongest’ to the 6th, writes Dave Renham. In this follow-up piece, I will reveal my top 5.
It’s important to say that these thoughts are mine and mine alone and, of course, there will be people who disagree with my order. That is how it should be; if we all had the same opinions as regards to horse racing it would be pretty boring! Also, how would we get an edge over other punters if we all thought the same?!
It was noted last time that just because a course and distance has a draw bias, there is no guarantee that the favoured section of the stalls will produce long term profits. Indeed, sometimes there may be value in the ‘worst’ section of the draw. This can happen when the market shortens up the better drawn horses too much. When this happens the prices of other runners get bigger to compensate. Ultimately a 3/1 shot will win more often than a 20/1 shot, but if 3/1 shots win 20 races in every 100, and a 20/1 shots wins 6 races in every 100 then you’d only make a profit on the horses priced 20/1. Successful betting is about value; backing horses that have a better chance of winning than their odds imply.
For each course and distance I will share the raw draw stats, and then dig deeper looking for other angles such as the going or when the number of runners gets close to the maximum. The draw stats data comes from the last six full flat seasons (2016 to 2021) and, as ever, the initial focus will be 8+ runner handicaps. The profit and loss figures are calculated to industry SP. I will also share Betfair SP figures when they make a significant difference. As with last time, as a bonus, I will share some ‘near misses’ that just failed to make the top 10. In fact, let’s start with those near misses:
Near Misses
Gowran Park 7f (good or firmer)
The first Irish course to be discussed is Gowran Park. This seven furlongs course and distance has shown a low bias for some time. More recently, ground staff at the track have introduced a false rail which may change things a little over time. At this point, it is too early to say how much of an affect it will have.
Let me first share the win percentages on all going for each third of the draw. Firstly a look at all races from 2016 to 2021:
Low draws have a definite edge during this overall time frame. They are drawn on the inside so no surprises there. This is not a huge bias, but it is significant. Here's what happens if we split this into 'three-yearly' chunks:
The more recent trio of seasons - the false rail was introduced in 2020 - does not seem to have affected the lower draws, but it seems that higher draws are now becoming more competitive against the middle. The PRB figures for each period give us more useful information:
These figures seem to re-affirm that low draws are enjoying the same sort of advantage they have in the past.
The bias, though, does seem to be stronger on better ground. Here are the splits for 8+ runner handicaps raced on good ground or firmer (2016-2021):
Horses drawn in the lowest stalls have won 50% of these races compared with just 13.9% for those drawn high. The place percentages show a very strong edge also, as do the A/E, IV and PRB figures.
Also going back further the 2009 to 2015 stats look as strong:
There is excellent correlation with the more recent data set which adds confidence to what we have uncovered so far.
It was noted in my previous piece that at some draw-biased courses exotic bets such as tricasts or forecasts can prove profitable. This is the case here, too. If you had permed the four lowest drawn horses in full cover tricasts you would have made a small profit of around 6p in the £. The tote trifecta variant would once again have been a far better option as you would have more than doubled your money! An ROI of 120% to be precise. Isn’t hindsight a wonderful thing?
To conclude, Gowran Park was close to making the Top 10 and one could make a sound case for it actually being in there. For the Top 10, though, I wanted to stick to what I perceived to be the strongest pure biases without any extra considerations such as going.
Tipperary 5f
A second Irish course in the 'near miss' squad is Tipperary over 5f. The stats are shown below:
It is a small data set but all areas correlate strongly in terms of high draws having a good edge. The period 2009 to 2015 is equally supportive of high draws.
Clearly opportunities will be limited, but that is certainly a bias to be aware of.
Catterick 5f (good to soft or softer)
Catterick is final stop off on my 'near miss' list. When the going gets softer, higher draws start to take control. Here are the figures for races on good to soft or softer ground:
The reason high draws tend to do well is that on softer ground jockeys often make a beeline to the stands side rail which appears quicker than the far rail under these conditions. A good example of this was seen in the 15 runner 5f handicap on 26th October 2021:
On this occasion, the jockeys headed towards the near side and, as can be seen, five of the six highest drawn runners filled the first five places.
Looking at all the races run on good to soft or softer, the three highest drawn runners have all made blind profit to not only BSP, but industry SP as well.
These are excellent returns across the board. In addition, combining the three highest draws in £1 combination straight forecasts would have yielded a profit of £62.37 (ROI +31.5%). Tricasts / trifectas with the highest four draws combined also would have produced a profit.
Before moving on, it should be pointed out that the bias gets stronger as the going gets softer (soft or heavy ground), although sample is quite small:
So keep an eye on the weather before racing at Catterick. This draw bias to high stalls on good to soft or softer looks a very playable one.
From the near misses - drumroll, please - it’s time for the top five!
5th position – Goodwood 1m
Goodwood over a mile has long been considered a track and trip where draw bias can play a major role. The shame from a punting perspective is that there are very few qualifying races each year. Hence we have a small sample but one with a clear edge to lower draws:
Low draws have a positive edge in all categories and I now want to look at the individual stall positions and how they have fared:
Normally with small samples I tend not to look at individual draws / stalls, but these data set show a cut-off point at stall 5. Horses drawn 1 to 5 have won 18 races from 115 runners (SR 15.7%); horses drawn 6 or higher have won just five races from 181 runners (SR 2.8%). This strongly suggests that horses drawn 1 to 5 have been massively favoured.
To conclude, while there are not many qualifying races each year, clearly when there are they are definitely worth a few minutes of our time.
4th position – Goodwood 7f
We drop a furlong at Goodwood to see a similar low draw bias to the mile trip. One advantage of the 7f distance is there are many more races each year as these stats show:
We can see strong figures across the board here for low draws. This low draw bias has been evident at Goodwood for most of the last 30 years!
It is worth noting the bias has looked less strong in the most recent three seasons although the PRB figure is still 0.54 for low versus 0.44 for high during that time. That might be down to the fact that the going has been a bit softer in more recent seasons. In general, Goodwood biases over the years have been less prevalent on softer going. The stats back this up when we look at the good or firmer data from 2016 to 2021. Under faster conditions it can be seen that the low draw bias does seem to get stronger:
All categories (win%, place%, A/E, IV, PRB) see an improvement for low draws on better ground as compared with the 'all races' data; and, all categories deteriorate slightly for high draws.
In terms of wins, which essentially is key, the draw win percentages for each third on good ground or firmer can be nicely illustrated by the following pie chart:
Six in every 10 races have been won by the lowest third of the draw under these firmer going conditions.
The 7f bias also seems to strengthen as the field size increases. In fields of 14 or more runners (all going), the draw stats for each third read as follows:
Once again we see a 60% win strike rate for low draws, but higher draws perform very poorly. We have seen this before when analysing round course biases. In big fields high draws are likely forced wide meaning they have to run further. Alternatively they can track to the inside, but then they will be faced with several horses to pass in the straight potentially needing good luck in running. It should also be noted that tracking to the inside early on losing ground also. Goodwood has a camber in the straight off which many hard luck stories are founded.
In conclusion, Goodwood over 7f has traditionally seen lower draws having the advantage. This seems to get more potent on good ground or firmer, and when the field size gets to 14+. Unsurprisingly, combining firmer ground and a bigger field accentuates the low advantage and the high disadvantage:
3rd position – Pontefract 1m
Moving into the top 3 and we travel north to Pontefract and its 1 mile trip. This is another round course bias where low draws dominate:
This is a very strong bias but, as I noted in my first article in the series, punters and bookmakers alike are much more aware of the strength of the inside edge now. Consequently, prices on the lowest drawn horses have contracted considerably in recent years. Nevertheless, the two lowest stalls have both made a profit to SP (combined profit of 15p in the £, and 21p in the £ at BSP). This is due to the fact that the two lowest drawn runners have won a remarkable 31 races between them. That means nearly 44% of all races have been won by the two stalls closest to the inside rail.
Races with big fields are rare but when we get to 13+ runners the bias seems to strengthen further:
Yes, I appreciate the sample is only 18 races, but low draws have won or placed four times more often than high draws (31 to 8). This is an eye-catching stat, as is the 0.62 to 0.40 PRB advantage to low draws over high. I think one can be fairly confident the bias does indeed gain potency in big field races.
Moving onto ground conditions, and for races on soft or heavy going, low drawn runners have won 13 of the 22 races, with high draws claiming a single solitary score. Again it's quite a small sample but the trends are clear. A similar pattern can be seen from the data between 2009 and 2015.
Having reviewed all 71 handicap races over 1 mile with 8+ runners, I can report that the exotic bets have once again proved a winner. If you had backed the two lowest drawn horses in £1 reverse forecasts you would have earned a profit of £34.06 (ROI +19.9%). The reverse Tote Exacta returns were even better with £66.50 profit (ROI +46.8%). Perming the four lowest drawn runners in combination tricasts would have yielded a small 2.2% return, while the trifecta would have harvested a very impressive 52.8% return.
These types of bets are not for everyone and they come with a low strike rate coupled with a potentially big bookmaker’s margin, but for small stakes the potential returns can be worth it. One good pay-out can really boost the bank.
Pontefract over a mile has a strong low bias where the focus should be primarily on the two lowest drawn runners. Personally, I would avoid horses drawn 9 or higher – these runners have combined to produced just 6 winners from 199 runners, a measly 3% strike rate.
2nd position – Pontefract 1m 2f
Staying at Pontefract we move up two furlongs to the mile and a quarter trip. I looked at this bias briefly in my second article in this series using the racecourse map below to show readers there is an extra left handed turn at this trip helping low draws further:
The draw stats are strong as one would expect:
At this distance compared to mile range, the market is not quite as aware of the edge low draws have, so finding past profitable angles ought to be possible. For a start, you would have made a blind profit to Betfair SP backing all four lowest drawn horses in the 39 races in the sample. Those 156 runners would have produced a profit of £23.73 to £1 level stakes equating to returns of just over 15p in the £. Amazing when you think about it really – backing four horses in every race for 39 races, and you would have made good money. The bottom four stalls accounted for 24 of the winners from 156 runners; stalls located five or more away from the inside rail accounted for 15 winners but from 242 runners.
Earlier, it was noted that the stats indicated that over a mile on soft or heavy ground the bias seems to get stronger. That theory is given extra confidence when we see the same pattern over this 1m 2f distance. It should be said there have only been 10 qualifying races on soft or heavy since 2016 but just look at the win percentages for each third of the draw:
Nine of the ten races in this small sample were won by low draws. In addition to that, the win and placed stats combined correlate strongly as we can see:
I am confident that on soft or heavy ground the bias gets more potent.
Moving back to the ‘all races’ stats, one remarkable fact is that the lowest five draws filled the first three places on no less than 11 occasions, two of which happened within an hour and a half of each other!
It should come as no surprise therefore that perming these five draws in tricasts and trifectas would have landed favourable returns. Perming five horses in all possible combinations of 1st, 2nd and 3rd amounts to a chunky 60 bets per race, so using small stakes of 10p per line (bet) makes sense, bringing in the 'per race' cost at £6. If we had done this perm using the tricast in all 39 races there would have been an outlay of £234, with £281.96 returned, giving us a profit of £47.90 (ROI +20.5%). As we have seen thus far, the trifecta tends to outdo the tricast bet, and it does it here - in style. Trifecta returns would have been £529.13 giving us a whopping profit of £295.13 (ROI +126.1%).
Pontefract over 1m 2f is a course and distance on which to keep a close eye from a draw perspective this year. It will be interesting to monitor the prices of the lower draws in the next couple of seasons; if they contract more, then profits will be harder to come by.
And, finally, it’s time for my number one draw bias in Britain and Ireland...
1st position – Chester 5f
Yes, I fully appreciate this is not a huge shocker, but I am confident about its status as the number 1 spot: the award goes to the minimum trip at Chester. This is despite the fact that they are moving the inside rail from time to time in an attempt to negate the bias. The rail movement seems to affect this shortest trip the least, and draw bias fans should stick to the minimum 5f trip and not include the extended 5½f range in considerations.
Here are the stats:
As I've said, yes, the bias is well known, but as far as draw biases go, it is still the strongest. The problem, of course, is making a profit from this widely held awareness. I discussed in the first article in the series how the prices at Chester on low drawn runners have contracted in recent years. Ultimately, this is why it is hard to make profits at Chester any more. That is, low still wins as often as it ever did (give or take - see below), but the available prices are tighter these days.
Going back to how the rail movement may be affecting this minimum 5f trip, if we compare the PRB figures from 2016 to 2018 with 2019 to 2021, we can start to see a slight weakening of the bias.
High draws seem to struggle just as much as ever, but middle draws are a little more competitive as a result of the false rail. All in all, though, low draws continue to enjoy a very significant edge.
In terms of running styles, a low draw coupled with a prominent run style, be it leading or tracking the pace, is a potent combination here as the image below illustrates.
We can see that the advantage of a low draw disappears if you race near the back early. Low draws that led early or raced prominently have been responsible for 16 winners from 59 runners (27% strike rate), which compares very well next to middle or high draws that raced mid division early or were held up – they have provided just 3 winners from 126 runners (2.4% strike rate).
The evidence is clear: combine a low draw with early pace over 5f at Chester and then you have a very effective combination.
With these five top draw bias courses, then, I've demonstrated my personal top ten UK and Irish draw biases, as well as a few 'bonus' also ran's. Please share your thoughts in the comments, especially if you think I’ve missed one. Thanks as always for reading, and good luck.
So the age-old Derby formula will not be holding this year, writes Tony Stafford. Third in the 2,000 Guineas (well fourth it used to be, as I conceded last week) meant first in the Derby at Epsom, but Luxembourg is lame. He will therefore not be carrying the Coolmore/Westerberg colours into yet another very probable annexation of English racing’s most sought-after prize.
Just as well then that a legion of bench-warmers took the opportunity at Chester and Lingfield to step up into the principal positions. First it was Changingoftheguard, running all over Godolphin’s theretofore Derby second favourite, New London, in the Chester Vase. It was great to see a revitalised Ryan Moore dominating the entire three-day fixture with superlative tactical riding from start to finish.
Chester revealed Ryan back to his very best, remarkably so in the face of the continuing serious health problems of his younger brother Josh, which have brought universal messages of sympathy from all around the racing world.
Changingoftheguard won the Chester Vase by a wide margin and then, in picking up the Dee Stakes with Star Of India, the Ballydoyle team had already started stacking up the back-up squad for the first Saturday in June.
It’s probably worth mentioning that their other three runners at the meeting - the filly Thoughts Of June in the Cheshire Oaks (there’s a name to conjure with!), Temple Of Artemis in the three-year-old handicap on the Thursday, and a lone Friday runner, Cleveland, who picked up the Chester Cup almost as an after-thought - all also crossed the line in front.
Then on Saturday it was on to Lingfield for their Derby Trial and, faced by another Godolphin/Appleby/Buick favourite in Walk Of Stars, Ryan and his mount, United Nations, were comfortably the best on the day.
Paul Smith, son of Derrick, was quizzed at every call on Saturday (as was Kevin Buckley at Chester) as to where he thought the pecking order might now be behind Luxembourg, but that was before yesterday’s news that the favourite will not run. Now I’m sure if you were to ask Paul or Derrick Smith, or Michael Tabor, or John and the junior Magniers or Georg von Opel or even Peter Brant in whose colours he runs, they would all shout in unison, “Stone Age!”
Where did that colt suddenly appear from, you would be entitled to ask? Well, certainly not from the upper reaches of the Classic consciousness after his five winless, although not promise-free, runs as a juvenile.
They brought a couple of second places in Group races, notably a one-length defeat behind the James Ferguson-trained Kodiac colt El Bodegon in the Group 1 Criterium de Saint-Cloud over ten furlongs in testing ground in late October. If it proved Stone Age’s stamina credentials – as if they were ever in doubt – it certainly also hurried Ferguson into the upper stratum of international racing.
El Bodegon has yet to appear since, but he has a Dante entry at York this week and then is a 25-1 shot for the Derby. That makes him ten times the price of Stone Age after a 13-length reappearance win at Navan on March 22 and then a five-and-a-half length romp in the Derby Trial at Leopardstown yesterday.
Each successive winning triallist won with authority, with Changingoftheguard and Stone Age showing the most. It will shock nobody to learn that all four colts – and the Cheshire Oaks heroine, too, are by Galileo, his famed Classic-winning genes still as effective a year on from his death at the age of 23.
Talking of Chester, only one of the five O’Brien winners was not by Galileo. Cleveland, who was stepping up a mile from his longest previous race distance to win the great staying handicap, is by Camelot, also the sire of Luxembourg. Camelot will doubtless have other chances of siring the winner of the second Classic he won.
The hardest part for any trainer is to break into the big league. Last week George Boughey won the 1,000 Guineas with Cachet and Ferguson must also be harbouring that dream, probably first imagined in the years his father John was, with Simon Crisford, at the helm of running the Godolphin interests of Sheikh Mohammed.
Another young Newmarket handler who may not be too far away from joining them is Tom Clover. On Saturday Clover took the Oaks Trial at Lingfield, his first stakes win, with the unbeaten Rogue Millennium, a bargain buy for the Rogues Gallery from the Shadwell dispersal. She was bought on the strong recommendation of her previous handler, Marcus Tregoning, who never got her to the track. A beautiful, strong daughter of Dubawi, she cost 35,000gns at auction and with her pedigree, looks and above all ability must be worth half a million!
I’d love her to win the Oaks. Tom and his wife Jackie, daughter of the late and much-missed Classic trainer Michael Jarvis, are showing signs of moving smoothly onto racing’s top table;
*
One necessary ingredient in racing is luck. Another is the ability to take an opportunity when it comes along. On Friday morning in Kentucky, one of the original 20 horses in the field for the Kentucky Derby at Churchill Downs, Louisville, was withdrawn owing to a late injury.
That left the way for the 21st acceptor on the list, Rich Strike, an 80/1 shot trained by Eric Reed and ridden by the unknown South American jockey Sonny Leon, to squeeze into the line-up and race from the widest draw of all.
His two best runs this spring had been placed efforts (third and fourth) in minor stakes behind Tiz The Bomb, favoured on both occasions, each time as a 20/1 shot or longer at Turfway Park. That horse was also in Saturday’s field and started a 30/1 shot.
Race commentator Larry Colmuss couldn’t have considered him much either because the second highest-priced winner of the race in the past 110 years had already run past the two favourites into the lead before he even noticed him.
Rich Strike bolted up and afterwards his trainer, who had the mortification of losing a large part of his string, his records, trophies and memorabilia in a stable fire a few years ago, said he had been very hopeful as he knew he would stay.
I don’t know what the horse is like in his stable but I can honestly say I have never seen so graphic a sight of one horse trying literally to savage another. For several minutes as Sonny Leon was trying to participate in a post-race interview his horse was attacking the pony, despite all the efforts of that horse’s rider.
Eric Reed certainly had luck on his side when he decided to claim the colt out of a race on the same Churchill Downs track last autumn. You pay your money beforehand over there, and if they run badly you have to bite the bullet.
Eric Reed and his owners didn’t have a bullet to bite, just the thrill of seeing the horse, bred and raced in the famed Calumet Farm colours, romp home by more than 17 lengths. Even then, thoughts of the Kentucky Derby must have been some way from even their optimistic minds.
It is hard not to sympathise with the jockey who rode him that day. That young man had to endure each of the two days of the meeting riding a single unfancied and unsighted horse, before watching the Derby. An Englishman who between 2010 and 2017 rode between a high of 39 and low of 15 wins over those eight seasons, he left for a new career in the US the following year.
Initially his move to the US brought great success and by early December 2018 he had ridden well over 50 winners, enough to put him second in the Fair Grounds, Louisiana, jockey standings.
No doubt he would never have expected to have ridden a Kentucky Derby winner in that horse’s only previous career win. The way Rich Strike finished on his return to Churchill Downs offers hope that the winning will not stop there.
Anyway, have you guessed the identity of the jockey? I think I’ d like to delay the revelation to allow me what I have always thought was the funniest moment ever at a disciplinary inquiry in the UK. Up before the terrifying if slightly out-of-touch gentleman in charge of the inquiry, upon being asked for his name, our hero said: “Beschizza” which the gent misinterpreted as “Biscuit, sir”. “Well Mr Biscuit,” he began. No wonder Adam of that name thought he’d better go elsewhere to ply his trade.
A nephew of Julia Feilden, he’s very much from a racing background and if he hasn’t quite made the big time in the US he will always be able to tell his grandchildren of the day he rode the horse that was to win the Kentucky Derby to a 17-length win also at Churchill Downs.
- TS
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/StoneAge_DerrinstudDerbyTrial_Leopardstown_2022.jpg319830Tony Staffordhttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngTony Stafford2022-05-09 07:50:102022-05-09 09:11:03Monday Musings: Shocks on the Derby Trails
In the first article in this series I looked at how the draw can influence the market and how the market can change over time to compensate, writes Dave Renham.
Occasionally the market still gets it wrong regarding draw bias but that is increasingly rare. This is because horse racing betting markets are usually extremely efficient (by the time the race goes off, at least), not just taking the draw into account, but multiple other key factors. In this article I am going to share more draw-based research that I hope you will find interesting and ultimately useful for your own betting.
For those Gold members of Geegeez, the good news is that you are able to research the draw in two places: the Draw Analyser and the Query Tool. How you use each to study the draw is partly personal choice, but I would suggest that best insights are obtained when deploying both, not just one or the other; I use both tools for my research. Essentially, if I am just looking at the draw and nothing else I will use the Draw Analyser, but if I want to use the draw in conjunction with other factors then I’ll use the Query Tool.
When using the Geegeez Draw Analyser the stalls are split into three sections or ‘thirds’ – low, middle and high. What this means is that in a 12 runner race for example, draws 1 to 4 would be in the low third, 5 to 8 in the middle, and 9 to 12 high.
TYPES OF DRAW BIAS
I want to start by talking about types of draw bias. I believe there are two types of bias. Firstly a bias that favours a particular section of the draw; secondly a bias against a particular section of the draw. Let me illustrate with a couple of examples using draw data from 2016 to 2021. Unless otherwise stated, in this article I am going to focus on 8+ runner handicaps during this six-year period.
Pontefract 1m 2f
It is rare to get effective draw biases at distances of 1m2f or more, but Pontefract is an exception. If we look at the track configuration we can perhaps see why this bias exists:
Low draws are positioned on the inside and with an early left turn this gives them the advantage of taking the shortest route assuming they break well. In contrast, higher drawn runners are either stuck out wide round the first turn or forced to tuck in mid pack or near the back, or they need to be rushed forward to get a position thus using energy very early in the race.
There is a second left hand turn after about another two furlongs cementing the early positional advantage for low drawn runners; and there is a third turn about a quarter mile from home which again favours those racing near to the inside rail. Let’s look at the most recent six-season data now:
The stats show a clear advantage to one section of the draw (LOW); there is a significant advantage in most areas. Low drawn runners win more often, place more often, have higher IV values and higher PRB figures, too. However, backing all such runners to SP would have made a small loss and the A/E index value is lower than the middle section’s A/E value. This factor was referenced in the first article: the market at Pontefract clearly appreciates there is a draw bias. Just because one section of the draw is clearly favoured, this not in itself a license to print money! For the record, however, you would have made a small profit of £11.98 during this period backing low draws to Betfair SP.
Pontefract over 1m 2f is an example of a bias strongly favouring a particular section. With middle draws out-performing higher draws, this is an example of a fairly linear relationship: the lower the draw the better. Draw 1 is better than draw 6; draw 6 is better than draw 10 etc.
Now for an example of a draw bias against a particular section of the draw.
Musselburgh 5f
The sprint 5f trip at Musselburgh is essentially a straight five but there is a slight kink to the left at the 3f pole which can slightly hinder wider drawn runners. With Musselburgh being a right handed course at longer distances, it means horses drawn next to the rail are the higher drawn runners. Here are the stats:
This is far from being a strong draw bias, but there is a bias against lower drawn runners compared with high and middle drawn runners. Low drawn runners come out comfortably bottom in all of the parameters as shown in the breakdown above. Looking at 2009 to 2015 we get a similar picture which gives further confidence that this is likely to continue this season and beyond.
It does seem that the kink to the left at the 3f pole is enough to make life more difficult for the wide (low)-drawn runners.
Indeed if we ignore 8- and 9-runner races (the smallest fields), and look at handicap races with ten or more runners we get the following results:
All of the low drawn variables deteriorate further, and such horses are winning only just above half of the races they statistically should (IV 0.53, an Impact Value of 1.00 being on par). Consequently, both middle and high draws are winning more races than they statistically should. One would expect to see those wider draws (low) struggling more over 5f at Musselburgh as the field size increases. However, it is always good to see results in black and white - as per the image above - to back up a theory.
INDIVIDUAL DRAWS / STALLS
A question: when you look at draw biased course and distances, what do you focus in on? The so called favoured third of the draw only? The favoured half of the draw? Or do you go further and have a preference for specific draws / stalls?
There is an argument to back the horse that is in ‘pole position’ especially on a turning track. One would think that would be the horse housed closest to the inside (i.e. drawn 1). However, the stats I have uncovered suggest differently. The stats suggest the second closest horse to the inside (i.e. actual draw 2 - 'actual' draw being the real position a horse was drawn, after accounting for any non-runners) is generally most favoured.
To show this in more detail I have looked at all 8+ runner handicaps over 5f and 6f run around a bend (2016-2021). For the record there are 12 UK courses where 5f and/or 6f races occur round a bend (seven turf courses and five on the all-weather).
Firstly I want to compare win and placed strike rates (N.B. Place SR% includes winners with the placed runners).
The margins may look quite small but they are significant as the data set covers over 2400 handicap races over 5/6f. All other key stats also point in favour of 'actual' draw 2. Firstly A/E values:
Runners drawn 2 have been far better value than those drawn 1. This is a much bigger difference than I had expected.
Next a look at profit / loss figures. Firstly a comparison of traditional SP figures (to £1 level stakes):
Losses of nearly 26p in the £ if backing all horses drawn 1 are bankruptcy territory; a smaller 8p in the £ loss for all horses drawn 2 would see a far more protracted slide to the proverbial poorhouse. But, here's Betfair SP to save the day:
The flow of bleeding has been stemmed from stall 1 but there are still bank-destroying losses; whereas trap 2 is now in the black!
But... we already know that profit / loss figures can easily be skewed by big-priced outlier winners, especially using Betfair odds. So I thought it worth comparing stats for the two draws when the Betfair SP was no bigger than 16.0. Here is what I found:
We can now see that big priced winners are not skewing the stats. Draw 2 once again has a better strike rate (both win and placed), better returns and a much stronger A/E value.
So what is actually happening here to promote stall two above the notionally best-drawn box, stall one? That is something I have pondered for many years because I have seen this type of pattern repeating time and again.
One plausible theory is that it may simply be down to the fact that horses drawn right next to the rail have less room for manoeuvre. With a rail on their inside, if they break from the stalls poorly then they are very likely to be stuck behind one or more horses. Their options are compromised until they've completed the turn by which time it may be too late. Meanwhile, horses drawn 2 have a little more space either side of them and hence more options if they break slowly. Whether this theory is true or not I obviously cannot say, but there is logic there, and it is a pattern replicated in US dirt racing at sprint distances around a turn.
What is clear in terms of the stats: in 5-6f handicaps round a turn it is preferable to be drawn 2 rather than 1.
Before moving on, I mentioned that 12 courses were in that sample and, of those 12 courses, only Kempton saw a clear advantage to horses drawn 1 over those drawn 2. Two courses - Epsom (6f) and Wetherby 5½f - had limited data (just 16 and 15 races respectively), while the other nine courses all favoured horses drawn 2 over horses drawn 1, most of them fairly strongly.
GOOD DRAWS WITH PRICE CONSIDERATIONS
As we have seen, backing a specific draw / stall under certain conditions could produce a profitable scenario. However, this idea is full of risks as we are pinning our hopes on one stall position and nothing else. So, how about combining a good draw with market factors? This is what we are going to look at next.
I have taken six of the strongest draw biases from the past six seasons (these are Chester over 5f and 7f; Goodwood over 7f and 1 mile; and Pontefract over 1 mile and 1 mile 2 furlongs). From there I have focused on the four stalls closest to the favoured inside rail: actual draws 1 to 4. Then I have ordered them depending on price. My idea is to compare price position of these good draws to see if there are patterns to be found.
By way of an example, let’s imagine the following scenario:
That would mean an order as follows:
Here are the actual results for the six course/distances (profit/loss has been calculated to Betfair SP and we are again focusing on handicaps with eight or more runners):
Chester 5f
Chester 7f
Goodwood 7f
Goodwood 1 mile
Pontefract 1 mile
Pontefract 1 mile 2 furlongs
Combining the six courses we get the following results:
It seems therefore the best value lies at either end of the price position spectrum. The shortest priced runners drawn 1 to 4 have made the biggest profit. They have also had a decent strike rate of 28.6%. The biggest priced runner from draws 1 to 4 have also made good profits although it would have been a bit of a rollercoaster with just 13 wins from 258 runners (SR 5%).
So is this the way to go? I'm not sure, but I believe the idea is worthy of more digging in the future. I’ll add it to my rapidly expanding research list!
- DR
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Pontefract_Pipalong_BillesdenBrook.jpg319830Dave Renhamhttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngDave Renham2022-04-26 07:16:002022-04-26 07:16:00Draw Bias 2022: Part 2
It has been a couple of years since I wrote some articles on the draw and, with the flat season hitting stride now, it is a good time to revisit the subject, writes Dave Renham. The draw will always have special place in my heart because it was essentially where my racing journey began.
Sprintline 2002: The Effects of the Draw - co-authored by Dave Renham
While at university I became interested in horse racing stats and I soon realised that there was a potential betting edge in focusing on certain sections of the draw at a few specific courses. Back then, in the late 80s and early 90s, the courses and distances with the strongest biases were at Beverley over five furlongs, Thirsk over five and six furlongs (especially on firmer ground), Chester from five to seven furlongs, Lingfield (turf course) five to seven furlongs, and Sandown over five furlongs when the stalls were placed on the far side. The beauty back then for draw punters like myself was that there was a decent edge for those of us who considered ourselves ‘in the know’. I was able to find plenty of betting opportunities that represented good value.
Unfortunately, if predictably, it was not long before draw biases started to be shared in racing articles which were then followed by comprehensive books on the subject. Indeed, I co-authored one of them!
As with many things, when a good source of highlighting value bets is found, within a few years the edge starts to disappear. This is very much a horse racing trait: good ideas have their initial edge because the majority of people are not aware of that value finding approach. As time goes on, however, the betting public and the bookmakers catch up and, as a result, prices tend to contract and the value begins to erode. This has happened to some considerable extent with the draw over recent years.
Using Chester’s five-furlong trip as an example, let us examine what has happened to the prices of the ‘best’ two stall positions over the past several years. The stalls in question are draws 1 and 2, those closest to the inside rail. I am looking here at handicap races with eight or more runners where draw bias tends to be more consistent:
Chester’s tight track has long shown a bias to lower draws and this has generally been well documented and widely understood. However, nowadays your average punter has had more exposure to draw biases than they did twenty years ago which explains the diminishing price pattern. The graph above shows that horses drawn in stall 1 had an average decimal SP price of 6.58 from 2003 to 2007, dropping to 5.19 over the most recent five-year period. Likewise, we have seen the prices of horses drawn in stall 2 dropping from 9.06 to 6.46.
Some statisticians may observe that despite the relatively solid sample sizes average prices can be skewed by an occasional bigger-priced runner. That would certainly be possible, so it make sense to compare the median prices as well. To remind you of your school maths class, median is the middle value when all are ordered from lowest to highest. This gives us another type of average, the findings of which are here:
Once again we see the same pattern: the prices for both draws 1 and 2 have dropped quite significantly over the period of study.
A further measure to illustrate how the draw affects the prices at Chester is if we look at all stall / draw positions from 2017 to 2021 and compare their average prices. We already know that the average for horses drawn in stall 1 has been 5.19 and stall 2 is 6.46. I have graphed the average prices for each stall over 5f at Chester, although due to small sample sizes in higher drawn runners I have combined those drawn in stall 8 or higher:
As we can see, despite a slight ‘blip’ with stalls / draws 6 and 7, the average price increases as the stall position increases (and is thus further away from the favoured inside rail). Looking at these data, we could confidently argue that at Chester over 5f the draw impacts on price more than any other factor.
I briefly want to go back to discuss the price reduction we saw earlier in the lowest two stall positions when comparing 2003-2007 average SP prices with 2017-2021. This has actually not coincided with the draw bias getting stronger; in fact, the draw bias has stayed roughly the same. This can be illustrated when breaking our draw data into three time frames between the years 2003 and 2021. The actual draw positions are also split into three: low third, middle third and high third.
As can be seen, low draws have continued to dominate in each time frame. This is further evidence of the fact that the price reduction is almost certainly down to more punters being aware of how fundamentally important the draw is to the business of finding winners at Chester over this minimum 5f trip. From a betting perspective, therefore, much or all of the value in lower drawn horses has now evaporated. This can be illustrated in terms of percentage returns (ROI%) if backing all horses from the bottom third (low) of the draw over different time frames.
I still find it remarkable that up to 2015 you could have made a blind profit at SP by backing all low drawn horses in 8+ handicaps over five furlongs at Chester. All good things come to an end, however, and that has not been the case in recent years. In the five year period 2016 to 2021, losses accrued were 13.7% of stakes. Ouch.
Appreciating and therefore deploying draw bias is not merely about looking at the performances of different sections of the draw; no, we also have to be acutely aware of how the market adjusts for such factors.
Being able to exploit the draw to one's advantage has also been affected in recent years by racecourse officials using other means of negating any potential bias. One way this can be done is by moving running rails which potentially changes part of the ground over which races take place as well as sometimes subtly changing the race distance by a few yards. The other, more notable, fly in the ointment has been the change in watering systems that most tracks now use. Some 20 or 30 years ago many course watering systems were badly affected by wind speed and direction, and hence certain parts of the track remained drier - and therefore quicker - giving rise to draw biases. Nowadays, though, the equipment has become more sophisticated and the water is spread much more evenly.
I mentioned earlier that Beverley over five furlongs used to be one of the strongest draw biases back in the day, and this can be seen when you look at the data. From 1998 to 2003 in 8+ runner handicaps the low third of the draw housed the winner 63.3% of the time, while the highest third won just 10% during that period. From 2004 to 2009, the strength of this bias appeared to dip a little but the low third still accounted for 53.4% of all the winners (high won a still dismal 15%). However, from 2010 to 2015 the low win percentage dropped to just under 42%, while high had narrowed the gap with 23.1% winners; and, from 2016 to 2021 it dropped to 40.8% low and 26.5% high. Over time, that's quite a big change. Yes, low draws are still favoured but the huge edge that there once was is no more.
Exactly why this has happened I cannot be sure; it is probably down to better watering and maintenance of the track. However, what is interesting is the fact that the prices on the best drawn horses have not changed much. Comparing the 2003 to 2007 segment with 2016 to 2021 here are the average prices for stalls 1 and 2:
Horses drawn in stall 1 have, on average, started at slightly shorter prices in the last five seasons (12 versus 11.42); stall 2 has seen an increase but a modest one when you consider the draw bias is nowhere near as potent these days. The median prices back up the raw average data as the table below shows:
What seems to be happening here therefore is the market at Beverley is still assuming the draw bias is as strong as it was back in the early 2000s. Unlike the Chester market, which has adapted as one might expect, this Beverley market has not: in reality, the odds should on average be higher than they currently are. The bitesize takeaway is that lower draws are generally poor value.
Another thing that has changed markedly in the past few years is the general appreciation that draw bias does not only occur over sprint trips. Pontefract, for example, over a mile and a mile and a quarter, boasts two of the strongest draw biases currently in play. Looking at 8+ runner 1 mile handicaps at Pontefract, it can be seen that this is a case of the betting market now cottoning on to the draw bias. This is in stark contrast to data gathered in 5f handicaps at Beverley.
Let’s compare once again the same two time frames - 2003 to 2007 with 2017 to 2021. Here are the average prices for stalls 1 and 2:
The average price of horses drawn in stall 1 has nearly halved; the figures for horses drawn in stall 2 have also contracted quite noticeably. Once again the median prices correlate strongly:
What this means, therefore, is that although low draws hold a significant edge over 1 mile at Pontefract the current prices on offer are so low on average, that they too are now generally poor value. We can see this in black and white when I share the fact that from 2009 to 2013 backing all low drawn horses at Pontefract over 1 mile in 8+ runner handicaps would have yielded a 13% profit; from 2017 to 2021 this flipped to a 22% loss.
This Ponte pattern mirrors the change we saw earlier in the Chester 5f prices and subsequent poorer value of low drawn runners in recent seasons.
In order to fully make the most of draw bias, or indeed perceived draw bias, it is clear we need to be aware of market factors, not just the raw draw data splits. Let us close with a look at Catterick over six furlongs – again focusing on 8+ runner handicaps. Because this six-furlong trip is contested around a bend there is a perception that lower draws have a slight edge. This is borne out when we compare the combined average prices of the three lowest drawn runners with the three highest drawn runners going back to 2016.
A difference on average of two and a half points. That may not seem much of a difference but over several races it can make a critical difference to our bottom line. During this time frame both sections of the draw have won virtually the same number of races (26 versus 27), implying that there is no bias to lower drawn runners at all. At least partly as a consequence of this perception, backing the three lowest drawn stalls would have produced crippling losses of 45.8% to SP, while blindly supporting the top three stalls would have produced a profit of 10.5%.
One observation when comparing odds over time might legitimately be that field sizes truncating has had a bearing on prices. While that impact should be spread across the full range of stalls anyway, this final chart also helps to imply that field size is likely not the main factor at play here.
It is a little 'busy', but essentially we have two lines which we might expect to be correlated - perceived win chance (expressed as SP) and actual strike rate (expressed as win %). Although the win strike rates jump around a bit, the blue dotted 'trendline' shows no advantage; compare that, however, with the orange trendline for average win odds which rises from low to high.
*
The aim of this article is to illustrate the important links between draw position and price, and to highlight the changing nature of some draw biases. Profitable betting is about getting value – well drawn horses only offer us value if the price is right. Also, we need to be aware that 'poorly' drawn horses can also offer value, but again only if the price is right.
- DR
https://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/chester_roodee.jpg320830Dave Renhamhttps://www.geegeez.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/geegeez_banner_new_170x78.pngDave Renham2022-04-19 07:58:122022-04-19 08:10:00Draw Bias 2022: Part 1
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.
