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

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

All Runners: Surface Same or Different

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

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

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

 

 

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

 

 

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

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

 

 

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

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

 

 

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

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

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

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

LTO Winners: Surface Same or Different

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

 

 

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

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

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

 

 

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

 

 

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

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

 

 

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

 

Surface Same or Different: Trainers

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

George Boughey

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

 

 

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

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

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

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

 

Charlie Johnston

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

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

 

David O’Meara

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

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

 

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

 

Concluding Thoughts

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

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

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

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

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

- DR