Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The next horse in the sequence please
Rough Quest
Go Ballistic
Earth Summit
Fiddling The Facts
?Flyingbolt was by Airborne, who was thought to be impotent, and mated by accident with a mare in a paddock who was there to keep him company!
So are both of them the a result of an accidental mating
33/1 1983 St.James ridden by Steve Cauthen , trained by Matt McCormack who I also remember as a jumps trainer ?!
Whilst you can only beat what’s in front of you, when essentially outsiders finish 2nd, 3rd & 4th there are doubts about the validity of the form. I think thats true for a group1 or a class 5 handicap.
That combimed with the style of the win is making difficult to get a handle on it.
I looked at the closing 1m race to and saw that a OR89 horse won it by a short head in the same time as the fourth placed horse which is 101. There is the doubt what did the placed horse run to.
I feel that Frankel is around the mid 130’s with potential to go higher.
Timeform had Zilzal, Mark of Esteem and El Gran Sensor rated at 137/136 at the end of their careers so for Frankel is be rated the same at the start of his 3-y-o career is quite a compliment.
Maori – imagine the steward’s room
Steward to jockey "You are here for overuse of the whip, what’s your defense?"
Jockey "I couldn’t afford to be sued for all each-way bets, sir"
Yes the guy has made a bad mistake. A lengthy ban is probably required but as soon you can’t have punters suing jockeys for mistakes where would it end?
Maori – imagine the steward’s room
Steward to jockey "You are here for overuse of the whip, what’s your defense?"
Jockey "I couldn’t afford to be sued for all each-way bets, sir"
Yes the guy has made a bad mistake. A lengthy ban is probably required but as soon you can’t have punters suing jockeys for mistakes where would it end?
Mr. Man
Just reread the inital post and your reply and together I think I see what you are driving at with regards to "outsiders" i.e >10/1.
If the software/selection process throws up a horse worthy of consideration (which it does without reference to price)and it is larger than 10-1, the value is built in. And by backing a large enough sample that are bigger in price that the actual "chance" there is potential for profit.
Is that on the right wavelength?
An interesting way is see if a horse is ready to perform at it’s best. Taking the Aintree race, even if Denman was at a "low" would he be running at say 15lb below his best and yet still perform well enough to win as his opponents are 19lb+ behind him even if one or two of them perform at their peak? This doesn’t take any other factors like ground or distance into account.
In summary maybe the biorythms have to be taken in junction with other factors.
By working a "real" price of each horse, is there an oppotunity to back & lay if that’s your mind set?
Concentrating on the top 5 on your tissue (the ones with the best chance), anyting with a positive variance of >5% become a bet. I would suggest anything bigger than 11/2 would be EW as it might not be the best horse in the race but is value to return a small profit if placed.
Then anything in the top 3 in the betting that has a 5% below the "real" price becomes a win lay.
This does mean more action and possible multiple bets in each race but would it improve profitability? Just a thought.
Now this sounds like a chunk of work but it may offer up an alternative use of the system.
As >80% of all races are won by the top 5 in the betting, could the top 5 on the ratings (it seems to give a difference in pounds)
been given a price which is considered fair at a 100% book.Then if the actual price in the "village" is less than, say, 95% of the fair price it is a lay & if it is more than, say, 105% of the fair price it is a bet. That way you are should be backing or laying at better odds than the calculated chance. Could this reduce the number of bets and bring some element of value in the selections rather than backing them all no matter what?
It’s seems the handicapper do not take ANY note of important things like going, distance, days between runs and track configuration.
Denman runs what 20lbs below his "normal mark" when goin right handed.
Alberta’s Run best form is on good ground, so we could expect a drop off 20lbs on soft ground.
Whilst these are exterme examples, a horse will only perform to its best if all factors suit it. The offical handicappers think your should perform to your handicap mark all the time which to my mind is completing nuts! A more logical question is how did they perform to their expected performance under the race conditions and handicap from that. This would mean some horses wouln’t get dropped for being beaten because they run as expected but an improvement in the expected result wether 1st or 6th could result in a rise.
Of course this doesn’t answer how some horses get a mark in the first place and why "random" dropps seem to handed out.
Flyingbolt
Won the Champ chase and Irish National.
The only others to spring to mind:
Crisp – based on ’73 National
A young Kauto Star probably could done the double if he had a 100 day break in between.
In favour of the Ryanair. There are times when there will be real quality in the two and mile chase division and times when there won’t.
The 4m miler used to be limited to horses who hadn’t won a hurdles or flat races, now it a division two RSA.
What was wrong with the Cathcart in stead of the novice 2m5f chase. It used to be open to novices and second season chasers only. However that may have been to close to the Ryanair.
I agree with previous posters that not EVERY championship race needs to be run at Cheltenham.
The mares races could be somewhere else and the 3m Nov was at Aintree.
