HORSE RACING VARIABLES

[MCLARKE]

There has been debate in the Speed Ratings thread about the importance of going and distance. This has raised the question about which are the most important variables to consider when making selections. I will start with my list in order of importance. Please fell free to comment or add your own lists.

Odds (both current race and previous race, exclude long odds)

Days since last run (higher preferred)

Race distance v distance of previous races

Finishing position of previous runs (not including last run)

Draw (this list is for flat racing only)

Number of runs

Number of runs (current season)

Going

Weight

Class movement

Country horse bred in

Race distance

Claiming jockey

Winning / losing distance of last race

Turf / AW

Weight v previous run

Official Rating

Finish position last run

Same / different jockey

Same / different course

Number of runners in previous race

Sex of horse

Age

Previous course

Handicap / non handicap

Official rating v last run

Official rating v last winning run

Maiden / non maiden

Course winner

Races since last win

Month

Course

Distance winner

Beaten favourite

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[harry_rag]

To be flippant, who’s tipped a horse on here when I’ve got a freebie or offer to utilise! But, for some people maybe tipster selections/naps can be a positive or negative signals as part of a selection process.

Then there’s spread betting prices, something I suspect hardly any racing punters would pay any heed to. Probably a red herring as my gut feel is they wouldn’t be of much use for that sport, but they’re hugely predictive for me in betting on goal and tryscorers so, if I was ever going to take a proper tilt at betting on racing I’d want to explore that angle if only to eliminate it 

[MCLARKE]

When I first started betting back in the early 80s I used to follow tipsters, mostly Newsboy from the Daily Mirror (a good socialist rag). I struggled to make a profit, probably because his tips were widely followed.

As I am always on the quest for value rather than winners it might make sense to bet against popular tipsters as their selections are probably overbet.

My data doesn't include such tipsters data so it's not an area I can really comment on with authority.

Spread betting (for racing) still on my to do list !

[richard-westwood]

Made me laugh .....my computer uses 17 of your list as I worked down so they must all have a big effect ...lol 🤣

[Trotter]

I like to keep things simple !

I mainly look at handicaps and at the following .........

class movement - obviously dropping in class preferred, this related to handicap marks
trip -  D win or some reason why a horse might improve for a new trip
going
track configuration (particularly uphill finishes, straight/bend)

I look at the last 3 as a combined factor trip/track/going ......... will the horse be effective at this trip on this track on today's going

that's mainly it

I will check trainer form to see if the yard is horribly out of form or banging winners in left, right and centre

and draw if the trip/track/going favours one side

Days since run I might look at to see how a horse goes after a break (this combined with trainer form)

 

these last few things mainly to see if there's any reason to abandon a selection I've made by looking at class and trip/track/going

[yossa6133]

Trainer form maybe, always something I think I should pay more attention to!

What the actual ground is compared to the going description i.e working your ratings out after the time of first race is known. Saw someone say recently that they never bet on the first race for this reason. 

Temperature, there must be horses out there that only perform when it's warm. Not seen much about this but it would make sense.

Market mover? Drifted like a barge or smashed in.

[Zilzalian]

13 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

There has been debate in the Speed Ratings thread about the importance of going and distance. This has raised the question about which are the most important variables to consider when making selections. I will start with my list in order of importance. Please fell free to comment or add your own lists.

Odds (both current race and previous race, exclude long odds)

Days since last run (higher preferred)

Race distance v distance of previous races

Finishing position of previous runs (not including last run)

Draw (this list is for flat racing only)

Number of runs

Number of runs (current season)

Going

Weight

Class movement

Country horse bred in

Race distance

Claiming jockey

Winning / losing distance of last race

Turf / AW

Weight v previous run

Official Rating

Finish position last run

Same / different jockey

Same / different course

Number of runners in previous race

Sex of horse

Age

Previous course

Handicap / non handicap

Official rating v last run

Official rating v last winning run

Maiden / non maiden

Course winner

Races since last win

Month

Course

Distance winner

Beaten favourite

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now put them in order of importance, i would take a good guess that different punters put them in different orders. You could add on stopwatch (RP) big fields v small fields and even naps the list is almost endless. Once you made your selection, The big question i would ask is- what was it based on? did you end up using speed figures or form?

Edited April 22 by Zilzalian

[In Play Race Reader]

I would have pace of race as my number one,past form and potential pace for todays race 

[harry_rag]

I guess this thread illustrates a couple of things; why racing is so fascinating as a betting medium for many people and why for me, from a “keep it simpler” perspective, I’ve ended up specialising in selling on the spreads and backing goal and tryscorers.

I do make “studied” bets on goalscorers where additional variables are weighed (games played/started, number of games scored in, last 10 or 20 game goals scored, even xG etc sometimes) but the main anytime systems run off just two variables; best bookies price and spread price for player goal minutes. From just that I make most of my selections and turn a reasonable profit. A lot of data gathering and analysis went into getting to where I am now but I can look at a game and identify the bets in a coupe of minutes.

The spreads are simpler still as the only variable is the spread price. Having identified the markets where the price is set so high that the sell price will almost always offer value you just blindly sell anything that meets your chosen minimum price. The golden age has gone in that respect though now there’s effectively only one firm. Firstly the edge has been reduced as there’s only one set of prices and secondly we’re left with a firm that won’t hesitate to limit or close successful punters.

I’ve never really looked at the spread betting markets on racing but my gut feel is that they won’t fall into the “selling blindly” space though you’re more likely to find value in opposing a horse than backing one. I’m also not sure if they’d be as useful as a predictive tool as the goal/try minute prices are.

[Zilzalian]

50 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

I guess this thread illustrates a coupe of things; why racing is so fascinating as a betting medium for many people and why for me, from a “keep it simpler” perspective, I’ve ended up specialising in selling on the spreads and backing goal and tryscorers.

I do make “studied” bets on goalscorers where additional variables are weighed (games played/started, number of games scored in, last 10 or 20 game goals scored, even xG etc sometimes) but the main anytime systems run off just two variables; best bookies price and spread price for player goal minutes. From just that I make most of my selections and turn a reasonable profit. A lot of data gathering and analysis went into getting to where I am now but I can look at a game and identify the bets in a coupe of minutes.

The spreads are simpler still as the only variable is the spread price. Having identified the markets where the price is set so high that the sell price will almost always offer value you just blindly sell anything that meets your chosen minimum price. The golden age has gone in that respect though now there’s effectively only one firm. Firstly the edge has been reduced as there’s only one set of prices and secondly we’re left with a firm that won’t hesitate to limit or close successful punters.

I’ve never really looked at the spread betting markets on racing but my gut feel is that they won’t fall into the “selling blindly” space though you’re more likely to find value in opposing a horse than backing one. I’m also not sure if they’d be as useful as a predictive tool as the goal/try minute prices are.

Ermm a pedantic grammar policeman is wondering where "coupe" comes into things and thinks "tryscorer" should be two words. 🤣👨‍🎓

[MCLARKE]

1 hour ago, yossa6133 said:

Trainer form maybe, always something I think I should pay more attention to!

What the actual ground is compared to the going description i.e working your ratings out after the time of first race is known. Saw someone say recently that they never bet on the first race for this reason. 

Temperature, there must be horses out there that only perform when it's warm. Not seen much about this but it would make sense.

Market mover? Drifted like a barge or smashed in.

I spent ages looking at trainer form but couldn't find any angle that gave me an edge

Interesting about the first race , I'll include this as one of the areas to investigate with my speed figures

Again the temperature angle is interesting. Not sure if I can incorporate the weather into my analysis ! I have noticed though that some of my successful winners based on speed figures seemed to achieve their speed figure at a similar time of year. That could be an interesting angle.

Market movers are also interesting. I always suspect the worse when I see my horse has drifted and the backed horses always seem to win, again anecdotal rater than based on actual data.

[MCLARKE]

21 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

Ermm a pedantic grammar policeman is wondering where "coupe" comes into things and thinks "tryscorer" should be two words.

I used to have a Ford Capri Coupe !

Don't start me with a rugby try. I had a heated debate with some of my rugby playing mates about whether the plural is trys or tries.

[harry_rag]

17 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

Ermm a pedantic grammar policeman is wondering where "coupe" comes into things

I could say I meant it as in "a glass, used especially for some alcoholic drinks, with a wide, shallow bowl (= the round part that holds the drink) and a stem (= a thin vertical part between the base and the bowl)" but I just missed the "l" out. That's the perils of autocorrect when you type something that is actually a word. I don't necessarily proofread everything I post on here to the hilt, you could probably find lots of missuses of "there" and "their" if you were so inclined.

 

22 minutes ago, Zilzalian said:

and thinks "tryscorer" should be two words

At least it seems you're wrong on that point though I'll admit I wasn't certain. A quick google suggests both goal and tryscorer are fine as one word even if autocorrect tends to object to them. I type/text them that often and had taken to the one word approach for convenience without ever checking if it was entirely correct but it seems it is.

[Zilzalian]

2 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

I spent ages looking at trainer form but couldn't find any angle that gave me an edge

Interesting about the first race , I'll include this as one of the areas to investigate with my speed figures

Again the temperature angle is interesting. Not sure if I can incorporate the weather into my analysis ! I have noticed though that some of my successful winners based on speed figures seemed to achieve their speed figure at a similar time of year. That could be an interesting angle.

Market movers are also interesting. I always suspect the worse when I see my horse has drifted and the backed horses always seem to win, again anecdotal rater than based on actual data.

Well i wouldn't back a Venetia Williams horse at the moment, that's an angle...

[Zilzalian]

2 hours ago, harry_rag said:

I could say I meant it as in "a glass, used especially for some alcoholic drinks, with a wide, shallow bowl (= the round part that holds the drink) and a stem (= a thin vertical part between the base and the bowl)" but I just missed the "l" out. That's the perils of autocorrect when you type something that is actually a word. I don't necessarily proofread everything I post on here to the hilt, you could probably find lots of missuses of "there" and "their" if you were so inclined.

 

At least it seems you're wrong on that point though I'll admit I wasn't certain. A quick google suggests both goal and tryscorer are fine as one word even if autocorrect tends to object to them. I type/text them that often and had taken to the one word approach for convenience without ever checking if it was entirely correct but it seems it is.

Nah being the proverbial twat i'm not having tryscorer (not allowed in scrabble games) as one word sorry. 💩😁

[harry_rag]

Never played scrabble in my life! We'll have to agree to differ but I'll be carrying on with the single word approach happy that I'm either right or at the cutting edge of evolving the language.

The bookies tend towards going with it being one word if you want the ultimate arbiter who we all have absolute trust in. 

[Zilzalian]

1 hour ago, harry_rag said:

Never played scrabble in my life! We'll have to agree to differ but I'll be carrying on with the single word approach happy that I'm either right or at the cutting edge of evolving the language.

The bookies tend towards going with it being one word if you want the ultimate arbiter who we all have absolute trust in. 

 

[MCLARKE]

7 hours ago, Zilzalian said:

Now put them in order of importance, i would take a good guess that different punters put them in different orders. You could add on stopwatch (RP) big fields v small fields and even naps the list is almost endless. Once you made your selection, The big question i would ask is- what was it based on? did you end up using speed figures or form?

The order of importance changes depending which type of racing I'm looking at.

For my current AW system the criteria (in order of importance) are age, draw, weight and forecast odds. 

For my current NH hurdle system the criteria are number of career starts, claiming jockey, sex, weight and forecast odds.

When I settle on a system using my speed figures I will probably end up with a different set of criteria although I suspect forecast odds will remain a fundamental part of it.

[calva decoy]

20 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

There has been debate in the Speed Ratings thread about the importance of going and distance. This has raised the question about which are the most important variables to consider when making selections. I will start with my list in order of importance. Please fell free to comment or add your own lists.

Odds (both current race and previous race, exclude long odds)

Days since last run (higher preferred)

Race distance v distance of previous races

Finishing position of previous runs (not including last run)

Draw (this list is for flat racing only)

Number of runs

Number of runs (current season)

Going

Weight

Class movement

Country horse bred in

Race distance

Claiming jockey

Winning / losing distance of last race

Turf / AW

Weight v previous run

Official Rating

Finish position last run

Same / different jockey

Same / different course

Number of runners in previous race

Sex of horse

Age

Previous course

Handicap / non handicap

Official rating v last run

Official rating v last winning run

Maiden / non maiden

Course winner

Races since last win

Month

Course

Distance winner

Beaten favourite

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You've missed out , named after favourite auntie 😆 

For me depends on different codes & times of season but my first thing is horses for courses where if a horse in the only previous CD winner in the field , going is in favour , horse is in form that time of year , stable are currently going ok then I'll have a punt but this isn't a gimme as for instance Southwell is now a different surface to what it used to be & Yarmouth closed for a year & was regrassed &  certain trainers who i used to follow there ( C.Wall ) one took a while to get their mojo back .

[frames]

I'm new here so maybe I'm going over old ground, so apologies if that's the case. I do think all the ideas expressed have value but for quite some time now I've stopped doing things like compiling a list of horses to watch - experience has taught me that all you end up with a list of horses that have been beaten, and that's not a good start to selection. I think the real money is in pool betting, so I have concentrated on that, 

[MCLARKE]

5 hours ago, frames said:

I'm new here so maybe I'm going over old ground, so apologies if that's the case. I do think all the ideas expressed have value but for quite some time now I've stopped doing things like compiling a list of horses to watch - experience has taught me that all you end up with a list of horses that have been beaten, and that's not a good start to selection. I think the real money is in pool betting, so I have concentrated on that, 

Personally I think the takeout in pool betting is so high that it's almost impossible to win

[Trotter]

5 hours ago, frames said:

I'm new here so maybe I'm going over old ground, so apologies if that's the case. I do think all the ideas expressed have value but for quite some time now I've stopped doing things like compiling a list of horses to watch - experience has taught me that all you end up with a list of horses that have been beaten, and that's not a good start to selection. I think the real money is in pool betting, so I have concentrated on that, 

welcome to the forum !

I think the problem with lists of horses to follow is that it's tempting not to evaluate the races they ran in that earned them the flag nor the race that they're due to run in next time out. In other words if you just get a notification that a horse you've bookmarked to follow is running tomorrow it's tempting to back it just because it's on your list of horses to follow without looking more closely at it's real chances

I think it's a similar problem with Stable Tours that you get at the beginning of each season or basically trainers opinions full stop. They might know a lot about the horse in their yard but they don't know much about the ten other runners in the 3.15 tomorrow, ie the ones their horse is running against. It might be tempting to back a horse because the trainer has singled him out in his pre-season stable tour but there's no context of the race he's running in and the other horses he's running against 

[frames]

Personally I think the takeout in pool betting is so high that it's almost impossible to win

 

The percentage takeouts vary, so it's a matter of opinion, I suppose. I think it also depends on how you calculate field book percentages - which are fixed.

[harry_rag]

I'll stick this in here as it seems legitimate as a variable to be considered before placing a bet (and follows up on a recent discussion). The issue of how you decide whether to go for the best price or the extra places when betting each way.

Having had a look at the 7:50 in Naas (19 runners), Sky are going 6 places from 4 though most firms are offering 5 anyway. I've looked at a couple of runners:

1. Captured 18/1 to 6 places v 25/1 to 5 places (5th the odds)
2. Calamint 16/1 to 6 places v 18/1 to 5 places (5th the odds)

My gut reaction is that the drop in price for the first horse is a bit steep but the second one isn't that significant. I've quickly crunched some numbers that give the following ratings (in terms of the decision about whether to favour the extra places); Captured at 0.74 v Calamint at 1.89. That's based on the gain in places (positive) and the reduction in price (negative) and the bigger the number the better the extra place option is.

Out of interest, how do you racing punters feel about those two options. Would you tend towards the better price for the first one but the extra place for the second?

[Zilzalian]

26 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

I'll stick this in here as it seems legitimate as a variable to be considered before placing a bet (and follows up on a recent discussion). The issue of how you decide whether to go for the best price or the extra places when betting each way.

Having had a look at the 7:50 in Naas (19 runners), Sky are going 6 places from 4 though most firms are offering 5 anyway. I've looked at a couple of runners:

1. Captured 18/1 to 6 places v 25/1 to 5 places (5th the odds)
2. Calamint 16/1 to 6 places v 18/1 to 5 places (5th the odds)

My gut reaction is that the drop in price for the first horse is a bit steep but the second one isn't that significant. I've quickly crunched some numbers that give the following ratings (in terms of the decision about whether to favour the extra places); Captured at 0.74 v Calamint at 1.89. That's based on the gain in places (positive) and the reduction in price (negative) and the bigger the number the better the extra place option is.

Out of interest, how do you racing punters feel about those two options. Would you tend towards the better price for the first one but the extra place for the second?

Well lets take different types of punters. I assume we are talking about singles here.

Type 1 The analysers or ratings creators (me) I expect my horse to win i never pick an ew (that's different than having an ew bet because a daft sod would be a fool to back win only on a 33/1 shot, again me) so would have to be confident in my selection anyway so i would want the bigger price.

Type 2 The casual punter that just likes to have a bet, he might choose to have a win bet or an ew depending on its price if he is betting for fun rather than profit (a winning bet would be nice) could choose either.

Type 3 The punter that knows nothing about horses (you 🤣) and shouldn't really be having a bet on gg's should take the extra places in both cases.

Type 4 The shit bag punter that is scared of losing money that would go EW on a 3/1 shot type, he would defo pick both the extra place options.

Not applicable to Type 5 punters, The don't give a f**k punter that can't even be bothered reading past the list of runners let alone the "options"

 

[harry_rag]

Fair points that illustrate “what type of punter are you” is yet another variable to throw into the mix generally!

I’d have said there are theoretical extremes where most punters would go one way or the other (a tiny difference in price for a couple of extra places or only getting half the odds for a single extra place) but everything in the middle is harder to call.

I might knock a spreadsheet together and perhaps @The Equaliser and anyone else who experiences the dilemma can try it out. I might get some use out of it in other sports. At least I can get the idea out of my head then and fully concentrate on the stuff I actually bet on day in day out!

[Zilzalian]

7 minutes ago, harry_rag said:

Fair points that illustrate “what type of punter are you” is yet another variable to throw into the mix generally!

I’d have said there are theoretical extremes where most punters would go one way or the other (a tiny difference in price for a couple of extra places or only getting half the odds for a single extra place) but everything in the middle is harder to call.

I might knock a spreadsheet together and perhaps @The Equaliser and anyone else who experiences the dilemma can try it out. I might get some use out of it in other sports. At least I can get the idea out of my head then and fully concentrate on the stuff I actually bet on day in day out!

Yes the psychology of betting is indeedy an interesting variable in itself, i used to observe it with great interest when i used to frequent the dens of iniquities that are bookies shops.

[MCLARKE]

3 hours ago, harry_rag said:

I'll stick this in here as it seems legitimate as a variable to be considered before placing a bet (and follows up on a recent discussion). The issue of how you decide whether to go for the best price or the extra places when betting each way.

Having had a look at the 7:50 in Naas (19 runners), Sky are going 6 places from 4 though most firms are offering 5 anyway. I've looked at a couple of runners:

1. Captured 18/1 to 6 places v 25/1 to 5 places (5th the odds)
2. Calamint 16/1 to 6 places v 18/1 to 5 places (5th the odds)

My gut reaction is that the drop in price for the first horse is a bit steep but the second one isn't that significant. I've quickly crunched some numbers that give the following ratings (in terms of the decision about whether to favour the extra places); Captured at 0.74 v Calamint at 1.89. That's based on the gain in places (positive) and the reduction in price (negative) and the bigger the number the better the extra place option is.

Out of interest, how do you racing punters feel about those two options. Would you tend towards the better price for the first one but the extra place for the second?

Another variable is that Sky do not offer BOG.

Another feature is the "shape" of the betting, if the favourite is short priced then there is likely to be more benefit of betting each way

[anaconda69]

11 hours ago, MCLARKE said:

Another variable is that Sky do not offer BOG.

Another feature is the "shape" of the betting, if the favourite is short priced then there is likely to be more benefit of betting each way

If u can beat a price even at the exchange Ur winning long term. 

[LeMale]

15 hours ago, harry_rag said:

I'll stick this in here as it seems legitimate as a variable to be considered before placing a bet (and follows up on a recent discussion). The issue of how you decide whether to go for the best price or the extra places when betting each way.

Having had a look at the 7:50 in Naas (19 runners), Sky are going 6 places from 4 though most firms are offering 5 anyway. I've looked at a couple of runners:

1. Captured 18/1 to 6 places v 25/1 to 5 places (5th the odds)
2. Calamint 16/1 to 6 places v 18/1 to 5 places (5th the odds)

My gut reaction is that the drop in price for the first horse is a bit steep but the second one isn't that significant. I've quickly crunched some numbers that give the following ratings (in terms of the decision about whether to favour the extra places); Captured at 0.74 v Calamint at 1.89. That's based on the gain in places (positive) and the reduction in price (negative) and the bigger the number the better the extra place option is.

Out of interest, how do you racing punters feel about those two options. Would you tend towards the better price for the first one but the extra place for the second?

My 2 pennies worth is, it's very much swings and round-abouts and as a @Zilzalian Type 2.5 (kind of inbetween) i make a judgement call depending on the odds at the time i'm betting, which can be very beneficial (like in the race you mentioned - placed bet at 16-1 with 365 win bet not ew because price too low, got BOG as sp was 33-1) or can backfire badly, just like the race after that with Moutarde where i split the bet, half at 40-1 (and 2 mins after went to 50-1) and half at sp both ew with skybet. At the time i was gutted i took the 40's as price was rising, but like i said, it backfired because it went off at 12-1 i think and lost £16.80 on the sp bet. I will try to put them on here at the end as don't want anybody thinking i'm a "hindsight punter" as long as no one laughs at my stakes. (it's what keeps it fun and not really gambling in my eyes) It can be frustrating when that 16-1 shot drifts to a big price (a price that i would normally bet ew) and it places, so i get nothing, but when it wins like yesterday i make more, like i said, swings and round-abouts you have to take the rough with the smooth, that's racing.