Non triers

Home Forums Horse Racing Non triers

This topic contains 179 replies, has 47 voices, and was last updated by Woolf121 Woolf121 1 month ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 151 through 165 (of 180 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1388841
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 25883

    Was/am not surprised the two that “caught the eye” most often were those particular twosome, Raymo. Whether that is the same as “non-trier”? imo It was close to it. What constitutes a non-trier to you, Raymo?

    Is a trainer having an unfit racehorse first time out running a non-trier?
    imo Yes, but it all depends on how fit. I believe the rules state a horse should meet a certain standard and the vast majority make that standard because it isn’t very high. But to have the standard any higher would in all probability be too difficult to police. Same with whether a horse has been taught enough to race.

    There are trainers who win with very very few debutants – if any… Very often (even the winners) can be expected to make abnormal improvement from first to second time out. But were these non-triers on debut? If a horse happens to be good enough at that point the jockey will still try and win… and therefore (in the vast majority of cases) imo not a non-trier. It’s just that those horses are seldom good enough primarily because of their fitness and/or basic readiness. Although some trainers are evidently capable of getting them fitter than others, it is worth remembering no debutant is 100% fit and/or 100% ready – so:

    Where do you draw the line between trier and non-trier in a way that can be policed?

    And if taking these “unfit” horses out of the equation, where are the “plenty of them almost daily”?

    For all bar the odd runner there are hundreds of possible excuses.

    With Ramsden and Fallon, although they caught the eye much more than the rest, it was still only 13 and 12 times in the year, with if I remember rightly 8 being second best (worst). Even taking every trainer and jockey and every runner in to account… it’s nowhere near every day.

    value is everything
    #1388842
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 25883

    Most TRFers will know the valid reasons a horse can run poorly and/or the jockey not appearing to be giving full effort; but just to give an idea:

    Along with the obvious draw/jumping, distance and ground, there’s speed/stamina/pace. I’ve sometimes seen tactics changed and people say it was a non-trier because it was further back than usual. But often – looking at the race beforehand – you can see there’s a lot of potential pace angles. Only one horse can ever front run and only a certain number can race prominently. So tactics are wisely changed (don’t want the pace to be overly fast) and unfortunately as a result some don’t like the change and run poorly. Then there’s wrong type of track (left / right-handed, flat/undulating/stiff/sharp, best at the/a local track), some need a certain jockey, some haven’t had the best of trips to the races and got upset, some are best at a certain time of year… And temperament! The amount of horses that either don’t like being in front very long and/or find little under presure – is enormous. These often look non-triers where as actually the best way a jockey can win is to hold it up until the last moment. Some are best tenderly handled and/or appearing to be given more to do than is wise with the majority. Some need a strongly run big field so they can settle in behind rivals and conserve energy, so doing best in big handicaps. May look as if a horse is a non-trier, but every horse has a different temperament – a different set of ideal conditions.

    value is everything
    #1388844

    droffats
    Participant
    • Total Posts 502

    Ginge
    You can dress it how you like and in as many ways as you like but there are non triers everyday, even more so in Ireland.
    I have given up and just watch now.

    #1388845
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 25883

    Are you sure that’s not just blaming others for you choosing the wrong horses to back, droffats?
    If non-triers are as widespread as you claim, then how do you explain other punters making a good profit from purely studying form and backing value selections (ie without any inside info)?

    If the game is as bent as you claim, then (taking in to account bookmakers mark ups) how come each price wins pretty much the amount of races they can be legitamately be expected to?

    value is everything
    #1388851
    raymo61
    raymo61
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4322

    Ginge you make a lot of valid points but to my eyes it is obvious that a number of horses in any given race are unable to win due to either fitness or unsuitability of ground/ trip/ course or style of running.

    Admittedly this doesn’t make them all non triers but some of them are. For example if a horse is a hold up horse normally then the best or easiest way to get it beat is to front run or to show it a lot of daylight. Now this may be a jockey following orders or just bad luck. I regularly see horses running on late having been subject to minimal pressure and after looking into its previous form I note said horse has raced prominently when it has performed well . IMO this is a good example of a non trier and it immediately goes in my notebook.

    Because of the amount of coverage nowadays of racing and the ability of punters to actually watch races as opposed to having to just listen to extel commentaries IMO this gives punters a better chance of making judgements regarding a horses capabilities.

    And as I have already said plenty of horses daily are given “easy” rides to allow them either a good handicap mark or to prepare them for future success.

    #1388852
    raymo61
    raymo61
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4322

    And to reply to your comment to droffats regarding horses running to form if the majority of horses ran to form then bookies would go skint and every favourite would win!

    As far as value is concerned the word value is very very subjective!! To quote and example last Saturday I thought the value was Definitly Red at 4/6 and Double Shuffle at 11/4 because the other two could not win and I was betting to 87 per cent !! Others may consider this to be crazy and would say value is a 33/1 shot that they think should be tens!! Like I say subjective!!

    #1388853
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 25883

    So you agree with me.

    value is everything
    #1388855
    raymo61
    raymo61
    Participant
    • Total Posts 4322

    Like I said Ginge lots of valid points yes :good:

    I do agree with you but not totally :wacko:

    #1388856
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 25883

    For example if a horse is a hold up horse normally then the best or easiest way to get it beat is to front run or to show it a lot of daylight.

    This goes to the heart of my point. Just because a horse has been ridden differently does not necessarily mean it’s not trying. My point was that anyone actually looking beforehand at the race’s make up, can see how much pace is likely to be in a race. eg When I looked at the decs for the Ladbrokes Trophy, every runner bar one ran their best races either from the front or racing prominently with a clear view of the front. So jockeys/connections were faced with a dilemma. Either go to the front/prominent and hope others don’t force you to go too strong a pace? Fastest way from A to B is going an even pace, so by going too fast lessens their chance of winning. Or change tactics and hold their horse up? I do think those in the front of the que went too hard last Saturday. But a lot of those changing tactics in the Ladbroke Trophy were never happy either. So it’s a judgement call, do you go to the front with a far greater risk of going far too quick for your own benefit? Or change tactics and run a far greater risk of your horse not enjoying it and therefore not running to form?

    I regularly see horses running on late having been subject to minimal pressure and after looking into its previous form I note said horse has raced prominently when it has performed well . IMO this is a good example of a non trier and it immediately goes in my notebook.

    I don’t often see non-triers, Raymo. I see horses running in races where there’s been too many pace horses and some haven’t liked being held up, not wanting to put it all in and making late progress when the jockey has given up. The amount of times I see punters believing a horse a non-trier when really in most paces it’s a case of the horse’s pace and/or temperament.

    And it’s exactly the same with your scenario, Raymo. Yes, when horses are natural hold up runners then they should be held up if possible. But what happens when every runner in a race likes to be held up? Something has to front run and they will all want to be held up. In NH racing you’re quite likely to get those adamant of getting a hold up ride getting left at the start (another time punters believe their horse is a non-trier). Whenever there’s little or no pace horses it’s highly likely the front/prominent racers, either getting a soft lead or at least a slowish run race where able to kick for home from an advantageous posi’; being difficult to peg back. However – as you rightly imply – for that prominent position to be an advantage the horse needs to settle… So does the jockey make sure of settling and likely give away many lengths in a slowly run affair – ie having far less chance of winning? Or does he race more prominently than usual – yes, risking being too free – but also knowing if settling will have positional advantage/far greater chance of winning?

    And connections are allowed to try different tactics anyway. It’s not necessarily that they aren’t trying. eg Horses who’ve made the running for victories will sometimes get a hold up ride in the prep before Cheltenham. But is it a non-trier? Or do connections know that if running at Cheltenham with a 30 runner field the horse is highly unlikely to get his own way up front? ie Seeing if different hold up tactics can work before the big day… Or sometimes choosing different tactics on the big day itself knowing there’s too much pace in the race, only to see the hold up tactics not working.

    value is everything
    #1388857
    Gingertipster
    Gingertipster
    Participant
    • Total Posts 25883

    I didn’t say that the majority of horses ran to form, Raymo. Far from it, in any race a minority of horses will run to form. Sometimes just one or two in a 20 runner race.

    I don’t know the exact figures but: What I said was each price wins pretty much the amount of times it is expected to win. eg Most 4/1 shots will not run to form and therefore not win, but around 18% will win (18% being a fair 9/2 chance plus a bookies mark up 2% = 20%… and as 20% = 4/1 that’s the price offered). So bookies 4/1 shots win the amount of times (around 18%) they’re expected to win. Same with all prices, around 48% of Even money shots and 5% of 16/1 shots etc.

    Yes, any particular price being called “value” is a subjective decision by the individual punter. Nobody knows for sure which horse/s is/are value in any individual given race. However, in reality consistently sucessful punters (those that have a better overall percentage of winners than average winner’s price) are able to make an overall profit because they are both good at analysing form and (just as importantly) are good at converting form in to chance (identifying value).

    ie:
    Unless his/her staking plan is very wrong, then a punter with a 20% strike rate at average winning odds of 5/1 will show a good profit over time. Ditto a 50% strike rate at average winning odds of 6/4 or 10% SR at average winning odds of 14/1 etc. These punters can all be said to have found overall value.

    Unless the staking plan is very lucky, a punter with a 20% strike rate at average winning odds of 3/1 will show a defecit. Ditto a 50% SR at average winning odds of 4/5 or 10% SR at 8/1. So although these punters may sometimes get value in any individual bet, he/she can be said not to have achieved overall value.

    My point is that many punters achieve overall value by purely studying form (without any inside information at all) and backing what they believe is value. This would be absolutely impossible if non-triers are as widespread as you believe them to be; because a large number whose form suggests their fair chance is say 20% (fair 4/1) will actually be close to 0%… And that in turn means every other horse in the race/s would have a greater chance than its available price. If non-triers were widespread then Prices would not win the amount of times they’re expected to win. ie It would be impossible to find overall value/profit.

    It is no coincidence that those that believe non-triers are widespread do not make an overall profit (do not achieve overall value).

    value is everything
    #1388864

    nwalton
    Participant
    • Total Posts 1733

    For what it’s worth, I watch racing day in day out and there are plenty of ‘ non triers’in low grade affairs.
    I will not play in these sort of races as even after many years, I just get a handle on the form. Anyone who makes a profit from these sort of events are far better than me and I salute them

    #1388869
    KevMc
    KevMc
    Participant
    • Total Posts 973

    I stopped betting in maiden hurdles & bumpers due to non-triers and the unknown nature of them.

    Especially common in Ireland now where the top end is so strong that rarely is a horse over 6/1 trying. Of course, you can say they are inferior hence the price but the sheer position of the horses at the start, standing 15 lengths out the back tells you otherwise.

    Handicappers are forever not fully off to get a mark for a certain target, that’s simply not trying to win. I do see it as part of the game though and i see it as being fine if you adopt the Prescott/AJ Martin tactic of running at the wrong trip etc. That way at least you have a very valid reason when the horse increases performance by 20lbs when it wins.

    #1388870

    homersimpson
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2077

    I stopped betting in maiden hurdles & bumpers due to non-triers and the unknown nature of them.

    Especially common in Ireland now where the top end is so strong that rarely is a horse over 6/1 trying. Of course, you can say they are inferior hence the price but the sheer position of the horses at the start, standing 15 lengths out the back tells you otherwise.

    So why stop backing in them. If you can discount all horses over 6/1 this will give a much smaller field to analyse. Instead of picking the winner from 16 horses you can pick the winner from say 3 or 4.

    #1388988
    KevMc
    KevMc
    Participant
    • Total Posts 973

    Because even then some of the sub 6/1 are not off, are not fit and a lot of the time there’s a Mullins/Elliott hotpot that’ll win at near evens anyway. It’s just not worth the time and effort.

    You can’t always discount the > 6/1 horses strictly, but it’s very much a massive surprise when one wins more so in IRE than UK IMO.

    #1388991

    homersimpson
    Participant
    • Total Posts 2077

    So again if the Mullins/Elliott hotpot at Evens wins 75% of the time this sounds like easy money to make if you have the bottle to put decent stakes on these. No “time and effort” required. I sadly haven’t if indeed this is a true reflection of what happens.

Viewing 15 posts - 151 through 165 (of 180 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.