SotD Update, 20th to 25th January 2020

A week that was equally frustrating and disappointing has somewhat put me on the back foot coming into the last five picks of the month.

We started January well enough, but now push has come to shove and I'm still three winners shy of making profit for the month. We've not been helped by the non-runner situation, but it is what it is and I really need a good week now.

Chris

Selections & Results : 20/01/19 to 25/01/20

20/01 : Maxed Out King @ 7/2 BOG 2nd at 3/1
21/01 : Golden Whisky @ 5/1 BOG non-runner
22/01 : Atalanta Queen @ 5/1 BOG 4th at 11/4
23/01 : Storm Control @ 11/4 BOG 5th at 11/4
24/01 : Klopp @ 7/2 BOG non-runner
25/01 : Petite Jack @ 9/2 BOG 3rd at 7/1

20/01/19 to 25/01/20 :
0 winning bets from 4 = 0.00% SR
P/L: -4.00pts

January 2020 :
3 winners from 19 = 15.79% SR
P/L: -3.00pts
ROI = -15.79%

Overall:
659 winners from 2485 = 26.52% S.R
P/L: +528.87pts
ROI: +21.28%

P.S. The full month by month SotD story can be found right here.
P.P.S The review of SotD's 2012 performance is
here.
Whilst the details for 2013 are now online here.
And the figures for 2014 are
now available here.
Our review of 2015 can be found right here
Whilst 2016's details are right here
The full story from 2017 can be read here.
Whilst the yearly review for 2018 is right here

And here is the overview for 2019

Stat of the Day is just one component of the excellent package available to all Geegeez Gold Members, so why not take the plunge and get involved right now?

Click here for more details.

Novice Hurdles: What’s the form worth?

As regular readers of these Punting Angles articles will know, most of the focus is on the staple diet of UK day to day racing, writes Jon Shenton. This is at least partially deliberate. Firstly, there is lots of it and therefore more data to crunch. Secondly, it makes at least some sense that higher class racing is  watched more, tracked more closely, better understood and that it is consequently harder to find an edge from data. After all, there is wall to wall coverage of the big days and events.

Better late than never, it’s time for us to get involved in the upper echelons of the sport. For one or two editions it’s going to be less about Plumpton, Sedgefield and Southwell (with all due respect) and more about Cheltenham, Leopardstown and the like.

This article, the first of two, is solely focusing on Graded novice hurdle races, exuding the mares' programme.  I will be evaluating most of the key dates in the calendar from Chepstow in October up to the festival at Cheltenham in March, with one eye on trying to find contenders for those mega spring festivals. This means events such as the Aintree and Punchestown festivals in April are not included.

To do this, I’ve pulled together data on Graded (Grade 1, 2 and 3) novice hurdles from both sides of the Irish Sea. In all honesty, the process has been quite a long one, and painstaking at times, manually checking race data and inputting it into a spreadsheet. However, it’s been a fantastic education and ultimately a rewarding exercise.  Whilst there are no usual point and click recommendations, I hope it’s of some use in your punting: the process has certainly opened my eyes to the world of novice hurdling.

Approach and method

Don’t worry, it’s not a science paper!   However, I do think it’s important to outline the process that I’ve used as a basis for much of this article.

To the best of my knowledge every Graded novice hurdle race since autumn 2015 (run in October to March of those years) has been evaluated to establish how runners performed over the subsequent 365-day period. That intel has then been pulled into a data table.  Based on key criteria a rating has then been generated to measure the quality of that race based on the future results of participants.

It only includes data up to 16th January this year so doesn’t contain any of the races from the most recent weekend, the Rossington Main, for example.

 

An example using the Tolworth

Sandown's Grade 1 takes place in early January and was won by Fidderontheroof earlier this month.   It is  run over a 2-mile trip and the question I’m trying to answer objectively is whether the race form is worth following or not based on the recent history of the race.  The below table shows a breakdown, by renewal, of the subsequent performance of all competing horses over a 90-day and 365-day period.   Horseracebase has been used to obtain the data.

Hopefully the column names make at least a modicum of sense. But, to explain further, the columns numbered 90 and 365 relate to form for that length of time, in days, after the Tolworth was run. So for example, the 6 in the 90run column for 2019 means that there were 6 runs from horses that ran within 90 days of the Tolworth in that year, the next column (90win) illustrates the number of winners from those 6 runners, 90pl the number of places and so on. Already this table gives a flavour as to whether this may be a race to follow in general terms.

The second part of the standing data shown in the table is evaluating the quality of the future form in terms of wins and places over 365 days, the column headers have “365” titles for clarity.

It is of intrigue that by backing every Tolworth runner blind for 90 days after the race at SP you’d walk away with a profit of £26.20 to a £1 level stake, a 72% return! (The P&L numbers are marked in yellow)

Volume of wins and places is interesting, but it’s helpful and important to understand the quality of those victories. So again, evaluating the Tolworth form in terms of the breakdown of those W’s and P’s in relation to the class they have been attained in, the below table gives the split.

The table shows the number of subsequent runs in Graded races at any level (GPrun) then working across from left to right:

  • G1W – number of G1 wins
  • G2W – number of G2 wins
  • G3W – you’ve guessed it, number of G3 wins
  • OthrW – wins in all other classes (inc. Listed)
  • G1PlOnly, G2PlOnly and G3PlOnly are the number of places attained in those grades, not inclusive of any winners

Summarising, the data paints a picture that, from 2015, there have been 49 runs from horses that competed in the Tolworth who then ran in Graded company during the following 365 days.  Of those, there have been four Grade 1 wins, three at Grade 2, three at Grade 3 and the column OthrW represents 19 wins in Listed or lower classes.

For information, the G1 victories are;

  • 2018 - Summerville Boy in the Supreme Novices Hurdle at Cheltenham
  • 2017 – Finians Oscar in the Mersey Novices Hurdle at Aintree
  • 2016 – Yorkhill in the Neptune (Ballymore) Novices Hurdle at Cheltenham and the Mersey Novices Hurdle at Aintree

These three animals prevailed in the Tolworth, all progressing to festival success and rubber stamping it as a race to follow.  You’d be right in thinking that fancy data is not required to confirm that the Grade 1 Tolworth is a strong contest.  However, understanding how the race compares against other quality races in terms of future form is of potential interest.

To contemplate its relative strength against other events, finding a way to rate or score each race is required. As a result, a relatively straightforward race rating has been constructed to do the job. The race rating system is highly subjective and there is a strong suspicion that if a hundred people did it, no two individuals would do it in the same way!  The exact method isn’t too important though, as the objective is to evaluate without bias which novice races are best to follow. A relatively simple (even with flaws) rating system still should give enough detail to be a bridge to further analysis.

Below is a breakdown of the ratings for the Tolworth, 2015 to 2020.

Here is a quick run-down of the columns and what they represent;

365%Score – this relates to the general quality of the race.  It’s calculated in the following way.

(The Win % of the race form for 365 days) + (the Place % of the race form for 365 days divided by 3)

A real example, the 2019 has 3 winners and 8 places from 19 runs (data in the first table), resulting in a winning percentage of 15.8% and the place percentage of 42.1%. Therefore the 365%Sc is calculated as below

15.8 + (42.1/3) = 29.8. All scores are rounded to the nearest number. A minimum of 10 runners in each race is required to generate a rating. 

GPWScore – this represents a rating generated from the subsequent winners over the next 365 days from each race.  The scores are comprised of;

  • Grade 1 win 10
  • Grade 2 win 6
  • Grade 3 win 3
  • Other Win 1

GPPLScore – this is the score value generated from the placed horses (excluding winners) over the following 365 days

  • Grade 1 place 3
  • Grade 2 place 2
  • Grade 3 place 1

GPScore = GPWScore + GPPLScore (i.e. a combined score from the win and place data)

RTNG  = the overall rating for the race in question, adding 365%Score + GPSccore

RaceRNK – is the overall rank of the race in terms of quality from the 163 races evaluated.   The lower the number the better.

Therefore, in the case of the Tolworth, the 2016, 17 and 18 renewals were relatively strong, with the 2016 renewal having the 7th best race rating in the dataset. 2015 and 2019 were disappointing with rankings of 122 and 97 respectively.

And that’s the process, fully transparent and easy to follow, I hope.

That’s quite a long scene set and explanation, but necessary in my view!

Onto the results...

 

Novice Hurdle Race Ratings

The below table is a consolidated summary of all of the analysed races from the years 2015 to present day and, as explained previously, only contests that have 10 or more subsequent runners are included in the data (the number of qualifying races is shown in the column titled QualR).

The table is sorted by the highest average rating of the race over the 5-year period.

 

There is unsurprisingly a large variance in quality based on subsequent 365-day form, from the Prestige, averaging a rating of 32.8, to the Chanelle Pharma, previously known as the Deloitte, averaging 96+ at the top of the pile.

It is at least mildly reassuring that the Grade 1’s feature in the higher end of the table in general. The Tolworth ranks in joint 7th confirming the view from the opening section that it’s a solid race to follow.

As someone who struggles to keep on top of the racing calendar and track the key movers and shakers, these data focus the mind. The bad news is that from here onwards there are no easy answers or instant takeaways: the only truly effective way to progress to a deeper understanding is good old-fashioned hard work and metaphorical elbow grease.

Having said that, interestingly, the 365P&L column shows in yellow where backing every subsequent runner from the events in question for 365 days post-race has been profitable to a level stake of £1 at SP. The fact there are so many is a pleasant surprise and worthy of more focus; there may be something to consider for building profitable angles, but ideally more than five years of race data would be needed to have the necessary confidence to invest.

For now, as a starter for ten, a quick dive into a couple of the prevalent races to follow seems a sensible path to follow.

Chanelle Pharma Novice Hurdle

This rating system shows that the Chanelle Pharma Novice hurdle (Deloitte until 2019) at Leopardstown is a clear and obvious winner with an average score of 96.2. That's higher than the second placed Cheltenham Classic Novices Hurdle by over 18 points! The Chanelle Pharma is now contested over a 2-mile trip since the newly-formed Dublin Racing Festival became reality in 2018 (it was previously run over 2m2f) and it is well known as a good pathfinder towards the Supreme and Ballymore in March.

This novice event has racked up 44 subsequent winners from 200 runs with a £1 level stake loss of £18 if you’d backed every one blind up to a year after the race.

Below is the view by renewal year, using the key columns described earlier.   Immediately the eye is drawn to the RaceRNK column, confirming that this contest had the 1st (joint), 3rd and 6th best individual races in the novice sphere since 2015.

Significantly, 19 of those 44 wins were delivered in elite Grade 1 company. That’s a whole ten more than any other race on the list and obviously worth delving into.

On closer inspection, those 19 triumphs are attributable to 11 individual horses. Nicholls Canyon with 4 of the victories (from the 2015 renewal), Sharjah with 4 (2018), Le Richebourg (2018) & Petit Mouchoir (2016) with 2 each. With sole G1 wins secured by Klassical Dream (2019), Samcro (2018), Barcardys (2017), Bellshill & Coney Island (2016), Windsor Park & Identity Thief (2015).

Perhaps surprisingly, there are only a trio of same season Cheltenham Festival winners after competing in the Chanelle Pharma for the analysed races. Klassical Dream won the Supreme last year with the two other two Prestbury Park winners coming in the Ballymore, Samcro in 2018 and Windsor Park in 2015.

It is noted that the 2019 renewal has had a relatively disappointing outturn. The law of averages perhaps would nod to a better 2020 vintage.

The Ballymore Novices Hurdle (Classic Novices Hurdle)

The second race on the list by some distance is the Ballymore Novices Hurdle (Classic) run at Cheltenham on Trials Day, which is very much on the radar for the upcoming weekend. Arguably, this race is a better one for the trackers than its Leopardstown counterpart as it’s delivered a £1 level stake profit of £57, through backing all runners each time they took to the track over the subsequent 365-day period.  That’s nearly a 36% return which seems utterly insane for 5 years-worth of renewals encompassing 159 total runners.   Perhaps it is the fact that it’s a Grade 2 which may drive some of that potential future value. Whatever the reason it’s a race about which to sit up and take notice.

I’ve added the 365P&L column to this table showing the value of backing all runners blind at SP for each renewal of the race. This event has a solid feel in terms of consistency, and whilst there have been 12 fewer G1 wins than the Leopardstown race previously discussed, the overall number of winners is only one fewer at 43, from a much smaller number of runs too: 159 compared to 200 in the Chanelle Pharma. Each Classic renewal has generated its share of future winners, with the 2016 version being the cream of the crop with a RaceRNK of 7.

Considering it’s an event which occurs on Cheltenham Trials Day, a good starting point would be to check how horses go on to perform at the big event.

It’s no silver bullet based on the last five years' data, that’s for sure. Not a single winner has been drawn from this race at the Festival in the same year, although it must be stated that five years is not a significant sample size. Also, in fairness, the crossbar has been rattled several times with Yanworth and Black Op coming close in the Ballymore, and Santini, Champers on Ice and Wholestone hitting the frame in the longer distance Albert Bartlett. Black Op and Santini did go on to enjoy Grade 1 victory at the Aintree Festival a month or so later in the Mersey and Sefton respectively. Several horses have developed into Festival winners in future years too.

On the point of future winners, whilst trawling through the results it was very easy to spot some eye-catching names finishing in eye-watering places in this contest historically. It’s best represented by this result card from the 2015 renewal.

Whatever happened to some of those also-rans failing to complete or trailing in 60 or so lengths behind the winner (whatever happened to the winner too?!)?

Whilst it’s a stretch to claim this picture is typical there are a whole raft of horses in this event who go on win on much bigger stages, often chasing ones too. In no particular order, Topofthegame, Elegant Escape, Slate House, Poetic Rhythm, Royal Vacation, William Henry and, going back further, Whisper, Coneygree and The New One have all cut their teeth in this race. That is an impressive roll call, which bodes well for Birchdale, Brewin’upastorm and Jarvey’s Plate from the mildly disappointing up to now 2019 crop.

Originally, I planned to go into more detail, but the powder will have to remain dry for a second part (this is already too long!) where I’ll cover the potentially profitable races to follow in more detail; including analysis of a horse's next run only after competing in one of these Graded novice hurdles.  I’ll also be evaluating the winners of the novice hurdles at Cheltenham to ascertain if there are any patterns linking back to the races included in this article.

- JS

p.s you can read PART TWO of this novice hurdle analysis here

Stat of the Day, 20th January 2020

Saturday's pick was...

7.15 Chelmsford : Strawberry Jack @ 5/2 BOG 3rd at 15/2 (Held up in rear, not clear run over 1f out, soon switched right, kept on inside final furlong, no impression, went 3rd post)

Monday's pick runs in the...

3.30 Newcastle :

Before I post the daily selection, just a quick reminder of how I operate the service. Generally, I'll identify and share the selection in the evening before the following day's race and I then add a detailed write-up later on that night/next morning.

Those happy to take the early price on trust can do so, whilst some might prefer to wait for my reasoning. As I fit the early service in around my family life, I can't give an exact timing on the posts, so I suggest you follow us on Twitter and/or Facebook for instant notifications of a published pick.

Who?

Maxed Out King @ 7/2 BOG

...in a 5-runner, Class 4, Handicap Chase for 5yo+ over 2m½f on Soft ground worth £4,289 to the winner...

Why?...

Well, this horse's name just kept on cropping up in all my shortlist reports, so here's just a brief overview of a handful of them...

1. This 12 yr old gelding may be getting on, but he's still running well and is 4 from 13 (30.8% SR) for 7.88pts (+60.6% ROI) in handicap chases, including 4/8 under today's jockey Danny Cook, 3/10 at Class 4 and 2/3 at today's trip.

2. He's by Desert King, whose offspring are 23/118 (19.5% SR) for 71.3pts (+60.4% ROI) in handicap chases over the last four years, including 14/50 (28%) for 53.55pts (+107.1%) at trips shorter than 2m2f.

3. Jockey Danny Cook is 9/38 (23.7% SR) for 8.55pts (+22.5% ROI) over the past 30 days, trainer Sue Smith is 9/33 (27.3%) for 13.55pts (+41.1%) on the same period, whilst together they are 9/24 (37.5%) for 22.55pts (+94%) including 6/12 950%) for 20pts (+166.4%) in chases.

4. More longer-term than just the last month or so, Sue Smith is 28/89 (31.5% SR) for 89.8pts (+100.9% ROI) in handicaps during January since the start of 2016 from which, soft ground runners are 14/36 (38.9%) for 50.7pts (+140.7%)

5. And finally for today, Sue's last 50 handicap chasers to be sent off at Evens to 13/2 here at Newcastle have generated 14 victories (28% SR) and 12.6pts profit at an ROI of 25.2% and they include the following of relevance today...

  • 13/45 (28.9%) for 10.73pts (+23.8%) at Class 3/4
  • 11/36 ((30.6%) for 17.46pts (+48.5%) during November to January
  • 10/33 (30.3%) for 14.48pts (+43.9%) on Soft ground
  • 10/32 (31.25%) for 7.82pts (+24.4%) with Danny Cook in the saddle
  • and 4/7 (57.1%) for 9.61pts (+137.2%) over today's course and distance...

...whilst during Nov-Jan, Danny and Sue are 6/19 (31.6% SR) for 6.04pts (+31.8% ROI)at Class 3/4 on Soft ground, including 2/4 (50%) for 6.08pts (+152%) over course and distance...

...giving us...a 1pt win bet on Maxed Out King @ 7/2 BOG as was widely available at 8.05am Monday morning (but please check your BOG status first). To see what your preferred bookie is quoting...

...click here for the betting on the 3.30 Newcastle

Don't forget, we offer a full interactive racecard service every day!

REMINDER: THERE IS NO STAT OF THE DAY ON SUNDAYS

Here is today's racecard

P.S. all P/L returns quoted in the stats above are to Betfair SP, as I NEVER bet to ISP and neither should you. I always use BOG bookies for SotD, wherever possible, but I use BFSP for the stats as it is the nearest approximation I can give, so I actually expect to beat the returns I use to support my picks. If that's unclear, please ask!

SotD Update, 13th to 18th January 2020

No wins from six last week was a mid-month setback, to be honest. All six ran as though they had chances, but none went well enough in the closing stages to mount any serious challenges.

It's only one week in isolation, we're still up for the month so far and we've still got 11 chances to land the 3 or 4 winners I'm searching for before February.

Stay tuned and let's see how that goes!

Chris

Selections & Results : 13/01/19 to 18/01/20

13/01 : Break The Silence @ 10/3 BOG 4th at 5/2
14/01 : Stockburn @ 11/4 BOG 4th at 2/1
15/01 : Reasoned @ 5/2 BOG 8th at 9/4
16/01 : Oscar's Leader @ 7/2 BOG 5th at 15/8
17/01 : She's Easyontheeye @ 4/1 BOG 3rd at 15/2
18/01 : Strawberry Jack @ 5/2 BOG 3rd at 5/2

13/01/20 to 18/01/20 :
0 winning bets from 6 = 0.00% SR
P/L: -6.00pts

January 2020 :
3 winners from 15 = 20.00% SR
P/L: +1.00pts
ROI = +6.67%

Overall:
659 winners from 2481 = 26.56% S.R
P/L: +532.87pts
ROI: +21.48%

P.S. The full month by month SotD story can be found right here.
P.P.S The review of SotD's 2012 performance is
here.
Whilst the details for 2013 are now online here.
And the figures for 2014 are
now available here.
Our review of 2015 can be found right here
Whilst 2016's details are right here
The full story from 2017 can be read here.
Whilst the yearly review for 2018 is right here

And here is the overview for 2019

Stat of the Day is just one component of the excellent package available to all Geegeez Gold Members, so why not take the plunge and get involved right now?

Click here for more details.

SotD Update, 6th to 11th January 2020

Two winners and a placer from five runners and 3.66pts profit are the kind of numbers we like to see at the end of a week for SotD. It doesn't always pan out that way, of course, but January has started steadily enough with three winners on the board already. We're going to need another three if not four to ensure a profitable month, so there'll be no resting on laurels here. 2020 is a clean slate, so we've achieved nothing yet.

Chris

Selections & Results : 06/01/19 to 11/01/20

06/01 : Ripstick @ 11/4 BOG 3rd at 3/1
07/01 : Cold Harbour @ 10/3 BOG WON at 3/1
08/01 : Qaseeda @ 5/2 BOG 5th at 9/1
09/01 : Wenceslaus @ 7/2 BOG non-runner
10/01 : Instant Replay @ 10/3 BOG (8/3 after a 20p R4) WON at 6/4
11/01 : George Valentine @ 7/2 BOG 16th at 4/1

06/01/20 to 11/01/20 :
2 winning bets from 5 = 40.00% SR
P/L: +3.00pts

January 2020 :
3 winner from 9 = 33.33% SR
P/L: +7.00pts
ROI = +77.78%

Overall:
659 winners from 2475 = 26.63% S.R
P/L: +538.87pts
ROI: +21.80%

P.S. The full month by month SotD story can be found right here.
P.P.S The review of SotD's 2012 performance is
here.
Whilst the details for 2013 are now online here.
And the figures for 2014 are
now available here.
Our review of 2015 can be found right here
Whilst 2016's details are right here
The full story from 2017 can be read here.
Whilst the yearly review for 2018 is right here

And here is the overview for 2019

Stat of the Day is just one component of the excellent package available to all Geegeez Gold Members, so why not take the plunge and get involved right now?

Click here for more details.

Stat of the Day, 13th January 2020

Saturday's pick was...

4.00 Warwick : George Valentine @ 7/2 BOG 16th at 4/1 (Prominent, lost place 3f out)

Monday's pick runs in the...

3.00 Southwell :

Before I post the daily selection, just a quick reminder of how I operate the service. Generally, I'll identify and share the selection in the evening before the following day's race and I then add a detailed write-up later on that night/next morning.

Those happy to take the early price on trust can do so, whilst some might prefer to wait for my reasoning. As I fit the early service in around my family life, I can't give an exact timing on the posts, so I suggest you follow us on Twitter and/or Facebook for instant notifications of a published pick.

Who?

Break The Silence @ 10/3 BOG

...in a 8-runner, Class 6, A/W handicap for 4yo+ over 7f on Fibresand worth £2,782 to the winner...

Why?...

Since mid-September, which was the last time of any his seven rivals won a race, this 6 yr old gelding has had ten consecutive top 4 finishes (9 in the first three home), culminating in a win over this class, course and distance ten days ago.

That win took him to 4 wins and 5 places from 14 starts over the track and trip, including..

  • 4 wins, 4 places from 11 at Class 6
  • 3 wins, 4 places from 10 in blinkers
  • and 3 wins, 3 places from 7 under today's jockey, Jonathan Fisher (all at C6, whilst wearing blinkers)

Moreover, since the start of 2016 in A/W handicaps here at Southwell, horses sent off at odds ranging from 11/10 to 7/1 within 30 days of an LTO win at the same class, course and distance are 37 from 112 (33% SR) for 37.1pts (+33.1% ROI), including of relevance today...

  • 31/90 (34.4%) for 40.7pts (+45.2%) from male runners
  • 24/72 (33.3%) for 28.4pts (+39.5%) at Class 6
  • 19/51 (37.3%) for 26.4pts (+51.8%) during January/February
  • 17/37 (45.9%) for 44.4pts (+119.9%) over 6/7 furlongs
  • 15/33 (45.5%) for 26.05pts (+78.9%) with 6/7 yr olds
  • 14/35 (40%) for 19pts (+54.3%) within 10 days of their last run
  • and 5/14 (35.7%) for 16.7pts (+119.4%) over this 7f C&D...

...whilst Class 6 males racing over 6/7f during December to February are 6 from 13 (46.2% SR) for 23.1pts (+177.4% ROI)...

...giving us...a 1pt win bet on Break The Silence @ 10/3 BOG as was widely available at 8.10am Monday morning (but please check your BOG status first). To see what your preferred bookie is quoting...

...click here for the betting on the 3.00 Southwell

Don't forget, we offer a full interactive racecard service every day!

REMINDER: THERE IS NO STAT OF THE DAY ON SUNDAYS

Here is today's racecard

P.S. all P/L returns quoted in the stats above are to Betfair SP, as I NEVER bet to ISP and neither should you. I always use BOG bookies for SotD, wherever possible, but I use BFSP for the stats as it is the nearest approximation I can give, so I actually expect to beat the returns I use to support my picks. If that's unclear, please ask!

Clock Watcher: Rise for National Anthem

Welcome to a new weekly feature, Clock Watcher, where we'll shine a light on a few horses that might be interesting to follow from a speed and/or sectional perspective. It is my hope that this column will also serve to introduce, embed and reinforce various concepts which may be unfamiliar at this stage.

Generally speaking, a run considered of sufficient merit to appear here will have two components: the horse will have recorded a time which is at least reasonably quick for the conditions; and the horse will have recorded a noteworthy upgrade on that performance.

The first component is fairly self-explanatory even if defining what is "at least reasonably quick" is highly subjective. Geegeez.co.uk doesn't currently produce its own speed ratings (and there is no plan for that to change at this stage), so for our purposes we will use Racing Post's Topspeed figures, which are published under license on this site.

The second component requires a bit more introduction. What is an 'upgrade', how does a horse achieve one, and how is this quantified?

What is an upgrade?

Track and field athletes run at their most efficient level - enabling them to produce their fastest times - when they travel at a constant speed. For instance, when Kenenisa Bekele broke the 5000m world record in 2004, a record which still stands today, his 1000m split times - or sectional times - were as follows:

12:37.35 (2:33.24, 2:32.23, 2:31.87, 2:30.59, 2:29.42)

Let's tabulate that:

A few months later, in the Olympic 5000m final, they covered the first 4 kilometres in 648.62 seconds, almost 41 seconds slower than the world record pace. Bekele, overwhelming favourite for gold, was readily out-sprinted and had to settle for silver, the winner recording a final time of 794.39 seconds, 37 seconds slower than the world record.

In a race where they crawled (relatively) and then sprinted, Bekele was unable to produce his best form. He could not run inefficiently to the same effect as his vanquisher, the Olympic 1500m champion Hicham El Guerrouj, whose superior kick facilitated his victory.

We know what is 'efficient' based on the body of similar historical races, and we call this par.

In simple terms, any deviation from efficiency - or par - whether fast early then fading, or slow early with a rapid finish, earns an upgrade. Thus, in this case, both the winner and second - as well, indeed, as the third through to sixth placed finishers - would have received upgrade figures.

An upgrade, then, is a recognition of the degree to which a horse raced inefficiently.

It should be noted that racing inefficiently will not necessarily prevent a horse, or an athlete, from winning. Indeed, El Guerrouj 'got the run of the race' back in 2004, that slow time suiting his questionable stamina but stronger kick. The primary objective is, after all, not to break records but to win the race.

What about par?

There is more detail in the User Guide around what may be new terms to some readers, and I'd encourage you to check that document (page 63 onwards in the current version, click here).

However, for the purposes of expediency, a quick line on par here. Par is the threshold against which all subsequent races over a course and distance are measured. From the User Guide,

Par is an assessment of the optimal energy distribution – based on relative time – between the sections of a race. It is not an average of all sectional times. Rather, it follows a fairly complex formula which uses an ‘nth percentile’ race as par. Further information can be found in Simon Rowlands’ excellent Sectional Timing Introduction report, available at this link. Indeed, that document is highly recommended for anyone keen to get a head start with the applications of sectional information.

So, in simple terms, par is a baseline, a means by which we may better understand the context of a performance.

Let's look at some examples.

 

An obvious one...

We'll start with a sore thumb, a horse on everyone's radar regardless of whether via visuals, sectionals or form. The very well related Waldkonig made his debut in a run-of-the-mill Wolverhampton novice stakes for two-year-olds on 7th December. A Kingman half-brother to Arc winner Waldgeist, he was sent off 6/4 favourite over the extended mile trip.

In the end, he won by nine widening lengths; the data offer some interesting footnotes to that emphatic victory.

 

There is a lot going on in this image, so let's take it step by step. First up, note that I have selected 'Call Points' (a five section breakdown) top left and I have clicked the 'Show Chart' button, which then changes colour and displays 'Hide Chart', the action that would happen upon a further click. So those are my selected parameters. (I also have the data view selected from my My Geegeez page, check the User Guide for more on that).

Beneath the blue buttons is a line of five coloured rectangles. These are the Call Points sectionals for the race. That is, they relate to the race leader at five points during the race, specifically the six-furlong, four-furlong, three-furlong, two-furlong and finishing posts.

The colour of the rectangles indicates the relative speed of each section, on a cold/slow/blue to hot/fast/red scale. Thus, this race was even (green) early, slow (blue) in the middle, and fast (orange) late. The OMC (Opening, Midrace, Closing) view below captures this more succinctly and is a better place for newbies to start, due to there being fewer data points.

Getting back to the main image, and the main part of it, we see a chart. This chart is highly configurable but the image shows the default, which is the sectional percentage data, by furlong, for the winner - and with the black par line also displayed. Any/all runners can be added or removed to/from the chart by clicking their name underneath or using the 'toggle' button top left.

Next to the toggle button is a statement of how many races comprise the par calculations and, therefore, the degree of confidence in par. In this case - indeed in the vast majority of all-weather race cases - confidence is high. At this stage, confidence is more limited elsewhere while the body of data grows as more races are run over various courses and distances.

The chart reflects what the coloured rectangles are saying: that the leader went even-ish (slightly above par) early, slowed up notably in the middle of the race, before finishing very strongly - well above the black par line.

Beneath the chart is the full result table, which has a familiar look to it. I have clicked on the winner's finishing position (i.e. on the text that says '1st') to reveal his sectional data - coloured rectangles for Call Points (including split times, aggregates time, and sectional time as a percentage of overall time, i.e. sectional percentage), running lines (the horse's position in the field and distance behind the leader, or in front if the race leader) - and in-running comment.

The rightmost column in the result table is 'UP', and it contains the upgrade figure. In this example, Waldkonig was calculated as having an upgrade of 29 by our algorithm. Again, in terms of quantifying ability, this tells us little more than that, like his father, Waldkonig is able to quicken impressively off a steady pace.

Waldkonig was given a Topspeed rating of 47 for his time performance in the race. That is far from a standout rating and would not highlight the horse's effort as noteworthy, though of course the nine length winning margin would be missed by nobody. By applying the upgrade figure to a representation of the time performance we get closer to an understanding of the merit of the effort: clearly it takes more ability to quicken off a fast pace than a slow one, with the degree to which a horse quickens also worthy of note.

We've been playing with combining various numbers to produce some sort of 'composite' time/performance rating, though I must declare at this stage that I'm not 100% certain that adding upgrades to Topspeed is a sensible thing to do.

We are currently trying to establish whether it improves the predictive ability of the raw speed figure: they are calculated on different scales so it is probably not entirely sensible to simply add the two together.

Nevertheless, there is some indication in the work done to date that this somewhat contrived 'combo' number has merit. In the case of Waldkonig, his 47 gets an extra 29 for a 76 overall. That is a better reflection of his performance, though probably not of his ability given this was a debut on a track that was likely not ideal. In any case, what it tells us unequivocally is that, in a race where the pace scenario looks muddling, Waldkonig is capable of a searing turn of foot.

 

A (slightly) less obvious one...

At a slightly less 'could be anything' level, trainer David Brown rewarded his and connections' patience when National Anthem, off the track for 417 days since running poorly at the same venue, blasted home in a six-furlong novice event at Southwell. Brown is the horse's third trainer in three career starts spanning 821 days and a wind operation!

Sent off at 15/2, fifth favourite of six but not completely unfancied, his performance was very different in sectional terms to that of Waldkonig, as the image below illustrates:

 

Here we see from the running line that National Anthem jumped very alertly and maintained that advantage, albeit that it was diminishing in the final furlong. He was better than four lengths in front after a furlong and fully nine lengths clear with an eighth to go. Little wonder that he tired close home. Also little wonder that he's entered over five furlongs at the same track on Monday where it will be very interesting to see how he goes in a handicap off a mark of 75, if taking up his engagement.

 

Far more speculatively...

Meanwhile, down in the basement, a horse called Disruptor might pop up at a price some time soon. He ran on 30th December at Lingfield, finishing third, and as can be seen from the below he ran an almost polar opposite race to par - based on the five Call Point sections:

 

This lad has had a few goes - twelve, including one since, to be precise - and has showed much improved form when leading or racing prominently recently. Prior to his run on Monday, where his inexperienced (14 rides) jockey shot up in the air as the stalls opened and then got sandwiched between two no-hopers for most of a furlong, he'd run his three best races from the front.

If/when he can get a slightly softer advantage - note the undesirable red zone section from five to four in his running data above - he has a chance to see his race out more effectively, albeit very likely in low grade company and with a more experienced pilot on top.

That said, looking more closely at the draw (DR) column below, it is worth noting that he has been consistently fortunate with his stall position in recent starts.

[NB note also that, in 'Show Sectionals' mode, races without sectionals have blanks. Hovering over the running lines segment displays details of the performance, including comments, position, distance beaten and jockey].

 

That's all for this inaugural edition of Clock Watcher. I hope it has provided food for thought and that, over time, it will support your understanding of the new data we are beginning to provide and how you might best take advantage of it for yourself.

Until next time...

Matt

p.s. as of Wednesday 8th January, sectional data is now live for Gold subscribers on geegeez.co.uk. You will need to enable it from the Race Card Options section of your My Geegeez page. On that page, you will also find a link to the most recent version of the User Guide, in which there is a comprehensive outline of sectional timing and how it is published on this site.

The current coverage comprises Total Performance Data tracks, as it is from them that we license our data. We hope to be able to integrate both Ascot and RTV (UK) tracks in due course. To be clear, we have no in house sectional aggregation function. Rather, we license 3rd party data as a publisher and aim to add value in the visualisation of that data. I very much hope by mid-year we have a far more comprehensive provision in terms of track coverage.

2020 Vision: Some Thoughts on Betting Better

It's the New Year and, depending on your reading of the calendar, a new decade, too. What better time then to commit to self-improvement and renewal? Out with the old and in with the new, resolve strengthened by the turning of the page.

That's the fantasy of a billion beings on Jan 1, only for the reality of the pain of change - in the midst of what are often the coldest, darkest, most financially stretched days of the year - to bite.

But some people do keep to their resolutions, and they do achieve their goals. Size 12, personal best 5k, profitable for the first time, whatever: the secret (such as it is) that separates the achievers from the make-believers is planning and execution.

Talk is cheap, thoughts are free; planning takes time and effort, but also locks in personal commitment.

I wish you whatever you wish yourself in 2020. If a part of it is to improve your betting, maybe you'll find some nutrition in what follows...

1: Understand generally where you are now

Why do you bet? Why do you bet win singles, each way doubles, Lucky 15's, or whatever? How often do you bet? How much? And why do you bet on horses rather than football, tennis, poker, roulette or bingo?

Is it to make a profit? If you're a Gold subscriber (or indeed pay for information from any source), it probably is, to some degree at least. But that's also very likely not the only reason.

From surveying readers on this site over many years, I know that any and all of passing time, solving puzzles/being proved right, and general engagement are common - and perfectly valid - reasons for betting. None of these, however, is specific to betting on horse racing. The same as betting for profit. So there must be more to it. Why racing? Why?

Perhaps it's the regular predictable availability of puzzles/profit opportunities; maybe it's the colour and pageantry; possibly it's the array of data enabling a deeper understanding and a chance of an edge. As with most things in life, it is almost certainly a combination of some or all of these elements.

Understanding ones general relationship with betting on racing is helpful because it finds a place for everything that follows: it offers a global context which, for many/most people, doesn't really have much to do with money at all.

Still, it is a legitimate question to ask oneself: am I betting on racing for profit primarily?

My answer is NO. There are lots of ways I could make a few quid (and a good few more quid than I do from betting on racing) in roughly the same amount of time I invest in looking for horses I like.

I bet primarily for enjoyment - for fun. But I do it with a profit expectation. Betting for fun and profit are not mutually exclusive. And don't let the dry arses tell you otherwise.

If you don't understand the underlying reasons for your racing betting, you may be chasing the wrong objectives and, consequently, a futile or frustrating relationship with the game.

Suggestion #1: Take time to understand the REAL reason(s) you bet on racing

 

2: Measure where you are now

If you can't measure it, you can't improve it

That quote is credited to Peter Drucker, a management consultant. It could have been uttered by a sports coach, a nutritionist, a headmistress, or a punter. It applies to any pursuit where we have a desire to move towards the right of whichever continuum consumes us.

But here's the tricky bit. What should we measure?

Again, the default is profit and loss, and that of course is something about which we all need a solid understanding. Doubtless these words contain enough pedagogy - pontification, perhaps - without a sermon on responsible gambling. So let us assume that we all understand those boundaries and operate within a range of acceptable loss to profit.

But how much are you losing, or winning? And how accurately do you know this? What is your method of calculation?

For me, I do an annual - six-monthly if I feel it's going especially poorly or well - review of account deposits and withdrawals. This tells me nothing about volume of bets, average stake size, race or bet types in which I excel or fail lamentably; but it gives me the most fundamental financial metric of up/down.

I've shared this info for previous years numerous times in the blog on this site.

Here's my 2019:

 

That's a good bit better than most years, due almost entirely to a couple of chunky wins in March. [The weird 'pence' figures relate to conversions from euro on Irish tote bets, in case you're wondering]

But note also the 'game of two halves' nature of the year. There is a reason for this, but I won't dwell on it here. Suffice it to say that betting when not in a sound mental state is more likely to lead to losses. On we go...

If I'd not had those spring draws, I'd have won about a grand. But it is important and fair to note that part of my betting approach is to tilt at windmills: to play 'gettable' multi-leg pools where there is the prospect of a disproportionate return on investment. As I've written elsewhere on here before, finding value is often more about fishing in the right (both literal and metaphorical) pools than backing the right horses.

My annual profit target, such as it is, is about £2,500; but really my target is to enjoy the process of finding bets. It's a time-consuming process and the investment of time is far more material than the cash (because the percentage of my time used for betting is more material than the percentage of my funds).

That's a verbose way of saying I have to enjoy it to justify the hours deployed. Maybe you have more time available than me, maybe you have less. Maybe you have more funds available, maybe you have less.

Therein lies the key to measuring success: choose the right metrics for you and measure where you are with them.

Time is always the kingpin metric for me, so if I don't have time I either won't bet or, more likely, I'll only make a casual action play. More on that in due course.

Suggestion #2: Understand your key metric(s) and quantify where you are against it/them as of the end of 2019

 

3: Pause for breath

There is a temptation at this time of year to decide to do something - lose weight, change job, et cetera - and then charge ahead on this new life-changing trajectory.

Generally speaking, that is probably sub-optimal. Better, once a new objective has been determined, is to establish how to get there. But before that it is good to mull quietly the what and why of the resolution.

For example, it might be perfectly acceptable to lose £1000 over the course of a year betting on a sport in which hundreds of hours of recreational time are enjoyed. After all, that's £20 a week, the price of not much beer and increasingly little caffeine and froth. Of course it would be nice to save the 'bag of sand' but if it involves upsetting the pleasurable equilibrium of perusing form, striking wagers and watching racing, then perhaps it's not a price worth paying.

Decide what is important for you, not what others might tell you is important.

It might be enjoyment before profit.

It might be winners (i.e. being right) before profit.

It might be profit at all costs.

And, again, it very well might be a combination of all three.

Suggestion #3: Before moving forward, take some time to allow your understanding of the current status quo to inform your next move

 

4: Set up to succeed

If, after pausing for thought, the route forward still looks different from the path hitherto then it is time to take action. Action works best when it is considered, informed and documented. I know, boring, right? All I'm really saying is that we have a better chance of success when we set up to succeed.

Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best

This quote, attributed to the German statesman Otto von Bismarck, could easily have supplanted the word 'politics' with 'Betting on horse racing'; but I don't suppose OvB was much of a punter, at least not of equines.

He was, however, a man of action; a man who believed that words were secondary to deeds. We probably all believe that, but we have to live it, too.

Getting back to it, betting on horse racing is the art of the possible, the attainable. It is very often the art of the next best. In other words, forget lottery win utopia (unless you play, and win, the lottery) and instead work on incremental improvement of approach.

For example, if you want to live off betting income but you're currently a losing punter, stage one is to either lose less or break even. It is not to live off betting income.

For example, if you want to look at more than four races a day but only have twenty minutes to do it, be aware that you will have to sacrifice the amount you can discern at the altar of covering much ground.

For example, if you need lots of winners to retain confidence, betting longshots more than occasionally is going to be incompatible.

For example, if you want to take a value betting approach (hint: you should if you want to improve your bottom line), failing to watch racing and/or use the best information sources will make it hard for you to know anything not already completely subsumed within the market.

Suggestion #4: Have time, bank, strategy and tools in place to optimise - and elevate - your desire outcome

 

5: Review, Review, Review

Your bet just lost. Or won. What now? On to the next one? No, not for the improvers.

Like everything in life, to be better we have to do more of what works and less of what doesn't. And, to do that, we have to understand what works and what doesn't.

A bet is a record of effort expended, of a decision made and, ultimately, of money won or lost. How often do you ask yourself whether the reasons for choosing a particular horse, one component of which should always be price for the value player, proved accurate? How often do you see a horse fail to win for a reason you predicted but which you felt was over-stated in the available odds? Was it then a good bet, or a bad bet?

Which other horse(s) caught your eye during the race? Were any unlucky in running? [NB ignore perennial hard luck horses: they're overbet and don't win nearly enough to legitimise the volume of trackers in which they reside]. What happened at the start of the race? [Plenty of horses cannot win after getting mangled at the start, such unlucky runners almost always missed by the in-running comment writers].

Use a tracker, and add horses - with comments - to it. Or use the notes feature in your chosen form tool.

Here is a snap of my Tracker for those entered in the next few days:

 

And a Tracker note, complete with dreadful pun for my own later pleasure, displayed when hovering over the gold star on the race in question:

 

As it turns out, Kraka has run four times since on the all-weather and lucked out hugely with the draw, see the DR column below. Now rated 64, he'll win soon (I hope), though I'd definitely prefer his chance at six furlongs rather than this seven panels affair.

 

Another great means of improvement is to review your bets as a body of work. I have to say I do not personally do this, mainly because of the time but also because of the nature of my betting (often incompatible with Bet Tracker constraints). Mainly, though, because I can't be bothered. This is what I mean by working within your capabilities. I have to measure all sorts of things for business reasons and, when it comes to my betting, I just want to know my bottom line.

Could I improve if I cut out areas of weakness? Of course! But the opportunity cost - the time spent recording, which could be spent watching races, or with my family, or reading a book, or kicking a ball, or in the pub - is too great for me.

Others will relish the opportunity to dissect their wagers by any number of parameters. Geegeez has a free bet tracker which allows just this. Introduced only last year, it has been wildly popular: the feedback - words - has been effusive and the number of users tracking their bets - actions - has actually taken me a little by surprise. Clearly many have a stronger desire to understand the nuances of their wagering set, and fair play and the best of luck to them. They give themselves every chance.

Here's an example - anonymous - of one geegeez.co.uk Bet Tracker user (a free subscriber as it happens), who has recorded almost 400 bets to date:

By Handicap or Non-Handicap

By Race Distance

 

Non-Handicaps up to 7 furlongs

 

Yes, of course it's a tiny sample size and possibly, maybe even probably, just noise. But there's a near 100% chance that this user previously did not know they might be quite good at identifying value in this context...

Suggestion #5: Review what you're doing, not just for signs of improvement but to ensure you're not sterilising something which used to be fun

 

6: Action vs Fancy: Enjoy the GAME

At the end of the day, the most important thing for me is to enjoy the game. To be involved, through this website, with sponsoring jockeys (David Probert, Callum Rodriguez, Rex Dingle, Mitch Godwin) and a training yard (Anthony Honeyball), and to syndicate racehorses (ten currently, with Anthony, Olly Murphy, Mick Appleby and Wilf Storey) so that other like-minded souls can also get closer to the action, is a genuine 24 carat bona fide 100% pleasure. To call it work is a truly great fortune.

Betting on racing is not incidental to me, but it is a pleasurable pursuit. I bet most days, some days more than others, and sometimes staking more or less.

When I have the time to really get stuck into a card, and I identify a sore thumb of a bet, I will wager accordingly. Never massive but big enough to justify the perceived opportunity.

When I have less time and/or I spot a few of mild interest, I'll have action bets.

I don't want to look at the card for an hour or two and not have a bet. That's what the arid bottoms suggest we do. No ta. If I don't have a strong view, or I think the market about has it, I'll make a cup of tea bet; and if I like more than one I might strike a sticky bun wager as well. But I will be invested in some small way in the outcome.

It is generally obvious whether a horse should be a cup of tea or a Dom Perignon stake; where it isn't, it should probably be somewhere in between erring towards the 'Rosie' urn. For me anyway.

The point: enjoy the ride. Or what is the point?

After all, if it's not fun, we might as well go and get a(nother) job.

Suggestion #6: bet in line with the strength of your fancy (and always in line with your means, obvs). And enjoy it: one day all this might no longer be possible

 

Matt

Stat of the Day: The 2019 Review

*IMPORTANT: the email I sent this morning opened with "Let me start with the caveat. Free, potentially, yes; but risk-free"

It should have said "Free, potentially, yes; but NOT risk-free" - sincere apologies. Matt

Last Tuesday marked the end of SotD's eighth full calendar year since its inception as a non-tipping piece back in November 2011, so thank you to those of you (including Matt) for putting up with me all that time!

The logic behind this daily feature is to take a slight step from the normal form book/ race card approach to betting, since form is temporary at best and race cards are still largely inadequate, although Matt's efforts here at Geegeez are the exception to the rule.

My brief is to give some statistical pointers as to how you could frame a bet from another angle and whilst we don't expect all of them to win, we do expect a decent run for our money and often the stats we quote will pinpoint winners elsewhere too. So it's really more than a tip, it's a way-in to a bet that you can use over and over again.

We attract lots of new members to the site every year, thanks mainly to the continual improvements made to the racing toolkit and partly due to SotD's success, and this is bringing in more savvy punters looking for better data, information and racecards than they'll find anywhere else on the 'net, so here's briefly how I "do my bit"...

My first port of call is find runners who fit a stat (or usually a number of stats) suggesting they will go well. I have quite a large portfolio of saved micro-systems and angles (our Query Tool is brilliant for this) and they generate a list of possibles each day. I also look at the Shortlist report and the qualifiers generated from the Report Angles facility and I end up with a fairly long list of horses/races to assess.

I then cross off the races that I don't even want to consider and only then do I start to look at a race card. Where I have multiple selections in a race, I'll then make a decision on which would be my preferred runner in the race. At this point, I should now have less than 10 races/horses on my shortlist, I then put them in an order that I think reflects their likelihood of winning and at this point, I look at the prices.

Once I've got the prices, I cross out those that don't offer me enough perceived value and then the one that now stands top of the list is the daily selection. We aim to have the selection online in the early evening before racing (preferably by 6.00pm) where possible but occasionally due to home-life, travel plans and/or holidays, it can be later, but there's a selection every day except Sundays and we don't take Bank Holidays, Easter nor Christmas off!

That said, we are currently trialling a morning of racing delivery of Stat of the Day, with the pick generally online by 8.15am.

I try to find runners priced around the 11/4 to 6/1 mark at BOG prices and look for some value in the odds achieved, but sometimes I have to stray outside those parameters a little. A large proportion of selections are sent off at much shorter odds than advised, and constantly beating SP is a key in making long-term profits. Basically, our profit figures aren't massaged by some freakishly long-priced winners, nor is our strike rate bolstered by a string of odds-on jollies.

What we do have is a consistent approach that aims to highlight one value selection per day and although this "one-a-day" stats-based approach to bet selection suffers all the obligatory peaks and troughs associated with betting on horses, we did manage to make a profit yet again in 2019, but it was a real tough slog towards the end of the year, if I'm brutally honest.

Normally at this point, I'm typing this out with a fairly satisfied smile on my face, but the final quarter of the year gave us little to smile about. Nevertheless, the bigger picture is that we managed to secure yet another yearly profit, our eighth on the bounce. We're quietly proud of our record of profit in every year since SotD's inception, for what is essentially a free add-on to the Gold toolbox package, but we're also aware that recent form has been below long-term levels... although I think I said that form was only temporary anyway!

A full month-by-month analysis of SotD's results can always be found at
http://www.geegeez.co.uk/stat-of-the-day-month-by-month/ , and the overall picture for 2019 was as follows:

Number of bets/selections/pts wagered: 290 (two fewer than 2018)
Winning Bets: 66 (67 in 2018)
Strike Rate: 22.76% (2018 = 22.95%)
Average payout from winning bet : 3.93/1 (2018 = 3.57/1)

Yearly Profit: 35.46pts (2018 = 14.16pts)
Profit on Stakes Invested: 12.23% (2018 was 4.85%)

From inception in November 2011 to end 2019: +531.87 points

The overall bottom line is still, we think, impressive and one that both Matt and I (it's a team game) are happy with; and, although I've been quite vocal in expressing my disappointment about the way 2019 fizzled out, a 12.23% return actually shows us in a good light against many of our peers.

We're already up and running for January, a month that has traditionally been kind to us, so fingers crossed for more of the same and a good year overall.

Many Thanks for being a part of Geegeez and SotD,
Chris, Matt and the whole Geegeez team.

***Stat of the Day is just one component of the excellent package available to all Geegeez Gold Members, so if you're not part of our community already, why not take your £1/30-day trial now?

Click here for more details.

Stat of the Day, 6th January 2020

Saturday's pick was...

11.40 Lingfield : Capriolette @ 11/4 BOG 4th at 7/2 (In touch, headway 2f out, ridden and unable to quicken over 1f out, kept on one pace)

Monday's pick runs in the...

1.35 Ayr :

Before I post the daily selection, just a quick reminder of how I operate the service. Generally, I'll identify and share the selection in the evening before the following day's race and I then add a detailed write-up later on that night/next morning.

Those happy to take the early price on trust can do so, whilst some might prefer to wait for my reasoning. As I fit the early service in around my family life, I can't give an exact timing on the posts, so I suggest you follow us on Twitter and/or Facebook for instant notifications of a published pick.

Who?

Ripstick @ 11/4 BOG

...in an 8-runner, Class 5,  Handicap Chase for 5yo+ over 2m½f  on heavy (soft in places) ground worth £3,184 to the winner...

Why?...

This 9 yr old gelding is a former dual PTP winner and was also a winner under Rules over fences when last seen 11 days ago (Boxing Day). He landed a similar Class 5 contest at Sedgefield on soft ground that day with today's jockey, Conor O'Farrell, in the saddle.

Conor's in really good touch post-Christmas, landing three winners on Boxing Day amongst his 7 from 23 (30.4% SR) record since the break that has rewarded those following him with 64.1pts profit at an ROI of some 278.1%, including...

  • 6/12 (50%) for 55.1pts (+458.8%) over trips shorter than 2m1f
  • 5/13 (38.5%) for 68pts (+523.4%) in handicaps
  • 4/5 (80%) for 56pts (+1120%) in handicaps shorter than 2m1f
  • 2/7 (28.6%) for 4.88pts (+69.7%) over fences
  • 2/5 (40%) for 2.81pts (+56.2%) at Class 5
  • 2/4 (50%) for 2pts (+50%) at odds shorter than 5/1
  • and 1/1 (100%) (on Ripstick LTO) for 4.94pts (+494%) for today's trainer James Walton...

...whose handicap chasers sent off at odds ranging from 2/1 to 14/1 are 6 from 30 (20% SR) for 23.6pts (+78.7% ROI) over the last two years, including of note today...

  • 6/23 (26.1%) for 30.6pts (+133%) with 8-11 yr olds
  • 5/23 (21.7%) for 14.7pts (+64%) with those sent off shorter than 10/1
  • 5/11 (45.5%) for 26.7pts (+243%) at Class 5
  • and 4/12 (33.3%) for 23.5pts (+195.8%) with Conor O'Farrell in the saddle...

...whilst James' 8-11 yr olds sent off shorter than 10/1 in Class 5 contests are 5 from 8 (62.5% SR) for 29.73pts (+371.6% ROI) with Conor O'Farrell riding 3 winners from 5 (60%) for 14.63pts (+292.6%) profit...

...giving us...a 1pt win bet on Ripstick @ 11/4 BOG as was available from Bet365 & BetVictor (and also Hills, but please check your BOG status there first) at 8.05am on Monday. To see what your preferred bookie is quoting...

...click here for the betting on the 1.35 Ayr

Don't forget, we offer a full interactive racecard service every day!

REMINDER: THERE IS NO STAT OF THE DAY ON SUNDAYS

Here is today's racecard

P.S. all P/L returns quoted in the stats above are to Betfair SP, as I NEVER bet to ISP and neither should you. I always use BOG bookies for SotD, wherever possible, but I use BFSP for the stats as it is the nearest approximation I can give, so I actually expect to beat the returns I use to support my picks. If that's unclear, please ask!