- This topic has 631 replies, 59 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
To be fair Mike, neither did Noble Yeats lol.
Twitter: Jackh1092
Hindsight is 20/20 so make the most of it!Kendal Meetingofthewaters is with WPM
Twitter: Jackh1092
Hindsight is 20/20 so make the most of it!I know he is. I was saying that in order to foil a Brassil plot you must be decent and Meetingofthewaters foiled it.
Ahh, sorry agreed.
On him, he could be interesting for a NHC i think.
Im on Nick Rockett but if he’s planned to come here, he’ll probably struggle to get in a KM, so perhaps a 4miler horse…
NHC-GN route..
Twitter: Jackh1092
Hindsight is 20/20 so make the most of it!Haven’t had a bet yet, but…
Corach Rambler reminds me a lot of Tiger Roll, in that you never know how much he has in hand. Idles in front and therefore still possible he’s better than his handicap mark.
Minella Indo reminds me of Neptune Collonges. Older horses tend to need further than they did in their younger years. So although he is not as good as he was, there’s a chance will be better than his current handicap mark once racing at 4m+. Ran an encouraging race first time over x country fences in Glenfarclas under 12 stone and handicap mark of 160. Now dropped to 157.
Value Is EverythingAgree there Gingertipster, Minella Indo ran impressively under top weight over the Cheltenham cross country course. If he where to take tow national fences just as well could be worth an ew bet
Vf x
Had added Any Second Now here, but I’ve decided to lay him back for now. He’s on a ridiculous mark, but just worried about him
not being in many books. Edit, I’ve went back in againNot mad keen on my Goffer bet, but stuck with him meantime. Really like the horse, but I bet him on his Kerry National run, and got put off him a bit with The Munster National
Having run in it before was a big negative for me with Galvin, but I’m loving his prep, and they’re getting that mark down nicely. Stablemate Conflated is the one who I hope pays for my bets at the very least, and I’ll be very disappointed if he’s not a fraction of the price he is just now, come April.
Stattler probably the one I’m most confident about, especially after his first run, but even with him I have some concerns, with him not getting an entry last year, and the fact he can be backed at 100’s. That’s a worry. Still, I’m fairly confident he’ll get one this time, and hopefully he rocks up in The Bobbyjo
I need another to go with the Bartlett pair just now, and shortlist was………
Jungle Boogie
Kilcruit
Midnight River
OntheropesJungle Boogie is a horse I love, but obviously not one to really bet without NRNB, given his frailties.
Kilcruit is a horse I’m going to hammer at some point hopefully this year. I just don’t want to see him entered in The Thyestes.
Midnight River is a bit of a forgotten horse. Smashing seasonal debut with something like this is mind, and still licking my wounds after that Newbury exit. 66’s is very tempting, but I’ll wait and see if he gets an entry.
The one I’ve went for today though is a horse I’ve always liked, Ontheropes. Comeback was only satisfactory, but hopefully he’ll build on that, and has the perfect profile for me for The Thyestes. Hoping to see him there, but I’ve added him for this meantime, as I thought 66’s just way too big
Bit messy this year for me, but happy to add Ontheropes from that shortlist
2nd Edit – Any Second Now laid off for small loss, and Ontheropes cashed out
Galvin 50’s
Stattler 100’s
The Goffer 66’s EW5PlsTo lay
Conflated 40’sMike,
A couple of years ago people were saying “never back a 7 year old”.Of course a punter should take account of the horse’s age.
But after allowing for age it is still thought value, then it is a good bet…
And some 11 year olds can be “well handicapped” if they’ve been dropped by the handicapper.Value Is EverythingTrue, being well handicapped is much more important than it used to be – since Aiintree’s modifications -but it may be of interest:
Several years ago I went through the Grand Nationals from the 1980’s to 2000andsomething. Noting how many of each age group ran and how many won. Because the number of runners were dominated by the 8 and 9 year olds most Grand Nationals were won by those ages. But other age groups won pretty much the percentage of races the number of runners suggested they should. The only exception being 7 year olds who had no winners. However, at that time so few 7 year olds ran in the race that just one seven year old winner would (percentage-wise) statistically have them as a good age group.
It was also the same with weights carried. Many punters believed (and some still believe) that not just being well handicapped, but the actual weight carried was / is important… When most winners carried under 11 stone. Going through the races noting the number of runners carrying under 11 stone compared to 11 stone plus. I found there were many years where very few connections of better class horses wanted to run. So often 30something under 11 st took on single figures of 11st+ (eg sometimes 37 took on 3)… And in the 80’s that latter group sometimes also contained Czech and French horses who at that time were given automatic top weight. So of course the lower weights were going to dominate the winners circle.
…Then, in comparatively recent times when more connections of better class horses wanted to run there were far more 11 stone plus winners. Funny that.Value Is Everything“Mike,
A couple of years ago people were saying “never back a 7 year old”.Of course a punter should take account of the horse’s age.
But after allowing for age it is still thought value, then it is a good bet…
And some 11 year olds can be “well handicapped” if they’ve been dropped by the handicapper.”The race has changed and changed again with the modifications. The random element of years past, (when punting on the race was more interesting and fun), where 11 and 12 year olds were winning has all but gone imo. The older horses may seem well handicapped on past glories but they won’t have the pace any more to win over these ‘easy peasy national fences’ against the younger brigade is the way I see it. Since 2015 all winners have been single figure age which would seem to support this theory.
7yo 22 runners 1 winner 1 placed
8yo 78 runners 4 winners 9 placed
9yo 113 runners 3 winners 7 placed
10yo 94 runners 0 winners 7 placed
11yo 52 runners 2 winners 3 placed
12yo 26 runners 0 winners 1 placed
13yo 8 runners 0 winners 2 placed
14yo 2 runners 0 winners 0 placedLast 11yo-14yo to place was Rathvinden in 2019.
“The older horses may seem well handicapped on past glories but they won’t have the pace any more to win over these ‘easy peasy national fences’ against the younger brigade is the way I see it. Since 2015 all winners have been single figure age which would seem to support this theory.”
Why did you pick 2015 in particular? The biggest modification to the fences was the introduction of soft plastic cores in 2012 so it seems more logical to count from then.
The winners in 2012, 2013 and 2014 were all 11 year olds.Does it really “support this theory”?
As Green’ asks Mike… Why pick 2015 when the modifications went back further – and so included 11 year old winners. tbh If I remember rightly the modifications took place after the race in 2012, so before 2013… 11 year olds won the first two runnings AFTER the modifications that you believe has “changed” the National so much.
Don’t get me wrong, I too believe – as a group – younger horses now have an advantage over their older rivals. There will be more improvers and therefore more well handicapped horses in the younger brigade. All I am saying is do not dismiss an individual racehorse’s chance purely on age…
Although maybe I should keep quiet? Having had excellent victories with Neptune Collonges @ 50/1 and Aurora’s Encore 119/1 – both tipped up on here. One of the probable main reasons for their outstanding value being they were dismissed by punters because of their age.
Value Is Everything“Why did you pick 2015 in particular?”
Because the balance of power to the younger ones winning was from then and has continued to the present day. Kendal’s stat posted today also of interest.
But you said the modifications “changed” the race towards the youngsters. Therefore the rightful place to go back to was from the modifications… And at least two 11 year olds won after those modifications.
The course was no different in 2013 and 2014 to the course in 2015, 2016 etc.
The only reason you’ve not gone back to 2013 is because you don’t want to. LOL
You’d rather bury your head in the turf.
Value Is EverythingKendal’s stats are “of interest” Mike, but they don’t exactly back you up.
In the last 10 years / since the modifications to a £1 stake @ SP:
Had you backed all 7 year olds blind you’d have had only 1 winner @ 50/1 but be well in profit with +£29 because only 22 of age 7 took part.
Had you backed all 11 year olds blind you’d have had 2 winners @ 66/1 and 25/1, so with only 52 runners you’d be +£41 in profit. The best profit of any age group.
Had you backed all 8 year olds blind it’s true you’d have had 4 winners in that time. But with them coming @ 25/1, 14/1, 10/1 and 11/1, 78 runners mean you’d still be -£14 down.
Had you backed all 9 year olds blind you’d have had 3 winners. But @ 33/1, 4/1 and 8/1 and with 113 runners it means you’d be a massive -£65 down…
And 10 year olds are -£94 down, with zero winners.When I bet I don’t look for horses with the best chance of winning.
I go for those who are underestimated by the market.
Value is everything.
Value Is Everything
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.