Gingertipster Posted February 23, 2011 Share Posted February 23, 2011 Don't know about trends, But if you are not on The Midnight Club for the National yet, I advise taking the 16/1 with corals before he runs in the Bobbyjo today. (Also got 20/1 Silver By Nature). TMC has not raced many times at todays distance, but is bred to get even further. Proven in big fields. Been placed twice at Cheltenham Festival, behind Weapons Amnesty in the Spa Hurdle (3m) and also 3rd over an inadequate 2m5f last year. Then chased home Kempes and China Rock in a Grade 1 Novice. Unlucky second last time when given plenty to do. By Flemensfirth who is sire of Imperial Commander, Time For Rupert and King John's Castle (second in National). Out of a mare who stayed 3 miles and from the family of Toby Tobias. Gives the impression is a lot better than he's shown so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingertipster Posted February 23, 2011 Author Share Posted February 23, 2011 Re: GRAND NATIONAL TRIAL TRENDS 2011 saturday 19th febuary Just seen this is a Grand National Trial Chase thread. :lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mileni4uk Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Grand National Thread Saw Ginge posted about it and realized we don't have a thread. :ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mileni4uk Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread Pretty impressive pedigree. Gold Cup winners either side. 4 miles not guaranteed, but very likely. I know yard fancies him a lot on better ground. I think he has every chance to go close :ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awooga Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread I quite liked Vic Venturi's run yesterday is on my shortlist for the National anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingertipster Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread Thanks Mileni. This may be of interest: A couple of years ago I looked in to the supposed bias against top weights in the Grand National. It is true lower weights have won and placed more times. But is this statistic fair? In the 25 years (24 Nationals) sample: There were 933 runners 782 horses carried less than 11 stones (83.82% of all runners) 151 horses carried 11 stones or more (16.18% of all runners) Therefore in these 24 years, those carrying less than 11 stones should be expected to win more than 5 times the number of Grand Nationals as those carrying 11 stones or more. Which is exactly what has happened. In 1997 only 1 horse (Master Oats 25/1 5th) of the 36 runners carried more than 11stones. So those who think 11 stone plus horses should do as well as below 11 stones, are judging 1 horse running against 35; hardly fair. In 1985 (including Corbiere 3rd) and 1989 (The Thinker 3rd) only 2 horses of 40 carried 11 stones or more, in 1990 only 2 of 38. In 1988 (including Rhyme And Reason 1st and West Tip 4th) just 3 of 40. In 1994 it was 3 of 36, in 1998 on bottomless ground (Sunny Bay 2nd) 3 of 37 and 1999 only 3 of 32 carried 11 stones or more. In all of the above races the higher weights were vastly outnumbered, yet did exceptionally well. In 24 runnings: 74 of 96 placed horses carried less than 11 stones (77.08% of all placed horses) 22 of 96 placed horses carried more than 11 stones (22.92% of all placed horse) However: 74 out of 782 means only 9.46% of those carrying less than 11 stones were placed 22 out of 151 means 14.57% of those carrying more than 11 stones were placed Therefore, those carrying more than 11 stones in fact have a better record for being placed than the lower weights. Much is made of no top weight winning for ages. Yet in 1986, 87, 91 and 94 an automatic top weight took part from places like Czechoslovakia; at odds of at least 100/1 and up to 500/1. Hardly surprising they did not win. If adding up all the SP's percentages of top weights e.g. 5.9 for 16/1 + 10 for 9/1 etc. (including 2 horses if dual top weights). It comes to 146.35 '/, 24 races = 6.09 for an average SP of between 15/1 and 16/1. Those are bookmakers prices with mark ups, so the true odds can be estimated as something like 22/1 (4.3%). Considering those automatic top weights with next to no chance of winning, and the estimated true odds of the average top weight – It is hardly surprising no top weight has won for ages. Looking only at top weights with a fair chance of winning: Corbiere 11-10 in 1985 at 9/1 3rd West Tip 11-7 in 87 at 11/1 4th The Thinker 11-10 in 89 at 10/1 3rd Sunny Bay 12-0 in 98 at 12/1 2nd Monty's Pass 11-12 in 04 at 20/1 4th Hedgehunter 11-12 in 06 at 5/1 2nd Added to that: In 2006 take out just one of the 40 runners (Numbersixvalverdie) top weight Hedgehunter would've won. In 2005 take out two (Hedgehunter and Le Coudray) and top weight Royal Auclair would've won. In 2004 take out the first three home and top weight Monty's Pass would've won. Top weights and high weighted horses run well at Aintree. In 2002 and 2008 11-6 was carried to second place by What's Up Boys (Kingsmark 4th under 11-9) and Comply Or Die, just 4 lbs less than this year's top weight of 11-10. Royal Auclair in 2005 achieved the same position under 11-10. Last year Don't Push It won the race under 11-5 with second place Black Appalache 11-6. These two were 20 lengths clear of the third, which means had both horses carried top weight of 11-10 one of them would (in all probability) have won, the other (in all probability) second. Another 4 or 5 lbs on their backs might have made jumping slightly more difficult and the others would probably have got a bit closer – but NOT 20 lengths closer. It can be seen by the evidence above that those at 11-6 or more do well. “Ahhh but they have not WON a race in ages” I hear you cry. Yes, but there is such a thing as coincidence; the fact top weights have run so well without winning suggests it's a coincidence. Talking of coincidence, I suppose now 11-6 is the “won't win” mark? Reducing even further the top weighted group while adding to lesser weights. Of course weight carried should be considered, but only as a judgement on how well or poorly handicapped a horse is; or on heavier ground where some believe it has more effect; or on whether they're size (small) makes it harder to carry. To dismiss a horse's chance purely on this weight carried statistic is highly questionable. May be we should look for horses names with an “o” as the second letter, half of the last 16 winners are from this group; Royal Athlete, Rough Quest, Lord Gyllene, Bobbyjo, Monty's Pass, Comply Or Die, Mon Mome, Don't Push It, ?o????? There is one good reason why high weights don't often win. Those at the top of the handicap usually have their form exposed or on the downgrade. Improving horses who could be Gold Cup winners aren't “risked” in a National. Only when proven not up to the task (and so easier for the handicapper to get a handle on) they're allowed to take their chance. It's obvious unexposed types have a greater chance of defying the handicapper than exposed sorts. Neptunes Collonges is exposed and may be on the downgrade. However, despite joint top weight, if (quite a big IF) recapturing his best is well handicapped. It could be argued Don't Push It is still unexposed at extreme distances, although looks inconsistent. Synchronised is also unexposed, but a very poor jumper. Midnight Chase is still improving, but will he be allowed to run? I believe horses should be judged as individuals, not purely by weight carried. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevet1859 Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread The Grand National: Big Fella Thanks 1pt e/w 20/1 Paddy Power (12345) With the spotlight on Cheltenham it may pay to take an initial look now at the Grand National. Big Fella Thanks is entered to run at the weekend and if he repeats his win or runs well again in the Greatwood Gold Cup at Newbury on Saturday, then his odds will surely shorten. Looking at some of the main trends for the National, Big Fella Thanks fits the profile, on age, handicap rating, and weight. He also possess a touch of class as he has won a Grade 3 handicap and a Listed handicap chase. There is plenty of stamina in his pedigree. From the Racing Post he is related to several stayers and Eider Chase winner David's Duky. With this year's Eider fresh in the memory there is no doubt that trip takes some getting. Finally, Ferdy Murphy knows how to train a big race winner and has handled plenty of successful staying sorts. All being well and he lines up on the day, its likely that Big Fella Thanks will be shorter than 20/1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bathtime For Rupert Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread Comply Or Die may be too old now at 12 you feel, but on a much better mark now and showed a hint of a return to form last twice - including in the Eider. Obviously virtually refused in the straight but still jumps well and has the experience. Could be a Clan Royal type to run his race again without having the quality to get involved though. Barely had a look this early but being told by my heart that 50/1 is a big price for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRat Posted March 1, 2011 Share Posted March 1, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread Backed 3 already in Ballabriggs 25/1. The other 2 are Synchronised and West Enf Rocker at 25s and 33s respectfully and I think those two are now bigger prices. At the time they fitted trends asdie form weights not having come out I still think they are all in the mix and Ballabriggs has a great chance. West End Rocker PU LTO but conditions may not have suited. Synchronised has a fair bit of weight but still has claims, and jumps and stays I will look before the race with final decs but will likely stick with these now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingertipster Posted March 2, 2011 Author Share Posted March 2, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread The truth about age and The Grand National Couple of years ago I looked at how age effects the race. In the 20 years sample of the Grand National (1989-2009 and not including the void 1993) there were 760 runners. Of those 20 races: 6year olds have won 0 times (0%), 7yo 0 wins (0%), 8yo 2 wins (10% of those 20 wins), 9yo 6 wins (30%), 10yo 5 wins (25%), 11yo 4 wins (20%), 12yo 3 wins (15%), 13yo 0 wins (0%), 14yo 0 wins (0%). However, of those 760 runners: 10 (1.32% of the total runners) were 6 year olds, 28 (3.68%) were 7 year olds 100 (13.16%) were 8, 191 (25.13%) 9 182 (23.95%) 10 150 (19.74%) 11 70 (9.21%) 12 25 (3.29%) 13 4 (0.53%) 14 So if all ages are expected to have the same percentage of wins: 6 year olds could be expected to win 0 of those 20 (0.0132 x 20 = 0.264). They won None. You could expect between 0 and 1 winner to be 7 year olds (0.0368 x 20 = 0.736). None were 7 year olds. You could expect between 2 and 3 winner to be 8 year olds (0.1316 x 20 = 2.632). 2 winners were 8 year olds. You could expect around 5 winners to be 9 year olds (0.2513 x 20 = 5.026). 6 were 9 year olds. Expect around 5 winners to be 10 year olds (0.2395 x 20 = 4.79). 5 were 10 year olds. Expect around 4 winners to be 11 year olds (0.1974 x 20 = 3.948). 4 were 11 year olds. Expect around 2 winners to be 12 year olds (0.0921 x 20 = 1.842). 3 were 12 year olds. Between 0 and 1 winners to be 13 year olds (0.0329 x 20 = 0.658). 0 were 13 year olds. Around 0 14 year olds (0.0053 x 20 = 0.106). 0 were 14 year olds. It can be seen that 9 year olds and 12 year olds have a slightly better record (only by about 1 winner) than can be expected. What about the record of age groups to be placed in the first 5 in those 20 years? One year only 4 runners finished, so there were 99 placings in 20 years. Of those 99: 0 were 6yo (0%), You could expect 1.32% 0 were 7 yo (0%), You could expect 3.62% 18 were 8yo (18% of the 99 placed), expected 13.16% 29 were 9 yo (29%), expected 25.13% 19 were 10yo (19%), expected 23.95% 24 were 11yo (24%), expected 19.74% 8 were 12yo (8%), expected 9.21% 1 was 13yo (1%), expected 3.29% 0 were 14yo (0%), expected 0.53% 8, 9 and 11 year olds have a slightly better record of placing than you'd expect. In contrast to the winners record, 12 year olds (along with 10 year olds have a slightly worse record than could be expected. Conclusion: It could be argued the best age is 9 years old. They may well have the right blend of experience and possibility of improvement for the race. However, this “advantage” is so small, would not advise anyone to make it part of a selection process . 6 and 7 year olds may not have the required experience. However, the sample is so small that one winner in this group would turn them from being a bad age group to a good age group. Therefore, again to rule out this age group on age alone is questionable. One win for a 13 or 14 year old would also transform a poor record to a good one. The 13 year old to place was 5th in the 6 finisher 1994 race. It is fairly obvious these age groups are often on the downgrade and so less likely to produce a winner. Although it might be possible to identify one who is still capable of running well. 12 year olds don't have the poor record you might think, with a higher percentage winning than could be expected. The place record being slightly less, suggests the good win performance could be a coincidence. Either way, being a 12 year old should not be regarded as a disadvantage, if it is well enough handicapped. Personally, I would not want to rule out any age group. Jumping ability, handicap mark and stamina are the attributes you need in a Grand National. I'd be putting a question mark against a horse like Quinz, because of his jumping, even though he might be on a good mark. An old horse may well be on the downgrade, but horses also tend to stay further as they get older / settle better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jtw1 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread By Christ you're a persistant bugger Ginge :rollin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingertipster Posted March 2, 2011 Author Share Posted March 2, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread You'll make me in to a trends man yet jtw. :lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaker1 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread some trends for the national 8 to 12 years old handicap rating above 135 on the day weight of 11 stone 5lb or under won over at least three miles run in at least ten chases won a chase worth at least £17,000 you have to go back to 1940 to find a horse younger than 8 that as won the national In the last 87 years no horse older than 12 has won the Grand National Most recent Grand National winners ran off an offical rating of between 136 and 157 with only Bobby Jo and Little Polvier winning from "out of the handicap" Since the war only five Grand Nationals have been won by horses carrying more than 11 st 5 lbs and two of those were by the incredible Red Rum! Gay Trip (1970) was the last Grand National winner who hadn't previously won over at least three miles! Every winner in the last ten years had won a race worth at least £17,000. Each of the last 10 Grand National winners had run at least ten times over fences before the start on the big day at Aintree. In recent years Silver Birch (second in the Cross Country), Bindaree (sixth in the >William Hill Chase) and >Dont Push It (pulled up in the Pertemps Final) have gone on to win the Grand National after racing at Cheltenham. Many others have tried and failed. Pay attention to runners from stables with a history of training good staying chasers and Grand National winners but don't place too much emphasis on this. Don't be put off if your selection has an inexperienced jockey on board - Liam Treadwell for example! Richard Johnson is one of the current top jump jockeys yet he has never won a Grand National! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingertipster Posted March 2, 2011 Author Share Posted March 2, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread some trends for the national 8 to 12 years old So most Nationals are won by a group consisting of over 90% of runners.:\ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingertipster Posted March 2, 2011 Author Share Posted March 2, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread some trends for the national 8 to 12 years old handicap rating above 135 on the day weight of 11 stone 5lb or under won over at least three miles run in at least ten chases won a chase worth at least £17,000 you have to go back to 1940 to find a horse younger than 8 that as won the national For a long time after 1940, novices were banned from running, so not many 6 and 7 year olds have run in the National. In the last 87 years no horse older than 12 has won the Grand National. How many ran? What percentage of runners were older than 12 years old? Most recent Grand National winners ran off an offical rating of between 136 and 157 with only Bobby Jo and Little Polvier winning from "out of the handicap" You've chosen a weight range of 21 lbs, where the difference between top and bottom weight is only 24 lbs. Since the war only five Grand Nationals have been won by horses carrying more than 11 st 5 lbs and two of those were by the incredible Red Rum! Because the third last year finished 20 lengths further back - It is safe to say, had both winner and second carried joint top weight of 11-10 (not 11-5 and 11-6) they'd still have finished first and second. Gay Trip (1970) was the last Grand National winner who hadn't previously won over at least three miles! You need a horse with stamina to win at 4 1/2 miles. :unsure Every winner in the last ten years had won a race worth at least £17,000. You need a good horse to win the National. How many runners had not won a race worth £17,000? Each of the last 10 Grand National winners had run at least ten times over fences before the start on the big day at Aintree. Experience helps. Come on Beaker, look at the statistics in percentage terms please. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowles10 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread here we go again :lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingertipster Posted March 2, 2011 Author Share Posted March 2, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread Here we go again what Bowles? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingertipster Posted March 2, 2011 Author Share Posted March 2, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread I've seen some good trends stats put up by Ganjaman in recent weeks, when he has taken in to account the percentage of runners in each bracket. If percentages are not considered than trends mean nothing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaker1 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread A total of 21 seven-year-olds have lined up since 1999 and 15 of them have either fallen or unseated. They include Eudipe in 1999 and Jurancon in 2004, both well-fancied 10-1 shots, while Iris Bleu, the 8-1 second-favourite in 2003, was pulled up on the first circuit after three significant errors. to be continued ginge Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingertipster Posted March 3, 2011 Author Share Posted March 3, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread The truth about age and The Grand National 1989-2009 and not including the void 1993 there were 760 runners. Of those 20 races: 7yo 0 wins (0%) However, of those 760 runners: 28 (3.68%) were 7 year olds So if all ages are expected to have the same percentage of wins: You could expect between 0 and 1 winner to be 7 year olds (0.0368 x 20 = 0.736). None were 7 year olds. Conclusion: 6 and 7 year olds may not have the required experience. However, the sample is so small that one winner in this group would turn them from being a bad age group to a good age group. Therefore, again to rule out this age group on age alone is questionable. Personally, I would not want to rule out any age group. Jumping ability, handicap mark and stamina are the attributes you need in a Grand National. I'd be putting a question mark against a horse like Quinz, because of his jumping, even though he might be on a good mark. An old horse may well be on the downgrade, but horses also tend to stay further as they get older / settle better. :ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billvernon Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread Ginger you can come across as a right pedantic sod when you lay into trends done by others on here - but full respect to you mate you are 91 % bang on the button - I am leaving 9 % to pure fly by your pants conjecture that also seems to work in your favour Ginge - You know your stuff and I for one bow down to your knowledge of this game :notworthy Hoping you take the last paragraph in the vein it was meant and and not offended Ginge. One thing about you - you are quick to acknowledge a fellow correct punter on this site and will also help the uneducated to gain a more enlightened view of the racing and percentages game.And I think most guys on here will acknowledge your forthright opinions that as previously mentioned are invarioubly found to be correct. But boy - I think it has to be said as in life everyone gets slightly miffed with a clever smart arse - and ginge !! it has to be said you are definetly one clever smart arse.;) And this site is better for it .:ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyHills Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread Ginge, thought you would have added last years stats in as well you lazy git rather than just copying the same old stuff:lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingertipster Posted March 3, 2011 Author Share Posted March 3, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread Ginger you can come across as a right pedantic sod when you lay into trends done by others on here - but full respect to you mate you are 91 % bang on the button - I am leaving 9 % to pure fly by your pants conjecture that also seems to work in your favour Ginge - You know your stuff and I for one bow down to your knowledge of this game :notworthy Hoping you take the last paragraph in the vein it was meant and and not offended Ginge. One thing about you - you are quick to acknowledge a fellow correct punter on this site and will also help the uneducated to gain a more enlightened view of the racing and percentages game.And I think most guys on here will acknowledge your forthright opinions that as previously mentioned are invarioubly found to be correct. But boy - I think it has to be said as in life everyone gets slightly miffed with a clever smart arse - and ginge !! it has to be said you are definetly one clever smart arse.;) And this site is better for it .:ok :lol No offence taken Bill.:ok This "pedantic smart arse" gets frustrated when people don't seem to read the thread. My earlier posts were meant to illustrate (using percentages) the real effect of age and weight. And how coincidence may come in to things. Then Beaker came out with what appeared to be the exact type of numbers stuff (without percentages) that my work has shown not to be relevent. It is frustrating, may be I went too far. Apologies to Beaker if he was offended. :ok There are some interesting trends related writings on PL, in particular by Ganjaman, but also jtw and Bowles. :ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaker1 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread hi ginge firstly im a woman and secondly you didnt offended :ok Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaker1 Posted March 3, 2011 Share Posted March 3, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread sorry you didnt offend me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingertipster Posted March 3, 2011 Author Share Posted March 3, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread Cheers Beaker.:ok p.s. Is your avatar Dancing Brave? Would have thought Oh So Sharp might be more relevent.;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ganjaman Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread GRAND NATIONAL TRENDS 2011 The highlight for many of the national hunt calendar, the Aintree Grand National takes place on Saturday 9th April. This year’s renewal has plenty to live up to after Tony McCoy’s emotional win on Don’t Push It last year. It’s always a fiercely competitive cavalry charge, you need plenty of luck to win it but there are plenty of key trends that can narrow the field down. Below we take a look at the trends for the past 10 years: Age (Win-Place-Runners) 6yo: 0-0-8 7yo: 0-0-22 8yo: 1-9-66 9yo: 3-8-109 10yo: 4-6-89 11yo: 1-7-67 12yo: 1-0-28 13yo+: 0-0-10 Every winner since WWII (1946) has been aged 8 to 12 7 of 10 winners (including last 6) have been aged 9 or 10 (7-14-198) In the past 6 years all 24 places were filled by horses aged 8 to 11 No horse aged below 8 or above 12 has made the frame in the past 10 years (0-0-40) Weight (Win-Place-Runners) Horses carrying 10-11 or more: 5-17-168 Horses carrying 10-10 or less: 5-13-231 In recent years with the weights being more closely bunched, higher weights have done better with the 11 of 12 places in the past 3 years being filled by horses carrying 10-11 or more. 7 of 10 winners (7 of last 8) were initially allotted a weight of between 10-5 and 10-12 on publication of National weights. 10 of 10 winners carried no more than 14lbs higher than bottom weight Top Weight: UF0FP290UF (0-1-10) Official Ratings Horses rated 144 or higher: 3-14-131 Horses rated 143 or lower: 7-16-268 In recent years the trend has swung towards higher rated runners. In last 6 years Horses rated 144 or higher: 3-10-101 Horses rated 143 or lower: 3-8-139 Since 2004 17 of 24 places were filled by horses rated 140 or higher Breeding Irish bred: 8-19-223 French bred: 1-6-101 British bred: 1-5-65 Other: 0-0-10 Mon Mome became the first French bred since 1909 to win the Grand National when landing the race in 2009. However Irish bred horses have the best record having won 8 of the last 10 and filled in 27 of 40 places (67.5%) from approximately 55.9% of the runners. Recent/Past Form 8 of 10 winners finished in the first 5 on last completed start 7 of 10 winners had not won that season (other 3 had won just once) 9 of 10 winners had won a listed or graded chase (exception had won a class 2 chase & a listed h'cap hurdle) 9 of 10 (last 8) had won a chase worth 29K+ 10 of 10 winners had run 4 to 6 times since Sept 1 9 of 10 winners (last 9) had won a chase over 3M+ (exception won a hurdle over 3M) 10 of 10 winners had run in at least 10 chases 9 of 10 winners had won 3 to 5 chases 7 of 10 winners had run in 5 to 12 handicap chases 7 of 10 winners (last 7) had won 1 to 3 handicap chases 10 of 10 winners had their last run since National weights were announced (past 50 days) 10 of 10 winners posted an RPR of 140+ on 1 of last 3 chase starts 7 of 10 winners (7 of last 8 and all 4 Irish-trained winners) had a run over hurdles in January, February or March Course form Previous Year's winner (Can’t Buy Time): 46402620 (0-4-8) Becher Chase winner (Hello Bud): 92PPPFU (0-1-7) Previous season's Becher Chase winner (Vic Venturi): R7CF2 (0-1-5) Becher Chase winner two seasons ago (Black Apalachi): 131P 7 of 10 winners had previously run over the National fences 2 of 10 winners had won over the National fences, both in the Becher Chase 2 seasons prior to winning this 5 of 10 winners had run in the previous season's Grand National, finishing F3FF0 8 of 10 winners ran at the previous year's Aintree National meeting (5 in GN, 2 in Topham & 1 in John Smith's H'cap Chase), 1 exception won previous season's Irish National and other exception did race the previous season Other Nationals Welsh National winner (Synchronised): UP (0-0-2) Previous season's Scottish National winner (Merigo): 75 (0-0-2) Prev season's Irish National winner (Bluesea Cracker): FU1FFFP (1-0-7) Prev season's Welsh National winner (Dream Alliance): F20F (0-1-4) Previous season's Kerry National winner (Northern Alliance): 4 (0-1-1) 6 of 10 winners had finished in the first 3 in the Irish, Welsh, Scottish or Aintree Grand Nationals 5 of 10 winners had run in a Welsh National, finishing 331P2 2 of 10 winners had run in an Irish National, finishing 01 2 of 10 winners had run in a Scottish National, finishing P9 Other Races Majordomo Handicap Chase winner (Midnight Chase): F1U (1-0-3) Bobbyjo Chase winner (The Midnight Club): U1PUU (1-0-5) Racing Post Chase winner (Quinz): FF (0-0-2) Morson Group H'cap Chase winner (Midnight Chase): UF (0-0-2) Haydock Grand National Trial winner (Silver By Nature): PF5P (0-0-4) 4 of 10 winners had finished in first 5 in a Hennessy Gold Cup (5544) 2 of 10 winners had won the previous season’s Thyestes Chase Trainers 4 of 10 winners were trained in Ireland (4-9-85) from approximately 21.3% of the total runners and Irish-trained runners have filled 9 of the 20 places in the last 5 years. Trainers who have won the race in the past 10 years and have entries this year are: Jonjo O’Neill (1-3-17), Willie Mullins (1-2-15), David Pipe (1-1-14), Gordon Elliot (1-0-3), Venetia Williams (1-0-12) and Nigel Twiston-Davies (1-0-25). Paul Nicholls (0-3-34), Evan Williams (0-2-2) and Tom Taaffe (0-2-3) have all saddled multiple placed horses. Trainers with very poor records in the race in the past decade include: Philip Hobbs (0-1-9), Alan King (0-0-5), Howard Johnson (0-0-6), Nicky Henderson (0-0-10) and Ferdy Murphy (0-0-13). Price 7 of 10 winners were priced 20/1 or below. There has been 3 big shocks in the past decade with 33/1 winners in 2001 and 2007, plus a 100/1 winner in 2009. 9 of 10 winners were priced between 25/1 and 40/1 at publication of weights Favourites (3-5-20) have gained 3 wins in the past 10 years, giving a level stakes profit of 7.50. Summary: Based on the trends from the past 10 years you are looking for a horse: · Aged 8 to 11 (9 or 10 especially) · Carrying 10-11 or more · Carrying no more than a stone higher than bottom weight · Officially rated 140 or higher · Irish bred · Won no more than once this season · Won a listed or graded chase worth 29K+ · Won over 3M+ · Run 4 to 6 times since September & run since 15th February · Run in at least 10 chases (winning 3 to 5) · Posted an RPR of 140+ in one of last 3 chase starts · Run over hurdles in 2011 · Previously run over National fences · Placed in an Irish/Welsh/Scottish/Aintree National · Trained in Ireland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irishbugger Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread hi ginge firstly im a woman and secondly you didnt offended :ok A woman!! :cow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowles10 Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread I've seen some good trends stats put up by Ganjaman in recent weeks' date=' when he has taken in to account the percentage of runners in each bracket. If percentages are not considered than trends mean nothing.[/quote'] The trends picking out last years winner at 22/1 meant nothing :$ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mileni4uk Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Re: Grand National Thread The trends picking out last years winner at 22/1 meant nothing :$ Weren't treands against the weight last year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.32384c3055cbc1254b0eb6212fda1359.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.