- This topic has 12 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Interesting piece by Simon Rowlands in his Betfair blog –
And he’s absolutely correct with each of his six ‘golden rules’.
I’m a mega-big fan of trends and try to approach my analysis from two angles. One is that there are likely to be certain ‘horse’ characteristics that may be important (over jumps my research indicates that the age of a horse is more significant, from a betting perspective, than is widely considered to be the case I think) and also the ‘people’ angle. Trainers, like all people (well, almost all) are creatures of routine. If something works they’ll do it again, and then again, and so patterns of behaviour emerge such as favoured prep races for ‘good’ horses, while certain trainers excel (from a betting perspective of ‘value’) with certain profiles of horses in certain types of races.
BUT – I always look for VERY strong trends – eyeing small samples with suspicion and not going back too far. And the only filters I tend to apply are ones which make logical sense to me. For example, to use an extreme case for illustration, a trend that horses beginning with letter C do well in a particular race would clearly not be of any interest but a trend that races over a certain distance over hurdles on a particular right-handed track tended to produce a positive level stakes return when you backed horses with a >50% win ratio going right previously would be an example of something with a bit of pragmatic, commonsense logic behind it.
Because of the massive potential for any backfitted trend to be no more than a statistical blip with absolutely no relevance as a predictor of future events I only tend to seriously consider trends that had produced a >100% profit on turnover unless I was very keen on the logic and had a decent sample of data.
I’d suggest with a fair degree of confidence that the correlation between the vast majority of historical trends and future results would be extremely weak but I think there are nuggets in there. I’ve found some in the past, which brings me to the SEVENTH golden rule, hinted at by Simon.
Trends do change, for a variety of reasons, so don’t hang on to a winning one that you’ve profited from but which now seems to be on the turn. Give up and adopt a watching brief. I learned that the hard way
- Total Posts 17716
I’m not into trends at all. Certainly wouldn’t have backed Katchit or Master Minded a couple of years back if I had been. Neither would I have backed Kauto Star when he regained his crown
When I say I’m not into them doesn’t mean I am not aware of how hard it is for a 4 year old to win a Champion Hurdle.
My problem with trends is handicaps have changed dramatically now there are so many Group races to chose from. Denman aside no longer do we get top class horses running in handicap chases. Nor do we get Binocular trying to do a Persian War and win the Tote Gold Trophy.
The quality is no longer there so it throws the weights out. Syncronized reacently won the Welsh Nation with a huge weight on his back which went against the trends simply because there was no quality horses in the field. Look back at the previous winners who carrioed similar weights and they were bear Gold Cup Class.
So where do you start from when you use trends…..from 5 years ago or 50 years ago?
Trends also tend to dipute each other….Plenty Derby winners have won the Arc but how many have won the 2000 Derby and Arc? Sea The Stars broke one trend but followed another if you follow my drift.
Where Cheltenham is concerned if I fancy Aigle D’o to win his race I couldn’t care less what trends say.if he’s good enough he’ll win simple as.
There are 4 times as many horses failed to win a second Champion Hurdle compared to those that have does that reduce Binocular’s chances of winning? Binocular doesn’t know a thing about trends and AP couldn’t care less and neither could I.
As your man says x amount won in Feb damn sure that won’t stop Hurricane Fly if he hits the front after the last.
Trends can be helpful but only a very very small part of what it takes to dig out winners.
Question: How many grand national winners were pulled up in a hurdle race at Cheltenham in their last outing before they won the Grand National.
Answer 1
I could also come up with a trend that would have found Don’t Push It but there are just as many say he couldn’t win as said he could.
Do anything you want with trends and there lies the problem
I like trends and related stats like impact values. I think they give pretty clear indications for some races. e.g I think it was reasonable to assume the most likely horses to win the Hennessy at Newbury were the younger ones on the basis that they tended to do well in the past and they were more likely to have improved beyond their handicap marks.
Flatstats does a lot of work on this stuff and it looks quite useful.
The problem is that the well-known factors are usually already taken into account by the market.
I am fascinated by the question of age though. I agree that the market might not fully account for it. However, I have found it very difficult to unearth hard data in this area. I am sure it would not be difficult to do a statistical analysis and the fact that there doesn’t seem to be one in the public domain suggests it is valuable.
Perhaps Corm could share his analysis with us.Hi Cormack
YEAH… I’m still a believer, but i don’t expect miracles. Trends analysis must be use to indicate the most/least favoured horses in the race. I edge forward in my seat when numerous form study methods seem to point at only one or two selections. (I like Solidus, VDW, watching races, Trends and Pro-Punter)
The link you posted is very interesting, and this supports my opinion that …"worthwhile Trend Analysis is a multi-layered and very complicated process"
This is why the "Trends" tipsters …rarely pick winners, their logic & methods are too simple.
I would like to pursue this… in the research section.
byefrom
carlisleI take very little notice of trends, except for the trends (or “form”) of individual horses. Some have a good record first time out / fresh, or with a particular jockey or course, or time of year. That type of thing is good and should be included in value finding.
But if we take the Hennessey trend of second season chasers as an example. It is obvious that a big, competitive handicap will probably need an improved performance to win (or possibly one that comes back to form after being dropped considerably by the handicapper). Something that leaves its current handicap mark behind. Second season horses are far less likely to be exposed, the handicapper does not know their worth yet because they are still improving. The race coming early on in the year gives another help to this type, as they can progress over the summer too. Not many second season chasers have raced over the trip of 3 miles 2 furlongs 110 yards. So those who have not had their stamina brought fully in to play before can improve. Therefore, third or fourth season chasers are up against it in this race.
However, we should judge all horses differently. There will be some second season horses who are open to less progression; where as there may be one or two third season types who have yet to show their best. Every horse is an individual. The correct information is to be had in its form, breeding and temperament; not the number of seasons to race.I’ve heard trends people saying it takes subjective opinion out of picking horses; yet they seem to choose which trends to include. On another forum one trends specialist went for Synchronised in the Welsh National, choosing to ignore the weight issue. So there is the question of what trends to take in to account (subjective opinion).
Then there is the fact some trends guys don’t bring percentages in to the equation. For example the weight trend in the Aintree Grand National. It is often talked about as fact that those carrying under 11stones have a far greater chance of winning. Yet in some years only 1 horse (Master Oats) or two, or three has carried 11 stones or more. One, two or three horses running against around 37 carrying less than 11 stones. Hardly a fair comparrison. When percentages are taken in to account the two groups have a similar record.
There will be a trend from time to time that makes a profit and can be be “value”. When a subject is not allowed for enough in prices of bookmakers / punters on the exchanges. However, once such a trend gets well known, average price available shortens but strike rate remains the same. So eventually a loss is made.
The biggest problems I have with trends are that it dismisses runners because of one statistic. Where as in truth 99% of horses have positives and negatives; and the 1% that don’t have negatives are long odds-on. Trends tell you who to back, usually without taking value in to consideration. A horse who has all the trends going for it, yet is obviously a poor value price, should NOT be backed. Where as if a horse has few trends going for it, yet is obviously a good value price, SHOULD be backed. Everyone needs value to make a profit.
Value Is EverythingHi Gingertipster
As for "Trends Analysis" in general, the big races (which are run on the same course & similar going) represents the same TEST year after year. If there are strong patterns within the race this can only be an asset to narrowing down the contenders.Anyone interested in brainstorming a new/original
approach to Trends…….
I suggest we use "The Welsh National" as a starting point.byefrom
carlisleI did some initial research on age using the Adrian Massey website.
There seems to be no obvious large disadvantage from backing older horses in jump races. However, the most remarkable thing about the data was the massive decline in participation as horses get older. Once horses get over 10, they drop out quickly as age and injury catch up with them and they retire or die.I like reading the trends and have had a go at it myself
But at heart I’m a sceptic…………I can see that there might be merit in the idea that trainers tend to be very conservative and send ‘the same type of horse’ to the same race year after year……….
The one that bugs me is using the betting or betting forecast as a trend………you know the ‘8/10 of the last winners have been 5/1 or under so that takes out 10 of the field’
To my mind the point of trends should be to find which horses ‘ought’ to be amongst the favourites. Using the betting as a trend is basically saying – these horses should be favourites for the race because they’re favourites for the race.
I’ve found an interesting take on trends in the racing post festival guide. Analysing the RSA Chase, specifically Time For Rupert from a trends perspective :
‘…the third black mark contains his hurdle form, which is much
better
than the average winner’
Brilliant logic, I thought
Ive read this with a great deal of interest and I suppose it depends on how you or I may view the subject and how relervent it maybe to your way of thinking
We have 10yr trends in the racing post which maybe a list of trends for the race that past WINNERS have come from.
Onthe other hand 1 could consentrate on races a trainer DOES A LOT BETTER IN than others and that interest me more than the other as some trainers SHOW VERY GOOD RESULTS in 1 main race type compared with the other races he enters.
I will be opening a thread that deals with around 10 trainers for the FLAT SEASON [odd aw during summer] and if past seaons are anything to go by a decent chance of profits
I noticed some dont like this approach but when the GRAND NATIONAL is mentioned from a TREND POINT OF VIEW surely that race a little bit of luck is ALSO INVOLVED and if 1 of the trends more or less picks 75% of the field to start with before removing other trends THAT APPLY TO THE RACE FROM PAST RESULTS theirs usually one of those trends that might find the winner THE PROBLEM HERE is which 1 as its very easy after the race to HIGHLIGHT that TREND.
In may ways its just another tool and if say TEN YEAR TRENDS in the RP corresponds with your own views it may just give you more confidence.
Like everything if it works for you all well and good if not your way of thinking then you would not look or use that approach anyway
% MAN
Hi % Man
I agree that "Trends Analysis" is just another tool. Your idea about studying trainers is a good one. Lets see if we can at least settle on ONE trainer to get our teeth into.
Mention a few… and I select ONE from your menu.
cheers from
carlisleTrends Analysis is an extremely useful and invaluable tool if done properly and used as a guide in conjunction with other forms of analysis. BOSTONS ANGEL in the RSA was a perfect trends fit for the race and was prominent on ratings so was a clear value bet at 16/1 for the RSA…HURRICANE FLY as well was also a trends topper in the Champion Hurdle and I had him top-rated but such trend-topping winners were few and far between at the festival this year if followed blindly.
Other notable trends toppers in the last year off the top of my head were MAKFI at 40/1 in the 2000 Guineas and BLUESEAS CRACKER in the Irish National at 33/1 as well as numerous trends contenders at Royal Ascot last year that came good.
On their own trends are not usually enough but they can be if done properly and if used on a selective race basis by focusing on Group 1’s and Class1/2 handicaps….to dismiss them out of hand is to miss an important part of the big-race puzzle. Trends and history does tend to repeat but not every year but I guarantee if you follow the top trends qualifier based on 10-15 year trends every year for 10-15 years you would more than likely get the winner most years using that approach and come out ahead.
A mistake a lot of trends followers make is to not place more relevancy and emphasis on stronger trends than the weaker ones and to look for alternative trends that the masses may miss.
For example if you have 2 horses and they both meet 9 of the 10 trends in question for a race but one missed out on a trend that had produced 10/10 previous winners of the race compared to the other which missed out on a trend that only produced 6/10 previous winners of the race then your decision is a lot easier.
Not much going on trends-wise today although NIDEEB is a fairly obvious choice for the Winter Derby meeting all the key criteria but not what I would classify as a ‘value trends’ contender.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.