I have ‘borrowed’ the quote below from a recent blog by Kieran at Make Your Betting Pay. I will put the link at the bottom of this blog for the full article. It is so useful, especially the table, and uses such a scientific approach, that i have used about half the blog below.
“We need to strike the right balance between leveraging our profits and protecting the integrity of our bank.
My usual starting point when carrying out this kind of analysis would be to calculate the longest expected losing run over 1000 bets. There is a formula for calculating this (mail me if you’re interested) but I tend to use a table which makes life a lot easier. I’ve reproduced the table below (it’s accurate enough for our purposes)
The important thing to remember here is that the larger the number of bets you look at, the longer the likely losing run will be. As an example with a 15% strike rate looked at over 1000 bets you are likely to hit a maximum losing run of 43 bets. However, if you were to have 10,000 bets with a similar strike rate, at some point you are likely to hit a losing run of 57 bets. That being the case, it’s useful to have a reasonable idea of the number of bets your selection method is going to throw up over a period of time. If you are looking at a method that throws up 300 bets a year then calculating your longest likely losing run over 1000 bets is ample. If you are looking at a method that throws up 10,000 bets a year, you need to dig a bit deeper than that.
Let’s assume the method we are analysing has 1000 bets a year with a strike rate of 60%. We can see from the table that we are likely to hit 8 consecutive losers at some point during year 1.
You can see that if we were to choose a 10% staking plan on such a method, we are almost certain to hit trouble and quite possibly decimate our bank at some point.
We therefore need our bank to be several times the size of our longest likely losing run – it is well within the realms of statistical possibility that we could get 2 such runs in quick succession!
For safety, I would say it is best to work with your bank broken down into a number of points that equates to 5 times your longest likely losing sequence.”
I think 5 times the maximum losing run is on the conservative side. A lot depends on what sort of start you get. If you’re off to a flyer, by the time the inevitable ‘crippler’ comes along you should have taken out more than enough profit to set up a new bank and won’t care. If you start on the bad run your faith in the system/method/tipster etc is shaken and you would probably abandon what may be a good thing. What is often forgotten though is that with percentage staking the stakes go down during losing runs so a losing run of ten wouldn’t be ten points lost but considerably less.
I heartily agree with everything else though. There is no doubt that basing your staking on avoiding one long losing run is folly as it is more common that a series of losing runs is the bank breaker. Therefore it is wise to allow for this.
The debate will rage on but, in the end, we are back to another grossly underestimated factor in betting – psychology. Some thrive on risk others prefer the more softly softly ” I don’t need the stress as I would like to live to spend the winnings” approach. There is no “wrong” nor “right” way, (try telling the Frankie Dettori backers that day at Ascot that they were throwing their money away backing 7 horse accas!). Granted, the same people could do a £1 acca 7 every day for the rest of their lives and lose every day. But they wouldn’t be complaining as the stakes would come out of the massive interest on their winnings!
There again though, if you are backing seriously, you have to work on the basis of probability and not possibility so it is a question of finding the optimum. For those who shun risk it will be five times the max or more. For those who thrive on it, maybe twice the max and for those who are trying to strike a happy medium, 2-4 times the max.
Whatever your appetite for risk, the table above offers a basis for making an informed choice. You can’t say you weren’t warned!
Here’s the link to Kieran’s site: http://makeyourbettingpay.co.uk/ . You will find the whole blog on there dated 18/1/12.
NEWBURY 4.15 THE LOCKINGE STAKES
This race has been dominated by 3 trainers in the past 18 years; Richard Hannon has won 3 of the last 5 runnings, Saed Bin Suroor 5 of the past 18 runnings and Michael Stoute 3.
Fav won 9 of the past 18 runnings and second favs 4 times
One 20/1 shot won but all the others were returned 9/1 or less
First 4 in betting won 16/18
The 12 that had a handicap ratings were all rated 116 plus
4 and 5yo's have completely dominated this with 17 winners between them and a wins to runs ratio of 13%. The only other winner was 6 with a strike rate of 6%.
ALL had between 1-6 runs in the last year
ALL were either making their seasonal debut or had just one run that season. 15 the former, 3 the latter.
16 won at 1 mile plus (10F max)
Distance winner x 15
6 won last time, 4 were second and ALL finished in the first 6 in their latest run
ALL ran between 8-30 or 121 -365days since their last run
Other than the trainers recods in this race listed at the start, the following are of note:
Willie Haggas has a 5/18 strike rate with his older horses here and he trains Yuftur who has plenty going for him trends-wise except he would be the joint longest priced winner of this in the last 18 runnings.
Michael Stoute has won with 4 of his 13 four yo plus runners here in the past 5 seasons and he runs second fav Integral, who has to overcome the stat that ALL the last 18 winners finished in the first 6 last time.
If we start with the 16 winners from the first 4 in the betting (9 of which were favs) then look at 4 or 5 yo's with a rating of 114 plus and a first 6 run last time plus a win at between a mile and a mile and a quarter, we are left with two horses from the yard who have farmed this over the past 5 years – the Hannon stable.
Last year's 2000 Guinees winner on his seasonal debut, NIGHT OF THUNDER, conqueror of Kingman and Australia in that race will surely get the pace he needs in this 18 runner race and is the fav (9 of the last 18 won) and deservedly so. Though it is interesting that Richard Hughes (who i presume had the choice) has opted for third fav Toormore who may be more tot he taste of each way backers
SAN 3.50 BET 365 CHASE (THE WHITBREAD) – last 18 runnings
A mixture. 9 were returned between 14/1 & 25/1 (twice).
Yet 14 came from the first 8 in the betting, which would mean 14/1 or less today.
17 carried 11-5 or less
ALl ran off handicap marks of 154 or less (which ties in exactly with the weight stat)
6, 7, 8 & 11 yo's have the best record with 1 win from 13 runners (8%), 4-41 ((10%), 6-89 (9%) and 3-34 (9%) respectively.
9 yo's have won 3 times from 78 runners (4%) but 10 yo's scored just 1-69 and 7 of the 20 runners are 10 yo's!
ALL had won over at least two and a half miles with 15 winning over at least 3 miles
15 had run between 3 and 5 times that season
Just 2 were last time out winners but 5 finished second last time. 11 posted a first 6 finish last time.
NONE fell last time, (from 34 last time out fallers to try) though two unseated and one pulled up.
All ran within the last 60 days.
The bang in form (12 winners from 34 runners the last 14 days) yard is that of Philip Hobbs.He runs three, two of which are 10 yo's, who have a terrible record in this. The other one is the 8 yo Record Spring who ticks a lot of boxes except his lack of a first 6 run last timeand is shortlisted.
Paul Nicholls is the top trainer at the course and his chasers here are 27/94. He saddles the highly rated (and weighted) Unioniste who, as well as his weight, has the last time out fall to overcome stats wise.
His other runner Has a near perfect trends profile but is very quirky. Just A Par doesn't wear blinkers for nothing but he is definitely one for the shortlist.
Henry de Bromhead doesn't send many over to Sandown but they are to be watched when he does. He has sent 2 chasers over the past few years and 1 has won. This is not a great race for the Irish but they have won 2 of the last 10 runnings. He trains Grand Jesture who, though he has the negative of no 3 miles win, was second at the Cheltenham Festival in a valuable 3m 1f handicap. Another for the shortlist.
Looking for a horse from the first 8 in the betting, aged 6, 7, 8 & 10, that had 3 to 5 runs this season, won over 3 miles plus and preferably with a first 6 place last time out, within the last 60 days leads us to no qualifier. The nearest are Grand Jesture And Lost Legend (6 runs this season) who finished 2nd and 6th in the 51K handicap at Cheltenhham referred to above won by susequent strongly fancied Grand National faller, the Druid's Nephew.
Grand Jesture was beaten only three and three quarter lengths that day with Lost Legend a further 12 lengths back. However, the latter gave the former a pound that day but receives 6 lbs tomorrow, so it could be closer this time. Also, Jonjo has a good record in these staying handicaps, though not this particular race.
Neither have won over the required 3 miles though, as had 15 of the last 18 winners.
To find one that has, you have to go outside the first 8 in the betting, right up to equalling the 25/1 biggest SP for this race during the past 18 renewals.
With Paul Nicholls record in big races throughout the season, it would be folly to dismiss a horse that ticks all the trends boxes. Just A Par beat the smart Third Intention by 14 lengths in a 3 mile Grade 2 in November 2013, gettingan RPR of 155 (runs off 140 tomorrow). However, having followed up with a decent 7th in the Sun Alliance Chase at the 2014 Festival, he seems to have gone backwards and has had an assortment of headgear on and off for his last 7 races. He achieved his best RPR since his defeat of Third Intention last time when third in a £7K handicap, but here is what the write up says: "Never travelling and pushed along throughout, in last trio, in touch 13th, driven before next, stayed on same pace from 3 out, went 3rd nearing finish, never threatened "
Blinkers are back on tomorrow and it wouldn't be the biggest shock if Nicholls worked the oracle as he has so often this season on the big days. This horse doesn't look in love with the game though and, on what i know, i couldn't be having him.
Next is Return Spring who finished 9th in the Cheltenham race where Grand Jesture and Lost Legend finished 3rd and 6th, but he was beaten 41L. He has proven stamina in that he has won over 3 miles one and a half furlong and some decent form going back to his close third to King's Palace last December. Raced prominently and was on the premises until weakening before clobbering the second last in the above Cheltenham race but all his best form has been on ground easier than tomorrows.
Finally the 6 YO Algernon Pazham who ran an absolute screamer behind the classy Virak last time, gaining an RPR of 145, and, after having hit the last, being beaten just 7 lengths receiving just 9lbs. However, having just the four chase runs and having refused the time before last, i doubt his jumping will be good enough here. I could be wrong and if he jumps well he is thrown in here but on balance, not for me tomorrow.
You will have discerned from the length of this conclusion that this is by no means clear cut and that there is no perfect trends fit. So, we have to decide between those two from the first 8 in the betting who have top class recent form but fall down on the 3m plus win trend (although with stamina proven), and those with the requisite 3 miles win but from outside the first 8 and with doubts about recent form or experience.
I am going to discriminate in favour of the former. I think that the latest run of GRAND JESTURE has the best from on offer amongst the trends candidates and his shrewd trainer has selectively and successfully placed his chasers here.
With the weight pull and the longer trip, it wouldn't surprise me if LOST LEGEND didn't make a fight of it so i am going to take those two against the field (currently 15/2 – from 16's! – and 20/1 respectively.
AYR 3.45 SCOTTISH NATIONAL – last 18 runnings
Just 2 favs won and the last one was in 2000
First 12 won 15. Today, that means 20/1 or less.
15 carried 10-9 or less
None won off a mark higher than 150
15 ran off 146 or below
All the last 10 were rated within 7 lbs of the top rated on Rcing Post Ratings (RPR)
8 yo's have by far the best record with 7 wins from 100 runners.
This 7% compares to a combined strike rate of the other winners, who were all aged between 7 and 11, of 4%.
No 6 yo won, though only 14 tried.
15 ran 3-6 times that season
17 posted a first 6 finish last run
17 had won over 3 miles plus
ALL completed last time
The in form yard is Peter Bowen with 7 winners from 22 runners in the last 14 days. He is the trainer of our unlucky, hampered, first fence unseated rider, Al Co, in last week's Grand National. He wouldn't be a trends selection here as he failed to complete last time. But that, and, to a much lesser degree, his age of 10, are the only filters that disqualify him. Otherwise he has decent stats and, with the tendency of recent winners and placed horses having run well in the race before, (Merigo winning in 2010 and 2012 and Godsmejudge second last year having won the year before), i think he will run a big race.
Two trainers with a good record at the course are Paul Nicholls and Tim Easterby with 10/27 and 2/6 respectively. Nicholls has a much better record here with his hurdlers but Easterby is 1/3 with his chasers over the past 5 years.
The former runs top weight Sam Winner who has a non completion last time and trying to carry 12 lbs more than the weight carrying record over the last 18 runnings to overcome.
The latter trains the interesting Trustan Times who has a 7lbs pull with Al Co for the 2 lengths he was beaten into third in this last year. Given the recent trend i think i have discerned regarding horses that have run well in this previously, he too could run well with the main trends drawback being the lack of a first 6 run last time.
There is no runner with a perfect profile. The closest is is SAMSTOWN who falls down (maybe not though, as he is 20/1 with Paddy Power) only on the first six in the betting filter. He is generally 25/1, with 28/1 in places, as i write. Seeing as there have been winners at 66/1 40/1 33/1 and 20/1 over the last 18 runnings, this is not too big a drawback.
The other 8 yo, who falls down on the same filter but also being rated 10lbs below the top on RPR, is David Pipe's Amigo.
However, mainly on the grounds that i think Peter Bowen had trained his horse for the National last week and it didn't have a race and that i don't want to be kicking myself, i will make my saver AL CO. The only really important stat aginst him is his unseat last week. Other than that, he has done it all before and is just 3lbs higher than when winning this last year, although none have won back to back renewals.
Before i go into the race trends and trainer/jockey stats, a word on the going.
The official going on the Mildmay Course is Good to Soft. The average time was 0.29 seconds per furlong slower than the Racing Post standard today (Friday). This would denote Good to Firm going.
They have the same going for the Grand National course which is riding even faster with the only race on that course today run in a time of 0.13 secs per furlong slower than standard. This would indicate Firm going.
Whichever label we want to use, this is fast ground that won't suit plodders – even over four and a half miles!
AINTREE 4.15 THE GRAND NATIONAL
Not a terrible race for favs but well below par, winning 4 of the last 18 runnings.
However, where it is close at the head of the market, the market tends to get it right with the second fav winning just once over the same period.
For a while it seemed the higher class had led to greater predictability but there have been lots of long odds winners over the past 18 runnings. There have been winners at 100/1, 66/1, 33/1 twice, 20/1 and 16/1 twice. So 7 times the winner was returned 16/1 plus, and, 5 times, 20/1 or greater.
Indeed 4 of the last 7 runnings were won by a 100/1 shot, and the last three winners were returned at 33/1, 66/1 and 25/1.
So, i wouldn't be put off any horse because of the price or market position (except maybe the second favs who have won only around a third what they should have statistically).
No horse carried more than 11-8 over the period studied, 17 carried 11-4 or less, and 16 carried no more than 11-1.
The weights record is mirrored in the record of the ratings. No horse won off more than 158 in the last 18 runnings, only one was rated 153 or more. The 16 others all ran off a mark of 150 or less.
Just to give some idea of the class needed to win this off a big weight and a high handicap mark, the one that carried 11-8 and ran off 158 was Neptune Collonges. This horse had previously run a close third in the legendary Kauto vs Denman Gold Cup!
Young horses have a dire record in this. Not many 7 yo's have tried; it is true but the 36 who have couldn't manage a place, let alone a win and 8 yo's are 1 out of 104.
9,10 and 11 yo's have won 16 of the 18 renewals with 6/189, 6/171 & 4/119 respectively, ie, 3 or 4% strike rate for each age.
One horse aged 12 has won with no older winners and 3 placed, from the 75 12 yo's and older to try.
No horse has won this more than once since the era of the great Red Rum who won this in 1973, 1974 and 1977, finishing second in the two intervening years. Consequently a distance win is not a plus! Nor is it good news for Pineau De Re fans.
No trainer has won back to backs other than Ginger McCain either which doesn't augur too well for Dr Newland's bottom weight Royale Knight (which is a shame as he has otherwise impeccable credentials).
No jockey since Red Rum's rider Brian Fletcher has won back to back Grand National either which goes against Many Clouds as his jockey, Leighton Aspell, won this last year.
16/18 had run between 3 and 7 times that season.
15/18 posted a first five finish in their last run.
ALL had won over at least 3 miles.
ALL last ran between 16-60 days ago.
Trainer / Jockey stats
The seemingly unstoppable Nicholls yard is bang in form with 13 wins from 37 runs this past fortnight. He runs four. Unioniste and Rocky Creek would have to be somewhere near the class of Kauto Star or Denman (using the guide of Neptune collonge's win discussed above). Too much weight and/or a too high handicap mark for horses nowhere near that class for me.
His other two are interesting though with Rebel Rebellion having everything going for him bar a win over 3 miles or more.
Mon Parrain has a near perfect trends profile and is shortlisted.
Willie Mullins, with 15 of his last 45 runners in the last 14 days, has just the one; Ballycasey, who, as an 8 yo who pulled up last time, doesn't have the trends profile for this.
Peter Bowen's yard are in fine fettle with 5 winners from 15 runners over the past two weeks. He runs a very interesting one, last years Scottish National winner Al Co and this is very much one for the shortlist.
Ian Williams (2/7 last 14 days), runs the 9 yo Super Duty who has had only 2 runs this season and finished out of the top 5 last time.
Finally, Robert Waley-Cohen has a good record at Aintree from, admittedly, a small sample with 1/2 winners at the course, both runs were chases. Despite the amazing record over these fences of his amateur jockey son, the horse, Oscar Time, is a 14 yo. No 14 yo has ever won this.
Taking 9, 10,& 11 yo's carrying 11-00,or less, rated 150 or lower, with between 3-7 runs, a first 5 finish last time between 16 and 60 days ago, we have a shortlist of six: Mon Parrain, Night in Milan, Al Co, Portrait King, Soll and Royale Knight.
If you want to narrow it down further and take the two huge prices out then take out Portrait King (80/1) andMon Parrain (50/1), although i have left them in the shortlist.
In order to come up with a selection i checked each of the shortlisted for their record on fast ground. All except Soll, who is untried on fast ground, go well on good going but, as stated at the beginning of this blog, the clock says the ground is riding faster than Good (watering notwithstanding and no rain forecast).
In which case there are just two from the shortlist that have shown a liking for fast ground; last years Scottish National Winner AL CO, who has the added advantage of coming from an in form yard, and the shrewd Dr Newland's ROYALE KNIGHT who i will back as a saver, despite the fact he will have to make history to do it.
Shocks aplenty with winners at 33/1 25/1 22/1 20×2 & 16×2 in the last 18 runnings.
At the same time, 6 favs won from the 18. So either top of the market or 16/1 plus looks the play.
All well above the minimum in what is a compacted handicap.
Only one carried 9-10 though and only a further one carried 9-5 plus.
So, less than 9-4
These tie in with the weights with 16 running off marks below 105
Horses aged 4 to 6 have an almost identical strike rate around 5%
16 had 5 runs or more in the preceding year
14 hadn't run for 121 days or more (just 4 had run recently on the all weather)
6 won last their last run.
17 had won over at least a mile
7 had won over further
12 were distance winners
Trainers and Jockeys
In form yards are Richards Fahey, with 4-13 in the last 14 days, and Hannon with 3-9.
If we use the last time out win, there is a shortlist of one – the bang in form yard of Richard Fahey's GABRIAL;
I can't resist a saver on LINCOLN to win the Lincoln though! If he had a distance win he would have a perfect profile.
WHAT IT TAKES TO BE A PRO GAMBLER
(I doubt you have been told this before)
No doubt we have all had that dream. Ourselves as professional gambler sat on the train going to the races. Laptop open, Racing Post too perhaps, finalising things before we arrive at the course and start organising the placing of bets for the gigantic coup we have plotted up and which will make us rich and famous.
Then we wake up! Professional gamblers, in the sense of those who only make their money from gambling and who make an income much bigger than they would from working for the average wage, are so rare that i doubt anyone reading this is one or will ever become one.
There are many reasons for this which are only partly to do with the personal attributes necessary to make a good living out of betting – patience, discipline, tenacity, money management skills etc. No, the fundamental reason that even someone who has the pre-requisites for success fails is for the same reason the majority of small businesses fail – under capitaisation.
Money makes money, this is what i refer to in the sub-headline. Denman's former owner, and larger than life, big hitting, pro gambler, Harry Findlay, famously said that
No punter on the planet wins more than 8% of his turnover.P11 of Patrick Veitch's book Pubic Enemy Number One
Let's suppose you could better that, and, to keep the maths simple, make 10% on your turnover. To better the average wage to earn say £30,000, you would need to stake £300,000 per year! This can be done – at one end of the scale by placing, on average, around £800 a day on one horse and at the other by backing an average of 20 horses per day to £40 stakes. But where to find 20 good selections a day or £800? By the way, if you think that 8% is on the conservative side bear in mind that Alex Bird worked on 2% and packed it in when 4% betting tax was introduced.
The other part of the capitalisation thing is cash flow. If you back as necessary to realise a profit of 10% on turnover, as decribed above, you may well have 20 points out of your bank tied up on an average day. Also if you are looking for the best prices – and you should be – then you are going to have money deposited with lots of bookies You will surely be familiar with how it takes seconds to deposit money with the online bookies but a few days for it to appear back in your account! Therefore there can be no cheating. You really do need to have the money in your bookies accounts to cover the the bets and to get the best prices.
So, while i dont want to discourage anyone who has the knowledge to make a profit, the cash to finanace it all and the personal attributes (mainly the ability to keep at it through the inevitable losing runs – every famous pro i have read about had lost at least one bank – the winning runs are easy), i do want to introduce a note of reality so that anyone thinking of "going pro" at least has some idea what they are getting themselves into.
THIS HOBBY CAN ACTUALLY MAKE YOU MONEY
So, is it all a waste of time then? If i can't make a living out of racing (i talk throughout this piece about horse racing because that is my sport.- all this applies equally to the dogs, football or any other sport you bet on) why bother? Not at all. First of all it is fun. If it isn't, why do it? Secondly, it isn't all or nothing. With at least a degree of some of the attributes listed above it is quite possible to supplement your income – many do! Everyone has a hobby and, as i always used to tell my mates when i was on my way to the bookies and them to the pub on a Saturday dinner, "I have a chance of walking out with more money, whereas you, unless you hit the jackpot on the fruit machine, will definitely walk out with less."
What's more this hobby could completely change your life. Ask Agnes Haddock who won £688,620 for a £2 Scoop 6 ticket. Or the thousands of small stakes punters who took their share of the bookies' £40 million payout on Frankie Dettori's Magnificent 7 accumulator at Ascot in 1996.
HOW THE SMALL PUNTER CAN PLACE A BIG BET
So how should the small or occasional punter play it? The reality is that the vast majority don't have a betting bank ie, a fund kept to one side that can be lost without too many problems if it comes to it. This was so before the Great Recession and will be even more true now. They don't back to level stakes singles and, in this respect, are in good company as none of the greats that i have read about backed that way either. Most, instinctively, are on the right track in that they are backing multiples to win a life changing amount of money and covering the doubles and trebles to retrieve some or all of the stakes
I would only differ in one respect in that i wouldn't back yankees and other full perm bets. If i were backing 4 horses i would bet 6 doubles and a 4-fold accumulator. That way, if the first one loses, which is highly likely, i will lose 3 of my 7 stakes (43%) rather than 7 out of 11 (64%) as would be the case with a yankee. Yes, sometimes i will miss a treble but a) this is rare and b) i will still have won on the 3 doubles.
The reality is that big money is won from big bets and the only way the small player is going to place a big bet is by doing what is known in financial circles as leveraging. This can only be done by getting at least a few winners to cluster up and rolling up the winnings onto the next horse, ie, backing multiples.
Now i realise this will be considered heresy in many quarters. After all, shouldn't we all have a betting bank? Shouldn't we conservatively calculate our level stake to the strike rate of our selections? Use the power of compounding to grow our bank until it is big enough to take a salary out? Keep a record of all our bets?
I think that for someone who is looking to simply supplement their income and have some fun doing it, all the above is good advice – with reservations about backing level stakes and with the rider that take-outs are advised when building a bank.
But, firstly, as I said above, this just hardly ever happens and secondly, more importantly, for the reasons above, it wouldn't achieve the goal of winning life changing money.
Unless you have a lot of money to start with or the means and patience to slowly build a bank the only way you will make life changing money is by backing multiples.
THE PURISTS ARE WRONG REGARDING STAKING
Again, heretical, but, without wanting to risk boring you to death with maths, there is no difference between backing the same selections in level stakes singles and multiples. If, for example a system breaks even using level stakes singles it will, in the long term, break even backed in multiples. However, there is one crucial difference: backing in multiples gives you the chance to win big whereas backing purely in singles doesn't.
The maths are simple, i will ignore the bookies over-round for now, more of that in a minute. The chance of an even money shot are 1 in 2 or 0.5 or 50% = even money. The chances of 2 even money shots winning are 1 in 4 or 0.25 or 25% = 3/1 So, if i have a system that says back only even money shots, i can either back singles to a twentieth of the bank or, because the bet has ony a third the chance of winning, i can bet doubles to a sixtieth of the bank. In the long run both will break even but, as our old staking guru, Eric, used to say, "in the long run we are all dead!" What goes for this example goes for all multiples which are, so long as they are staked proportionately, just as valid a bet as singles.
On the day of Frankie's 7- winner, through the card acca at Ascot, it was reported that a cleaner (i think at one of the bookies) backed the first 6 winners @ 50p each way singles – she didn't cover the acca! She won £19 which would have been closer to £20K had she covered the 6-fold to 50p each way!
Yes, the extra point for the acca makes each bet that little more expensive but you are looking for a cluster of winners which may come today or may never come. If it never comes you are unlikely to miss that small covering bet per day but, if it does come and you miss it, as with the cleaner…
You won't be spending your final days regretting those lost extra fractions staked on the accas, but you will regret the big win missed for the sake of saving a small stake.
STAKES AND ODDS
What about selectivity and value? Selectivity is fine as long as it isn't overdone. If you only back one horse a day to a tenner you will have staked £3650 by the end of the year and therefore, using our – optimistic – 10% profit on turnover you would have made the princely sum of £365 at the end of the year – around £7.30 a week. You wouldn't even cover the cost of a daily paper for that.
Dont get me wrong, making any profit at all is a feat in itself and not many people have a hobby that pays for itself. But, i find i take the biggest action, i put in the biggest efffort, when there is something big at stake. I need to be inspired and, for me, the prospect of such a small profit without at least the chance of a big win doesn't do it. Even if you pick 4 a day to the same £10 singles as in the previous paragraph, you are still looking at around £30 profit per week. A nice little earner that will maybe cover the utility bills, and, if you are happy with that and the fun of betting, good luck to you – but that's not enough for me to burn the midnight oil, and that is what is necessary at times if you really want to make serious money betting.
How about value? First of all i have never seen a definition of it that isn't just a matter of opinion. The theory is that you find a horse that is at longer odds than it should be – but who says? Also, what makes you think the bookies drop enough ricks to pay you a living wage – or even pay your electric bill?
In answer to the first question you should be able to say, according to your bottom line. If you are not making a level stakes profit you are not getting value – losing runs notwithstanding, which point holds for 'non value' bets too. Only by looking at a long series of 'value' bets can you judge as it is only possible to know if you are backing value odds or not on average as no objective examination can be made by looking at each separate selection.
Just to illustrate the difference in approach. Fujiyama Crest was available at 12/1 on the morning of the Magnificent 7. It was returned at 2/1 SP. I think this is a clear cut case of terrible value which is explained by money coming from every off course bookie in the country being piled onto it on course (SP's were decided by the on course betting in those days). In those days, if you backed an acca, you were locked into the bet. If it were to happen today, the vast majority would cash out but they would have been sorry! Although only 2/1 (hopefully some took the early price) there were massive amounts rolling up and Fujiyama Crest's win may have made the difference between a new car and early retirement. Yes, a value seeker would argue the punters got lucky; that 12/1 was a more accurate price, and, therefore, 12 out of 13 times it would have lost. But, on this occasion, and with a jockey riding with sky high confidence, it won and vastly changed the lives of many.
Now, after leg 4 of that 7-fold the bookies were flapping and all the horses from then on, if not earlier, were certainly returned shorter than they would have been otherwise, ie, not value. What would you prefer, the acca including the non value selections or to cash in after leg 4 and avoid the bad value? Yes, we know this in hindsight but it is the nature of any acca that the weight of money if sufficient, will shorten the odds of the later horses (this is just one of the reasons why you should always back using Best Odds Guaranteed – BOG).
The nub of the question is this: would you prefer a winning multiple at non value odds or a winning single at value odds? Yes, if we all lived forever it would all come out in the wash and level stakes singels would make the same profit or loss as the multiples. However, give me the lump sum today and i will worry about the lack of value while i am on the world cruise!
ODDS AND STRIKE RATE
The inescapable fact is that you can either back a lot of winners at short odds or few winners at long odds. Anyone who tells you that you can have a high strike rate and long odds, backing one per race and in the long term, ie not over a short "purple patch" or winning run, is simply fooling themselves, and, unwittingly or otherwise, not telling you the whole truth.
The pro gamblers par excellence are the bookies. If you look at the record of horses winning at different odds on any system builder you will see instantly the secret to the bookies edge. You will see how even money shots win nearly half of the time how 3/1 shots win nearly a quarter of the time etc. It is this "nearly" that makes them their profits of an average of 8% per year on turnover – the higher prices pay an even bigger percentage to the bookies. This varies only fractionally from year to year over the last 30 years or so. The simple secret is that they set the odds.
However the 8% is small enough to say, eg for staking purposes, even money shots will win nearly half the time whereas 20/1 shots will win less than 5% of their races, on average.
So, to my way of thinking, if both options lead to a 10% profit on stakes, there are some advantages in backing the shorter priced ones – chiefly that losing runs will be a lot shorter so you either need a smaller bank or you can put a bigger proportion of your bank (if you have one!) on each selection.
MORE WINNERS = MORE WINNING MULTIPLES
More importantly, given our liking for multiples, the higher the strike rate, the more winners; the more winners, the more chance there is of them clustering together which is, after all, the pre-requisite for a winning multiple bet – the big win
In conclusion, this is our fundamental approach, the philosophy of this site – hence the name. It is not to say this is the 'right' way and others are the 'wrong' way. No, it depends on your goal and, to some exent your temparament – not everyone can take the inevitable long losing runs that come with backing the longer prices. No,the only contention is that if you dont have much money to start with this is the most likely way you are going to make the sort of money that will make you notice the difference.
Our aim is to provide you with, and help you find, WINNERS and back them in such a way as to either change your life significantly, or, at least bet in such a way as to make a small profit to stay in the game until the big one.
Just in case you think this is all a pipe dream, not related to reality, and that the big win above was a one-off, below are some near misses. We have had several smaller wins of a few thousand and some near misses two of which would have paid around £50K and the other £30K – all to just £1 stakes!
Here are the screenshots for two such occasions. It is only possible to go back a year so i would have to get Bet365 to send me details for the other big near miss. The second one i had on record anyway.
Most recent first:
The first day at Glorious Goodwood and, from memory, day 3 of the Galway Festival. This was in some ways a great day but, in another, the worst betting day of my life. I had 7 selections in 4 races – 2 in each of 3 races and one banker. So, the total bet to cover all the accas was 2 x 2 x 2 x 1 = £8 each way. The last leg had a 12/1 forecast selection and a 33/1 so, in my wisdom, i decided the 33/1 shot had no chance, (these were tips from two very good sources by the way – not my selections) and left it out to save £4 each way ie, eight quid.
- GDW 3.40 VAN PERCY (1 of 2 sels) – WON 10/1
- GAL 5.35 JACKSONSLADY (Banker) – WON 5/1
- GAL 6.40 VASTONEA (1 of 2 sels) – WON 12/1.
Now there is £858 going onto BATTLEOFTHEBOYNE in the 7.45 at Galway which loses but the other horse my source gave me – and which i left out of the accas – the aptly named SURREAL, romped home at 33/1! As i said earlier it isn't the small lost stakes you remember but the missed big wins! That bet would have 29,172. And i missed it to save 8 quid! (Click the screenshot image to see it full size.)
Another near miss that would have paid around 58 K: Bet Receipt
So, it can be done. All that's needed is a strategy, the determination to stick to it and frequent, plentiful winners so that there is a chance for them to cluster up.If you have the determination, we have the strategy and the frequent and plentiful winners.
MAKE MONEY FROM MULTIPLES
Profitable portfolio of systems produces multiple winners
As you may know, our approach is a high turnover one which, even with a less than 10% profit on stakes, will return a good cash profit. Eg, instead of one big £400 bet we might place twenty x £20 bets in a day, which also spreads the risk. An average 8% profit on stakes would bring an average daily profit of £32 per day or £214 per week – not a passport to luxury but life changing in that, for many in these hard economic times, it would perhaps double their income.
We are able to to adopt this approach because we have a portfolio of profitable systems which can produce anywhere between a few and 30 plus selections a day. They are not all profitable every day; but this doesn't matter with our approach so long as the in form ones out perform the out of form ones. On a good day we could have 10 to 20 winners. All we need is seven ot eight of these to cluster in our accumulator and we have cracked it. Short of that, a few doubles or trebles will do for now.
The strike rates of the portfolio systems vary between 16% (35% win and place) at an average SP of 9/1, right up to 80% (backing!) at an average SP of 1/3.
We don't back them level stakes as shown in the illustration above though. It would all average out in the long run, but if you are putting the same single stake on a 9/1 shot as you are on a 1/3 you are going to be over betting the former and under betting the latter. If there is a period when there are a lot of longer priced selections and no short ones you may lose your shirt! We back our singles according to the strike rate of each system.
We are comfortable with putting a lot of bets on and sometimes risking a large proportion of our capital in one day. We back them all around 10 – 11 am using BOG.
However, for many, having so much money tied up at one time, and at risk, is just too much stress. Were we to back from race to race, we would lose the significant advantage of BOG.
The only other way to place numerous bets in the morning (thus taking advantage of BOG prices) but without risking a lot of money, is to bet multiples. And just another plug for this way of betting, everyone likes a 25/1 winner but three 2/1 winners backed in a treble will pay 26/1.
We sift out selections for multiple bets
For a long time we have been asked to pare down the selections so they are more manageable. We have always resisted this because it is obviously possible (and sods law!) that we will start by vetting the winners out and the losers in.
Also, it will mean a lot more work for us. There is only my Brother and I so this new approach is going to add about four hours a day to our workload.
However, luck and longer hours notwithstanding, given our modified approach of backing multiples daily as well as all the singles from all the systems, we will be obliged to vet all the portfolio selections every day to give us a chance of a big win and, if not, a profit or at least break even from doubles etc.
We have a long experience of these systems and are therefore confident we can vet more losers out than winners.
We will be looking to vet out:
Hype horses, those only at the top of the betting because of who the trainer or jockey is rather than what they have achieved on the track.
Horses that are alleged to have won on the alleged prevailing going.
This is my hobby horse. The official going very often does not tally with what the race times tell us about the going. On Saturday, November 22nd 2014, in the Betfair chase at Haydock, not a soul in the Racing Post selection Box went for Menorah because they (and all the pundits on the Morning Line) expected he would struggle to get home in “this ground” which they imagined was going to be a bog. We pointed out on our Saturday Punters Pal blog that the times for Friday indicated Good going and that, even allowing for half an inch of rain overnight, the going was likely to be no worse than the Soft side of Good to Soft. Result? Menorah stayed much better than all except the worthy 2 lengths winner Silvianaco Conti to finsh 2nd at 10/1 (well clear of the rest) and the race times showed the course rode Good to soft on Saturday.
Taking advantage of the ignorance about the going is only possible, (if we want to get our bets on at BOG in the morning), if we know the race times achieved the day before. But it is something we are going to use more in future for vetting our system portfolio selections for the WINNERS DAILY MULTIPLE. Obviously, this particular angle can only work on the second day or more of a meeting.
Horses in races which the trends say they will struggle.
Horses where the yard seems out of form or has a bad record at the course (from a reasonable sample of course), or in that type of race at the course.
Ditto with jockeys who have a poor record riding for the trainer at the track.
These and some good old fashioned studying of the form and race times are what we will use to whittle down the numbers and arrive at our WINNERS DAILY MULTIPLE bet.
As you may have noticed, the original blog was written last November.
The service was new then and we had no results to show. We have now.
Had you backed to just 50p doubles and £1 accas, you would have had returns of £448.24 for £250.50 staked – a profit of £197.74 in just two months at small stakes which amounts to a 79% profit on stakes.
To see the daily breakdown, click HERE.
YOUR QUESTIONS ANTICIPATED
What is the Winners Daily Multiple?
First of all it is fun! There is nothing like having a lot of money running onto your last leg in an acca, or even the second leg of a double, to get the adrenaline flowing. And, don't forget, with some bookies and exchanges you have the option to cash out nowadays. So, if you had a few Grand running onto the last you could cash out and put say half, rather than all, on the last leg.
Second it gives the chance of very big returns for small stakes.
Third it uses selections from the multiple proven sytems in our portfolio, (public and private ones), vetted by my Brother Mark and I. There will also be the odd trends selection at the weekend or during big festivals.
Jumps or flat?
All the year round, jumps, flat and all weather in the UK and Ireland.
How many selections will there be?
We aim for between 3 and 8 a day as this is more manageable for covering the doubles or trebles etc on the way to the big winning acca we are after. However, the bets will fit the selections and not the other way round. We won't balk at going for an each way 12-fold at short odds if that's what the vetting process tells us. Equally, if we can't find at least 3, we will not make the numbers up just for the sake of some action. It would be rare for there to be no bet though given the number of selections our portfolio throws up each day.
How should I back them?
We will give you full details of not only what to back but how, eg, each way or win, doubles trebles, accas etc. As soon as you subscribe you will be advised on the best bookies to use for backing multiples and the things to look out for from the others.
We will also be using, from time to time, some old school bets, or variations of them, such as the Round Robin, Flag Bet, Double or Single stakes About, Stop at a Winner, Stop at a loser etc.
Bear in mind you don't have to back these in multiples. You could bet them in singles as well,as we do, but you will kick yourself if you miss the big one through not covering the acca!
Will I need a big betting bank?
As discussed in my last post, if it ever was the case that backers generally used a betting bank, the recession has put paid to that in all but a few cases i would think.
The beauty of backing multiples is that even backing to 20p units could get you a good payout, eg, my winning £20,000 would have paid £4000 for a 20p stake. And, had those two near misses come in, the same 20p units would have returned around £6 and £12K.
As a guide for those who actually do use a betting bank, a bank of 300 units would be enough with, generally, a maximum of 10 points tied up in any day. So, to £1 units stakes you would use a £300 bank, to 50p's – £150, 25p's – £75; and so on.
Frankly though, to concentrate too much on this is to miss the point. I only mention it so that people don't do all their money betting with too high unit stakes. No, the main point is we are looking for big payouts. If i win 50 Grand today, the last thing i will be doing is looking through my records to see how that works out profit-wise!
For those backing in singles and using a betting bank, a 100 point bank with stakes varying from a half point each way to 8 points win, would cover the risk. We will advise the stake for each single.
How will I receive the WINNERS DAILY MULTIPLE selections?
Each day by 11 am (sometimes the night before if there are not many selections) you will receive an email telling you the selections are ready on a password protected page. You will choose your login details when you pay.
All you need to do is open the email, login through the link and then place the bets.
Do you really back these selections in multiples too?
Yes, there will be a link to a copy of our bets on the members page along with the selections each day.
How much will it cost?
£15 per month or £30 per quarter. Both include the VAT that ClickBank charges.
Is there a guarantee?
Yes. While there is the downside of having to pay VAT when buying through ClickBank, the upside is that they, not we, offer a full, no questions asked, 60 day money back guarantee which, effectively, allows you a two month free trial. Effectively, your guarantee is guaranteed by ClickBank.
You could try this to very small stakes to begin with (i wouldn't advise paper trading though as you won't be best pleased if you miss the big one!).
Why subscribe now?
Basically, you will be backing exactly the multiples we bet exactly how we back them for around 50p a day with some big payout days inevitable and the chance of a very big win any time. This is our time of year with mainly exposed jumpers to assess.
There will have to be some limit on the number of subscribers as, if we all had the same winning quid acca on at the same bookie, offering the best BOG price and win, say, £30 Grand each that would be a total of 3 million off the same bookie. I don't know what the consequences would be for that but i will forego my account with any bookie for £30K.
Also, if everyone is on at BOG – and i can't stress enough the importance of this, why people take SP is beyond me – in theory there needn't be any maximum limit as the early price will be locked in. However, let's not push our luck. All the big bookies payed out more than the 3 million on Franke Dettori's Acca 7 day at Ascot so there should be no problems getting paid but, too many members and too big a win in the present economic circumstances? So i think we will set the limit at 100.
On the other hand, the economic situation is such that people are very reluctant to part with their money at present. So we don't want the opposite problem of upping our workload drastically for just a few subscribers. Therefore, as well as relying on the fact that it is very likely you will have been on our mailing list long enough to get to know us and you will trust us to honour guarantees, respond to emails,have the selections and backing advice ready in good time etc, we are offering a bonus.
COMPLIMENTARY EBOOK "The Going's Good – or is it?"
FREE TO THE FIRST 50 SUBSCRIBERS
A 13 x A4 pages in depth analysis of the accuracy or otherwise of the going and how you can quickly and easily evaluate the going yourself after just one race. This is no back of an envelope padded affair but an in depth study. I reckon this alone is worth the quarterly price for Winners Daily Multiple and we may well sell it in the future
You wouldn't back in a race where you didn't know the distance of the race, so why back when you don't know the going? Or better still, how to get the general picture from the first race or two and then build a more exact understanding as the day goes on. Even better, so long as you know the weather forecast, how you can evaluate the going from yesterday's race times and therefore take advantage of BOG – the night before if you are quick enough and the prices are up.
As i have said on many blogs, the official going, which is reported in the Racing Post, is very often wrong. I wrote the first of these two blogs just after the Betfair Chase on Saturday 22-11-14 when the going at Haydock was supposed to be a bog. There was racing there the day before which told quite a different story. The times indicated Good going and, though it rained half an inch overnight, we said we didn't think it would be any worse then the soft side of good to soft. We tipped up Menorah who supposedly wouldn't like a 'slog through the mud' and he finished a close second, well clear of the rest, at 10/1. What's more the times indicated Good to Good to Soft going.
I am writing part 2 the day after The Hennessy at Newbury (officially Soft, Heavy in places) and the Fighting Fifth Hurdle at Newcastle (official going Soft).
Three of the races at Newbury were run in times suggesting Good or Good to Soft going at worse. One thing is for sure, those times could not have been achieved on Heavy ground.
Whereas it was wrong the other way round at Newcastle where all except Irving's win indicated Heavy going. Irving's time suggested Good to Soft/soft ground but it was such an exception that i suspect that was a very fast run race, under the conditions, and we saw two very smart horses pull clear of the rest.
We use the race times to assess the going, not someone walking the course or leaning on a stick. Of course, this can only be done if there was a meeting at the same course the day before and it is also necessary to check the weather. However, if you know certain facts and how to interpret them you can, like us, make your own mind up about the going and we have written an ebook on the subject which shows you, step by step, exactly how to calculate the Going yourself.
This is yours to keep, as a thankyou for buying today so that we know where we are up to numbers wise. Even if it turns out that the WINNERS DAILY MULTIPLE is not for you and you ask for a refund, the ebook will be yours.
Finally, there is the sod's law factor. If you sit on the fence you may, and i know it is a long shot but it is true, miss a cracking first day or even the big one. You would certainly be kicking yourself then and i should know after my brilliant stake saving that cost me 30 grand a few months ago!
So, if you are interested join now
There is no need to risk missing a good day or even being too late for the 100 limit as you have as good as a 2 month free trial via the Clickbank guarantee.
Also, if you sign up to try it today, you will receive our "The Going's Good – Or Is It" ebook free, yours to keep whatever. This can be used at all UK and Irish race courses and even for some big races such as the Arc or Breeders Cups meeting – anywhere there is a standard time publicly available. Whether you stay with the WINNERS DAILY MULTIPLE or not you need never be put away by false going reports again.
The recession and the shift of economic weight eastwards has changed everything. The very rich have people who they pay a lot of money to advise them how to invest their way around these changes. For your average person though there is no such thing as a surefire investment. The stock market? Anyone remember the 1987 crash? Property? The early 90's, and the present stagnation at best outside certain London boroughs, put paid ot those illusions.
The middle, 'sensible', gradualist, approach carries no guarantees whatsoever and offers very little in reward. Unless you are prepared to take a calculated small risk for potentially big rewards you are likely to at best stay where you are.
So, i will leave it up to you. Either accept this new situation and make the necessary adjustments or carry on as you are. I wish you luck whichever way you choose.
I don't always agree with the US 'life coach' Anthony Robbins, but i remember a saying of his that has stuck with me for 20 years:
If you always do what you have always done, you will always get what you have always got.Anthony Robbins
SANDOWN 3.10 THE IMPERIAL CUP
Fav 7/18 BUT second favs NONE
First 6 in betting x 14
14/1 or less x 17
11-6 or less ALL. 11-1 or less x 17
138 or less ALL
136 or less x 17
4 YO (2-11) and 5 yo's ( 8-80) have by far the best strike rates
Ran between 2 and 5 times that season
Won last time x 8
TRAINERS AND JOCKEYS
The Pipes have farmed this over the period with Martin winning 4 and David 3 of the last 8 of the last 18 renewals.
Nicky henderson's yard are 4/9 in the last 14 days. He runs the 4yo West Wizard who finished second last time and is shortlisted.
John Quinn is 2/5 at the course and he has Chieftains Choice, slightly older than normal at 6 and with a fall last time.
BIDOUREY hails from the all conquering (in this race) Pipe yard and is the 4yo fav. Those two stats alone make him a relatively confident – for a 24 runner handicap – selection.
NEWCASTLE 2.55 THE EIDER CHASE
The fav won 3 of the past 14 runnings and the second fav won 4
12/14 winners came from the first 5 in the betting and 10 from the first 3.
A 28/1 surprise has won, along with a 16/1 shot, but this hasn't been a race for surprises and the other 12 all went off 11/1 or less.
All carried between 10-00 and 11-12.
12/14 – including ALL the past 10 – carried 11 stone plus.
All were rated 139 or less.
7 and 8yo's have the best record with the former winning twice but from just 18 runners (11%) and the latter winning 4 from 34 (12%).
For the rest, the older they are the lower their strike rates, with 9 yo's winning 4-51 (8%), 10 yo's 3-54 (6%) and just 1-26 for the 11 yo's – 4%.
All had previously won over at least 3m and half a furlong with 13 winning over at least 3m 1f.
5 won last time out of the 10 who finished in the first 4 last time.
12 posted a first 7 finish in their latest race.
All ran in the last 90 days
12 ran within 30 days
Trainers and Jockeys
There are three bang in form yards with runners in this:
Kim Bailey, who saddles Knockanrawley, who ticks nearly all the boxes, has had 4 winners from 11 runners in the past 2 weeks.
Stuart Coultherd runs the 9yo, 33/1 shot, Sharney Sike. His yard have sent out 2 winners form just 6 runners this past fortnight.
Nicky Richards has sent out 3 winners from 8 over the same period. He has Tutchec, who, like two previous winners, pulled up last time.
Daryl Jacob is 2/5 for Emma Lavelle and rides top weight Shotgun Paddy. An 8yo who is at the right end of the weights and who finished third last time appeals. However only one has carried that weight in the past 14 renewals and he runs off a mark 8lbs higher than any of the previous 14 winners
KNOCKANRAWLEY almost picks himseld from a trends angle
.He is the only horse in the race who carries 11-00 or more and is rated 139 or less, he comes from the first 5 in the betting, is a 7yo who won last time over 3m 2f. The only blot on his trends copybook is the 54 days since a run but i am willing to overlook that in the light of the positives
WARWICK 2.05 KINGMAKER NOVICE CHASE
Favs won 7 of the last 15, and second favs won 6. One of the remaining two was the 7/2 3rd fav.
No shocks with the longest SP being 8/1, then 11/2, then our 7/2 third fav.
Of the 9 with an official rating, all were rated 134 plus – all qualify
5 and 6 yo,s have dominated this with 6 wins from18 runners (33%) for the former and 3-10 (30%) for the latter. With no 5 yos running, it is the 6 yo that has almost double the chance on trends against the 5- 28 (18%) for the 7 yos and over 3 times the chance against the 1-9 for the 8 yos.
All bar one ran 60 days or less ago.
10 won their last race
Paul Nicholls and Alan King have won nearly half of the last 15 renewals between them with 4 and 3 wins respectively.
The in form yards are Alan King with 5/18 over the past fortnight and Richard Lee with 1/2.
At the course, Paul Nicholls is top dog strike rate wise with 10/29 over the last 5 seasons and 7/16 with his chases.
Alan King's chasers have a 10/29 win rate over the same period.
Given the record of the first two in the betting, this looks a trends match between VIBRATO VALTAT and Top Gamble. The clincher is the superior wins to runs record of 6 yo's. Add to that the trainers record in the race and the horses proven form in and above this grade (has won two Grade 2's and a Grade 1) as aginst the class 3 form of Top Gamble and the trends and form case are hard to oppose.
Given Alan King's stats, Turnover Sivola could look tempting. But, as an 8 yo with no run for 70 days and no winning run last time He would be an atypical trends winner.
NEWBURY 2.25 THE DENMAN CHASE
Favs won 6 of the last 14 runnings and second favs won two.
The first 3 in the betting won 11 and the first 5 won 13.
One surprise at 33/1 but the rest were two 12/1 shots then the next shortest was 13/2.
All within range
Of the 13 to have an official rating, all were rated 148+
7yos have the best record by a mile with 6 winners from 13 runners (46%). This compares favourably with the 4/27 (15%) for 8 yos and 1/17 (6%) for 9 yos.
Ten had 2 or 3 runs this season
5 won last time, 2 were second, 3 third, and é finished 4th. The other two pulled up.
12 of the 14 had won over 3 miles plus.
11 had won over further and 10 were distance winners.
Just the one stat – Paul Nicholls has farmed this race, providing 8 of the last 14 winners! An amazing record.
Given the record of 7 yos at or near the top of the market and the record of P Nicholls there is a shortlist of one: UNIONISTE, who has won over this course and distance and over further (3m 1f). Indeed, according to RPR figures, the further he has gone the better he performs.
NEWBURY 3.00 THE GAME SPIRIT CHASE
9 of the last 17 favs won and 6 of the second favs
All 17 came from the first 4 in the betting
All were returned 5/1 or less with 15 coming in at 7/2 or less
All are within the range but only a select band of 3 carried 11-10: Ask Tom, Azertyioup and Master Minded.
A peak form Sire de Grugy would beat the first, give the second a race but not the latter at his very best. Only Moscow Flyer of the last 15 years 2mile chasers could have lived with that pace.
The big question in this race is how close is sire de Grugy to his best?
Of the 17 winners, 13 had a rating.
All these 13 were rated 149+ and 12 rated 152 or more.
There are only 7 and 9 yos in this so: 7yos won 3 times from 12 runners (25%) compared to 3-24 (13%) for the 9 yo's.
6 have tried to win this after a break of more than 121 days but only 1 won.
14/17 had between 1 and 3 runs this season.
In their last run, 8 won, 3 were second, 3 finished third and 2 fourth. So, 16 posted a top 4 finish last time.
Yet again a Paul Nicholls benefit with him providing 6 of the last 17 winners.
The other stat is harry Fry's record at the course (8-17) and, within that, of his chasers – 2/6;
Sire de Grugy has an emotional tug as he proved all the doubters wrong when winning the Champion Chase carrying our money and tipped up to our TV and Cheltenham Multiple Bet subscirbers at the festival last year.
However, you have to wonder why so late for a comeback? Jamie Moore reported a quite recent setback too in his ATR interview. Were he near his best i would have no doubts about recommending him despite the relatively small matter of age. But, he is going to have to be within at least a stone of his very best Champion Chase winning form of last season to take this and that is a big ask after such a long lay off and with a recent setback to overcome.
Upilison Blue would be the second lowest rated winner of this in 18 years were he to win and Karinga Dancer (despite Harry Fry's brilliant record at this track) would be the lowest.
Uxizandre would be only the second winner in 18 runnings to finish outside the first 4 last time out.
Which leaves us with the last time out, winning, (at the distance as well as further), 7 yo, 3/1 second fav who has had 2 runs this season and who hails from the races top trainer by far in Paul Nicholls, MR MOLE.
This one has improved around 10lbs from last seasons best in just two runs this season, and, like nine other previous winners, has won over further ( 2M 5F to be precise) as well as at the distance.
I am banking on a half stone or more improvement from this inmate of the races top trainer and, combined with a pipe opening comeback, rather than a near peak one, from the reigning Champ, i am hoping these two things will combine for the trends selection to win.
However, i won't be at all upset if that genuine and classy champion strips fitter than i thought and jumps right back to the head of the market for the champion Chase!
NEWBURY 3.35 BETFAIR HURDLE
Favs have won 4 of the last 16 renewals and second favs have won 3
There have been a couple of turn ups at 50/1 and 33/1 but, other than that, the maximum odds have been 16/1 once. The remaining 13 were all returned 14/1 or less.
Which ties in with the fact that 14/17 times, the winner came from the first 7 in the betting.
Fairly inconclusive in that, no horse won carrying more than 11-7 so all except the top weight remain.
Again, no help as they include all the runners.
15 renewals have been won by 5 to 7 yos which breaks down as follows: 5 yos provided 5 winners from 92 runners (5%), 6 yos 7-96 (7%) and 7 yos 3-67 (4%).
13/17 winners had between 3-7 runs in the past year.
13 had run between 1 and 4 times that season
Of which: 8 won their last run, 3 finished second and 2 came home third. So, 13 finished in the first three in their most recent run.
8 won at 2m 1f plus.
9 were distance winners
15 had their most recent run between 8 and 90 days ago.
In form yards are: Nicky Henderson with 9/27 winners in the last 14 days.
John Ferguson with 4/12
Jennie Candish has the beststrike rate at the course with 2/7 over the last 5 seasons.
If we look for a 5,6 or 7yo from the first seven in the betting, in this case i have looked at all forecast 14/1 or less, with a top 4 finish last time less then 90 days ago, we are left with a shortlist of 4: Activial, Jolly's Cracked It, On Tour and FASCINO RUSTICO.
I have discounted the other 3 on the basis of trainer form. Of Harry Fry's runners only 25% have run to form in the last fortnight, according to the Racing Post and just 30% for Evan Williams. Whereas the selections trainer, Harry Skelton, has got a healthy 67% running to form.
Mind you, this is an ultra competitive affair so minimum stakes.
Fav won 4/14 and second fav won twice.
At the other end, there have been winners at 25/1, 20 x 2 and 16 x 2 winners.
12 of the last 14 winners came from the first 9 in the betting.
All carried between 10-00 and 11-5
12 carried 10-6 plus and 11 no more than 11-3
All rated between 128 and 147
13 ran off a mark of 143 or less
7 yo's have the best strike rate by far with 3 wins from 15 runs (20%). 9 yo's have won more runnings, 5, but from 61 to try ( 8%)
All other ages in the race have a roughly 5% wins to runs record.
Although one had not run that season and another had just the one run, 10 had run between 2 and 5 times that season.
12 had a first 7 finish last run.
13 had their last run between 16 and 90 days ago.
Of the 11 to have scored , (3 had not won previously!), all had won over at least two and a half miles and, of these, 9 had won between 2m 7.5f and 3m 2.5f.
There are only two 7 yo's in this and they make up the first two in the betting who account for just under half the past 14 winners.
The bang in form, (3-9 winners in the past 14 days), big race Saturday specialist, Paul Nicholls, runs the current fav Easter Day. He has a couple of things against him from a trends perspective: only the one run this season and no win beyond 2m 6.5f. I would also add that this last season conqueror of the Royal and Sun Alliance winner, O'Faolains Boy, has shown all his best form on Soft going. He certainly has the class though if ground and trip turn out to suit.
Only beaten a length and a bit by subsequent listed winner, Sego Success, the time before last over 3m 1f, IF IN DOUBT got a confidence booster when cruising home in a 4 horse race at Catterick over 3m 1.5 on similar ground to todays. It is interesting that AP McCoy keeps the ride for this JP McManus owned horse.
He ticks all my trends boxes and is the sole selection.