GENERAL RACING CHIT CHAT

[The Equaliser]

3 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

The data I use is the basic data that you can find on the PL race-card (form, age, weight etc.)

I have several years worth of data which I have analysed and developed various strategies from. I then download the current day's data and apply the strategies to this to arrive at the day's selections. 

Thanks.  Does doing all this take up many hours per day?

[MCLARKE]

The process to arrive at the day's selections is fairly automated so only takes a couple of minutes.

I dread to think how many hours I have spent analysing data in the past. I think if I divided my profits by the amount of time I'd probably be earning about 1p / hour.

I do enjoy the process though and there are always new angles to be looked at, you have now got me fixated on developing a system for heavy going.

[alancraik]

I have looked thru various threads are there any spread sheets for keeping track of horse selections and betting strategies available

[Villa Chris]

I need to start a bank for my selections. My new strategy at the moment is based around prize money among one or two other things, but it’s a prize money system. It’s not new and it’s probably been done to death over the years. Started two months ago with it and I’ve made profit for the first two months. This month I’m slightly down, but I’m positive it can be profitable. It’s simple and I enjoy it at the moment.  

[Villa Chris]

To anyone that does their own ratings. Do you take into account course form? If so I wondered how that works out. For example  you have an 8 horse race. 3 of them have ran at the course before. The other 5 haven’t.  Out of the ones that have only two of them have ran at the course more than once. Doesn’t this scenario leave blind spots, especially if your top rated hasn’t run at course before and second rated has . 

[alancraik]

Chris

I have a method that is based partly ratings. I do not count horse for at course, I think trainer form and jockey form at course is more important. Higher the percentage the higher the score.

As for your previous post, the old saying could not be truer, money goes to money.

Hope this helps

[Villa Chris]

Cheers Alan. You can look at it both ways I suppose, but I’d just find it easier to not include course form. Maybe do so if you’ve got two equal on the ratings and the one has superior course form to the other. I tend to look at trainer/jockey form as that tells you a lot about the fitness and well being of the horses coming out of that yard. My head has been like a computer this morning. Happy enough with where I’m at at the moment, but we all want to try and improve. 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Villa Chris

[Trotter]

I have a quick way of putting a rating on recent runs in handicaps

I count a length as 2 pounds 

Then if a horse rated 80 gets beat 3 lengths I'll say it 'ran to 74'

then next time out it's mark might have gone down to 78 and it gets beat 1 length and I'll say it 'ran to 76'

If a horse rated 80 wins by 2 lengths I'll say it 'ran to 84'

Gives a quick indication as to where a horse is relative to it's handicap mark ..... and you can look for horses who's 'ran to' figure is gradually improving. If you rate enough of their past races you also might get an idea as to what conditions of track, distance and going they produce their best at

Obviously works best for older handicappers who have lots of back form in the book

 

[Alley Cat Glover]

How do you rate 3 horse run races, seems they can either be very tactical or  horses win by flattering margins because other horses don’t perform on the day.

 I have a reason for asking Ga Law 4 year old novice run 3 times won 3 times been on him every race and won plenty with him mainly down to first race where he was 8/1 and above. 
Choose to back him because Getaway Trump was said by P. Nichols to be 80% fit and he was giving Ga Law 15lb. Just thought he had a chance anyway won convincingly.

Went on to Exeter in 7 runner field and won well held. Put the 2nd in tracker thought it would win bur didn’t, so let the form down?

Anyway on to 3 runner race at Wincanton again won convincingly as could be. Upto 138 rating now. Now he beat one that I would say ran to somewhere around his mark but P Nicholls had another well respected runner, Grand Sancy, was race fit in there against him who was so well beat, especially after hitting 2 of the fences, but was he on a day off?

So I am looking at backing Antepost for Cheltenham, probably a waste of money but my money he has won for me.

The trouble is priced up in all 3 novice chases. Only currently run right handed tracks is that a problem? Run over 2m 3f but seems to travel so well and mainly jump cleanly with the odd mistake for a novice. He won’t get the 7lb weight for age allowance after Jan 1st will he or in the Cheltenham showcase races?

So which race do I back, have I got to do all 3 and split stake accordingly. Might be his next race is early December in Henry VIII at Sandown over 2 miles which Grand Sancy was 3rd in last year!

Obviously race conditions will be critical, don’t think he wants anything too soft,

Do I wait for his next race, but value may well have all gone if said race result goes well. Anyone with some time to spare any thoughts?

 

[alancraik]

2 hours ago, Villa Chris said:

Cheers Alan. You can look at it both ways I suppose, but I’d just find it easier to not include course form. Maybe do so if you’ve got two equal on the ratings and the one has superior course form to the other. I tend to look at trainer/jockey form as that tells you a lot about the fitness and well being of the horses coming out of that yard. My head has been like a computer this morning. Happy enough with where I’m at at the moment, but we all want to try and improve. 

Chris

when I give a score to any of my catagories , going, trainer form, class etc, a horse with 40% wins would get a higher score than  a horse with 10%. eg 40% 4 points 10% 1 point. No horse gets more than 4 points per catogory.

[Valiant Thor]

3 hours ago, Villa Chris said:

To anyone that does their own ratings. Do you take into account course form? If so I wondered how that works out. For example  you have an 8 horse race. 3 of them have ran at the course before. The other 5 haven’t.  Out of the ones that have only two of them have ran at the course more than once. Doesn’t this scenario leave blind spots, especially if your top rated hasn’t run at course before and second rated has . 

Its down to what weighting the cd winner has or has not got over non cd winners

Lets look at some imaginary data from 295 10 horse races (2950 runners no dead heats so 295 winners)
From the 2950 runners we have 550 previous cd winners of which go on to win 65 of these races (11.8% sr)
That leaves 2400 non previous cd winners that win 230 of these races (9.6%)

So to find a weighting for a previous cd winner you divide the races cd winners 65 by races total winners 295 =.22%
then divide total previous cd winner runners 550 by the total runners 2950 = 19%
Finally  divide cd winners total 22% by runners total 19% = 1.18 which is your weighting (1 being the mean)
So by being a previous cd winner you are 18% more likely to win than a non cd winner (1.18-1=18%)
so therefore when rating a race and 1 runner is prev cd winner then you multiply your base rating by the cd weighting 1.18
All being equal a weighting of 1 is the mean so >1 positive rating <1 negative rating
So if your base rating was 100 then a prev cd winner would have an improved rating of  100*1.18= 118
Obviously the rating would be the inverse if it was a negative weighting of say 0.84 then it would be 100*.84= 84
this can be done for multiple factors , jocks ,trainers,beaten favs, etc etc once you find the important ones then your rating start to take a shape which can the be used to produce a viable tissue .
hope this helped a bit.
ATB
VT

 

Edited November 15, 2020 by Valiant Thor

[Villa Chris]

14 minutes ago, Valiant Thor said:

Its down to what weighting the cd winner has or has not got over non cd winners

Lets look at some imaginary data from 295 10 horse races (2950 runners no dead heats so 295 winners)
From the 2950 runners we have 550 previous cd winners of which go on to win 65 of these races (11.8% sr)
That leaves 2400 non previous cd winners that win 230 of these races (9.6%)

So to find a weighting for a previous cd winner you divide the races cd winners 65 by races total winners 295 =.22%
then divide total previous cd winner runners 550 by the total runners 2950 = 19%
Finally  divide cd winners total 22% by runners total 19% = 1.18 which is your weighting (1 being the mean)
So by being a previous cd winner you are 18% more likely to win than a non cd winner (1.18-1=18%)
so therefore when rating a race and 1 runner is prev cd winner then you multiply your base rating by the cd weighting 1.18
All being equal a weighting of 1 is the mean so >1 positive rating <1 negative rating
So if your base rating was 100 then a prev cd winner would have an improved rating of  100*1.18= 118
Obviously the rating would be the inverse if it was a negative weighting of say 0.84 then it would be 100*.84= 84
this can be done for multiple factors , jocks ,trainers,beaten favs, etc etc once you find the important ones then your rating start to take a shape which can the be used to produce a viable tissue .
hope this helped a bit.
ATB
VT

 

Looked at something similar to this yesterday. I’m kind of getting my head around it. Thanks for taking the time out to explain . 

[The Equaliser]

On 11/12/2020 at 12:31 AM, MCLARKE said:

The process to arrive at the day's selections is fairly automated so only takes a couple of minutes.

I dread to think how many hours I have spent analysing data in the past. I think if I divided my profits by the amount of time I'd probably be earning about 1p / hour.

I do enjoy the process though and there are always new angles to be looked at, you have now got me fixated on developing a system for heavy going.

Funny enough I had a few bets today looking at ratings/jockeys/napsters etc.  I then came across Cloudy Glen in the 3.15 Font 15/11/20.  I remembered how Venetia Williams was famous for getting winners when the going was heavy.  I had a small wager.  Apart from a horse falling in front of it early in the race, it came through and won by 13 lengths.  So how about that.  Nothing to do with ratings/jockey bookings or a Napster tip.  I sometimes wonder whether a lot of strategies are not worth the paper that they are written on.

[MCLARKE]

Well done.

She does reasonably well with horses on heavy going with an AE of 1.01.

Overall her statistics are quite poor with an AE of 0.96. She has a particularly poor record with hurdlers, where the AE is 1.01.

She does have an exceptional record with horses that have had a break of at least 45 days with an AE of 1.30. 119 runners from 702 runners over the last 7 years with a profit at BSP of £284.

Also she does well in November and December where she has an AE of 1.15.

Cloudy Glen ticked all the boxes, i.e. a chaser running in November after a layoff of 246 days.

It would be interesting to read VT's views on these statistics.

 

[The Equaliser]

54 minutes ago, MCLARKE said:

Well done.

She does reasonably well with horses on heavy going with an AE of 1.01.

Overall her statistics are quite poor with an AE of 0.96. She has a particularly poor record with hurdlers, where the AE is 1.01.

She does have an exceptional record with horses that have had a break of at least 45 days with an AE of 1.30. 119 runners from 702 runners over the last 7 years with a profit at BSP of £284.

Also she does well in November and December where she has an AE of 1.15.

Cloudy Glen ticked all the boxes, i.e. a chaser running in November after a layoff of 246 days.

It would be interesting to read VT's views on these statistics.

 

Many thanks.  It looks like you have been focussing on stats around the "heavy going" factor.

I have been getting a bit miffed by trying to check and focus on what seems to be relevant in a horse race only to find that various paths I follow just lead up the garden.

It is as if there are a lot of variable factors and trying to pin down anything significant that leads to consistent winning selections that pay for the losers is very difficult to find.

In some ways I accept that it has to be this way or else the bookies would go broke.  However, as someone once said once one recognises that they have a problem then they are half way to solving it.

Sometimes the ratings make sense and a horse wins and at other times they are just a complete nonsense. Sometimes the market leader wins and at other times they run a stinker.  Sometimes a good jockey booking highlights a decent winner but at other times it just doesn't pan out.  Sometimes the tipsters seem to be right but at other times they are useless.  All seems very complicated but as @Trottersays it is all just a puzzle that needs to be solved.

I have signed up to the Geegeez.co.uk Racecards for a £1 trial for 30 days.  After the trial the monthly subscription is £36 per month.  I don't know if any other members have used this service and have found it useful.  I would be pleased to hear from them if they had?

I don't like the Race advisor that I believe you signed up to.  I did try it once and although I have never seen so many different kind of ratings I couldn't see how anyone could make any money by following any of them.  The chap has his loyal followers but it doesn't include me.

 

 

 

[Villa Chris]

I remember her saying she doesn’t run her horses during the summer as it’s not safe jumping ground. That may account for why her horses seem to run well in softer conditions as she won’t run them on good ground.

[The Equaliser]

3 hours ago, Villa Chris said:

I remember her saying she doesn’t run her horses during the summer as it’s not safe jumping ground. That may account for why her horses seem to run well in softer conditions as she won’t run them on good ground.

Yes Chris, she has also said that she trains most of her horses on soft/heavy ground and that is why she has more winners when the mud is flying. 

[Villa Chris]

4 hours ago, The Equaliser said:

Yes Chris, she has also said that she trains most of her horses on soft/heavy ground and that is why she has more winners when the mud is flying. 

It all adds up then, why her horses run well on soft/heavy. Also read the other week that European horses running in the Melbourne cup should have to go over there earlier to get used to the surface and train on the surface so their bones are can get used to it. It’s not the rules yet, but they are looking into it. They are hoping it will lower the death rate in that particular race. 

[Villa Chris]

What was Ed Chamberlain on about on Sunday, saying it’s doubtful we will see Defi Du Seuil again just because he pulled up. Bizarre comment and also the horse is only 7. Infact I’d say it’s a good time to back Defi ante post for Cheltenham as his price has drifted. Hobbs horses don’t seem fully at it at the moment and it was the horses first run back on testing ground. Just don’t get the silly comment that we probably won’t see him again .  I know it’s a bit early but do any of you start thinking about Cheltenham yet? Any ante post bets going in?  Must say I’m not one for ante post betting but understand why a lot are. You get some cracking prices. one who I fancy is Abacadabras in the champion hurdle. It will be well run which will suit aba and once Epatante puts her foot down to leave the pack , this will give Aba something to aim at. The horse is no good when it hits the front too soon, but managed to hold on for victory over in Ireland at the weekend, although was a tad fortunate with jockey error on Saint Roi. 

Edited November 16, 2020 by Villa Chris

[Alley Cat Glover]

I know it’s a bit early but do any of you start thinking about Cheltenham yet? Any ante post bets going in? 
 

Chris, been looking at a couple, see post above on this page, my problem is, it is a real lottery, If you can pick a horse, then got to find the right race, unless you can be sure, like with a more established horse. Unless you have an in not sure you get to know before connections announce, then surprisingly the price has gone, after that can still be 2 months before Cheltenham, still have training problems and conditions to worry about.

In owners group and one thing don’t seem to get is any targets or path way for the horses really given to you understandable with everything that could go wrong. 
 

Not got a lot of experience in this mind, still not seen much in the way of Novices to really be released yet, especially from Ireland. Guess you need a horse rated 148+ to even have a chance?

 

[Alley Cat Glover]

Sorry @chrisvillameant to quote you there.

[Trotter]

To be honest I never really look at any races until the night before

There's always 'racing tomorrow' so why bother about racing in two months

I suppose it's evident then that I never do ante-post betting ......... can't remember ever doing one

[Villa Chris]

5 hours ago, Alley Cat Glover said:

I know it’s a bit early but do any of you start thinking about Cheltenham yet? Any ante post bets going in? 
 

Chris, been looking at a couple, see post above on this page, my problem is, it is a real lottery, If you can pick a horse, then got to find the right race, unless you can be sure, like with a more established horse. Unless you have an in not sure you get to know before connections announce, then surprisingly the price has gone, after that can still be 2 months before Cheltenham, still have training problems and conditions to worry about.

In owners group and one thing don’t seem to get is any targets or path way for the horses really given to you understandable with everything that could go wrong. 
 

Not got a lot of experience in this mind, still not seen much in the way of Novices to really be released yet, especially from Ireland. Guess you need a horse rated 148+ to even have a chance?

 

I’m not one for ante post bets for the reasons you’ve mentioned. By time NRNB comes out value has gone. For a lot of people Cheltenham is the pinnacle of horse racing. From November I start thinking about it, making notes of horses and like to read other forums to see what other people are saying. Try and keep an eye on the racing in Ireland for obvious reasons. The novices are out a bit late this season. Still none the wiser with the supreme. Must admit once the festival is over Win/lose I’m glad to see the back of it. 

Edited November 17, 2020 by Villa Chris

[Villa Chris]

@MCLARKE just read the gamble on Bushypark which went from 16s into 7/4 favourite is being asked by Horseracing Bettors Forum to be investigated . It’s on RP newsfeed 

Edited November 19, 2020 by Villa Chris

[MCLARKE]

Haha, I'll expect a knock on the door from the police !

[Villa Chris]

Going to try and do my own ratings for a race on Friday . Class 2 at Newbury. Been up all night with notepad and pen crunching the numbers as they say ? .seriously though got something in my head that I’m going to try . It’s a bit time consuming, mind. I’ll be taking into account the following...

Prize money won 

Distance

Going

Class

Course form 

Current mark 

Form 

Trainer/jockey form 

see how it does. Basically at the moment I’m mainly looking at prize money won, which has its moments, but want to try and develop it. 

Edited November 23, 2020 by Villa Chris

[Villa Chris]

Anyone know where I can find statistics for previous CD winners at uk courses.  Looked online and can’t seem to find any. 

[MCLARKE]

Interesting angle Chris, I'm surprised I haven't looked at it before.

From my own NH database the following courses have been profitable for CD winners.

	WIN	RUN	RESULT	E	PS	PP	AE
Taunton	53	203	38.19	43	74	17	1.25
Sandown	35	196	-4.88	32	71	9	1.11
Chepstow	40	229	-32.16	36	66	8	1.12
Plumpton	51	227	25.44	47	76	7	1.08
GOWRAN	13	74	-19.13	11	28	6	1.15
Naas	24	117	6.14	20	34	6	1.18
Carlisle	36	171	41.21	31	57	5	1.16
Cheltenham	59	378	77.00	52	92	5	1.14
Haydock	19	95	6.98	16	28	4	1.16
Sedgefield	76	415	-34.65	74	113	2	1.02
Catterick	31	139	20.71	28	55	2	1.10
Towcester	18	78	26.95	15	23	2	1.19
Aintree	13	101	32.54	13	19	2	1.04
Wetherby	42	226	-34.85	41	67	2	1.03
Tramore	9	57	19.62	8	10	1	1.18
Hexham	25	157	18.04	24	35	1	1.05
Newcastle	32	164	10.46	31	46	1	1.04
Wexford	4	21	6.98	3	4	1	1.34
Lingfield	18	95	-9.86	18	26	1	1.02
Limerick	15	103	-28.49	15	22	1	1.02

 

A note of caution, last season had a particularly poor return with an AE of 0.88 compared to 1.01 for the last 7 years. The strike rate has fallen from 18.1% to 13.5%, I am struggling to think of any reason for this.

[MCLARKE]

Apologies Chris, I've just realised these statistics are for CD winners in the same race. I will revert back with the correct data.

[Villa Chris]

Cheers mate. I’d just like it in hand so when I attempt to do my own ratings I can revert back to the statistics for that particular course. If there is a CD runner(s) in the race I want to add that to my ratings but need to know the strike rate of all NH courses.