Questions and Answers - please email me any questions & I will respond on this page.
The
trainer form can be significant. In a handicap you are looking for which horses
may run slightly better or worse than their mark and trainer form is a factor in
this.
Milton Bradley has endured a losing run lasting many months yet there are still
plenty of folk prepared to back his horses. Howard Johnson recently was a high
profile trainer out of form. In the latter case, the horses had suffered a
collective allergy caused by a batch of hay. Of course, he came back to form
with a bang at the festival but prior to that his horses were ripe for laying.
Jonjo O'Neil's horses have not been quite right for a long time either. James
Knight of Coral's
hit the nail on the head in the Racing Post recently when he said that all the
stables runners should be taken on at the moment.
On a more positive note, when a stable hits form for whatever reason, the horses
often collectively run slightly above their mark. Not all of them of course but
certain trainers enjoy prolonged runs of form followed by a quiet spell. During
the run of form, the horses will tend to rise in the handicap and there comes a
point where they need to start to drop before the next form run and things go
quiet. Derek Shaw is a good example of this. When Milton Bradley regains some
form, he will have some very well handicapped horses running. Some trainers such
as Paul Nicholls are usually in good form all through the season but even then,
the stables horses all had their flu jab together and ran quiet for a couple of
weeks.
Jockeys undoubtedly make a difference but it is not always easy to predict to
what extent. The recent farce in the 4 runner apprentice race should remind us
all to be cautious about in-experienced jockeys. This race was won and lost
entirely on the jockey! On the flat then timing is important and some jockeys
are better at timing their run than others. In the bigger handicaps where things
are ultra-competitive, having a top jockey can make the sh hd difference between
winning and losing. Over the jumps, strength is more important. Keeping a tired
horse going after a 3 mile slog in the mud takes strength and AP McCoy has few
peers.
One important thing to note, sometimes horses are over-bet because of the
jockey. I think we saw that earlier in the year with the excellent Kirsty
Milczarek. She is an excellent rider and deserves all the credit she receives
but because the media picked up on her because she is a pretty young female
apprentice with a catchy nickname; there were a few weeks where her horses
started shorter than they should have done.
Also, some trainers are better at bringing horses along gradually. Some have
them blazing as 2-y-o's and some consider that 2-y-o's should be looked after
until they are 3. Mark Johnston, Luca Cumani train their horses to stay longer
distances where some trainers train the horses they have for sprinting. Some
jockeys are excellent from the front (remember Steve Cauthen) and others excel
on hold up horses (George Baker).
Overall, the factors are just part of the jigsaw puzzle and there is not a
simple way of assessing the trainer and jockey but with experience you learn to
read the factors on the day and use them to your advantage.
1. If say say three bookies on oddschecker are going 12/1 about a horse and the rest are going 10/1 - where would sporting index put themselves in the odds equivalent - 10/1, 11/1, 12/1 ? It depends on the view of the trader. He will have priced it up - maybe 10/1, maybe 12/1, maybe 16/1. His prices will be reduced to a 100% book and the spreads calculated from that.
or if its easier - a couple of bookies on 20/1 and rest 16/1 etc. where would SIndex be? Again, the trader will take a view and price the horse as he sees fit. It is possible to backwards calculate the equivalent fixed odds given the spreads if that is what you mean. I will have a look at that and post a table on my site.
Basically my question is do you often get the best 'odds' via sporting index on the indices? If not I'll stick to bookmakers and betfair! The way the spread bet awards points in unique - the second gets more points than the third - not the case in fixed odds or exchange betting. Therefore it is difficult to compare exactly but what I will say is that there is plenty of value on offer in spread betting and you are on the right track to finding it.
2. I suppose I should really ask about your tissue / xcel service. I do my own betting so wouldnt want tips - but tissue spreadsheet could be useful to me. I know its hard to quantify but how accurate are your tissues - what percentage move the right way in the market? The spreadsheet is useful as a tool. My tissues are the key to finding value, which you have to achieve to make a long term profit. I am not trying to be accurate and I may have 4/1 about a 10/1 shot on my tissue or 8/1 about a 9/4 shot. Regardless of market movements - my success is largely due to picking value bets in handicaps. I only produce tissues for handicap races as there is no point pretending I can price a field of un-raced 2-y-o's.
I expect I would use your tissues simply to make value bets on betfair - and not bother trading them. Yes, that works just fine.
3. If I were to have a little dabble on the spreads - where do you think I should start? Could I simply start selling the bottom 3 or 4 tracks blindly in the Starting Prices market - and grind out a profit - or do you just sell the meetings with fewer handicaps (maybe I have the latter ass about face!)....Maybe I should go with Double Numbers. Funny, I started with Double Numbers years ago but it is a time consuming market. My advice to newcomers would be to ghave a look at the Racing Post Favs market. This has the advantage that you know which horses you are on. I would advise against selling any market until you have a bit of experience as the risk can be very much higher. Find a meeting and look at the RP favs. As a simple system, mark each one as a positive +1, a negative -1, or indifferent -. When you find a meeting where you have a figure of +3 or greater - say you fancy 5 with 2 negatives - +3. Indulge in a small buy, sit back and enjoy the action! Remember, if you open an account with the firm you mentioned, they will give you £100 cash so if things go wrong on your first 5 bets or so you hopefully will not be out of pocket.
4. Lastly, when the value opportunity presents itself with spread betting markets - how long do they hang around. There are no doubt a few 'shrewdies' out there (like yourselft!) that get on right away. Also how many opportunities might there be a day or week where spread firms get it wrong? Spread firms suffer in that there are so few 'mug punters' who spread bet and so their clients are often professional or at least shrewd, as you say. Because of the dynamics and sheer volume of markets, there is always value somewhere so I would not worry about that. It is worth the time getting to grips with spread betting. Don't try to learn all the weird and wonderful markets - pick one and learn it. Watch the results and you will soon build up a knowledge and be able to expand into other markets. Keep a virtual diary if you like. Sporting Index over a very low min stake so you can start slowly at first.
Thanks for the comprehensive reply before about value and insights into women jockeys, i.e. Kirsty and interesting to hear u think it is hard for a horse to come from behind on an all weather track and win.
Lingfield is different - horses who kick on too early in the straight tend to get caught and the inside of the track is slower so you don't want to be right on the rail. Greg Fairley got caught out twice(!) on Sat.
I do keep thinking that there is an element of luck involved in horse racing, you can know all the knowledge in the world but at the end of the day it is quite unpredictable.
Lady Luck is a very unfaithful lady! BUT luck should even out long term and quite often, a dodgy jumper who falls, a come from behind horse who finds trouble etc which are cases of 'bad luck' are often at least partly predictable.
I have definitely realised laying is not as easy as it sounds in terms of the fact u can lay a good few horses to lose only for one horse tipped to ruin any previous good run. I guess there is a different psychology to laying which you don’t really consider, what do u think?
This kind of betting does require a different approach. Although the concept of value still applies, it must be used much more carefully. A few years back, when I started laying, I did very well for a number of weeks. Then one day I had a tissue price of 50/1 on a horse that I laid at 14 and 16 on Betfair. The horse was backed from 33/1 into 7/2 fav and duly won nicely. That was my rude awakening! On paper the '50/1' shot had no chance but his gambling stable (another key factor) had got him ready. The fact that the horse was so short actually made him value. Equally, an apparent 4/1 chance that drifts out to 8/1 is often worth laying despite its price being too big. Still, we have to tread very carefully with laying.
I have seen some tipsters who only lay for the reason of a horse having more weight to pull around thus this makes the horse a 5 star lay tip, or most of the time they go by form, but if form was anything to go by then u wouldn’t get 10/1,12/1,14/1 winners.
I subscribe to a point of view held by many pro gamblers - weight is largely unimportant. That sounds like a bold statement but a horse is a very strong, heavy animal. An extra 6 lb is neither here nor there. Look at how much baggage a donkey can carry! The shorter the race, the less the weight has an effect. If you ran to the end of your garden in 3 seconds, then ran again carrying a bag of sugar; chances are you still run 3 seconds. Carry it during a marathon it will certainly make a difference. Therefore on the flat, I largely ignore a 6lb penalty. It is more critical over the jumps.
Where people get confused, is when a horse goes up in the weights it often has to run in a higher class of race. This is what prevents the horse winning yet the weight is often blamed. In a class 4 race on the flat, say the top weight is coming down from class 3 after some moderate runs and the bottom weight won a class 5 last time, backing the top weight is a better blind strategy. Overall, the class difference between 3 and 5 is much more important than the weight.
This
may not be true in certain cases. Say a tiny horse is asked to carry 12st in a
h’cap chase, then the physical weight may be too big a burden even if he/she
has the class to have been allotted top weight. On the flat though, usually,
physical weight can be ignored.
To
me, past form is not as important as conditions on the day. I am amazed when
analysts point to a piece of form 2 years ago which puts horse a a neck in front
of horse b at the weights. Ground, draw, stable form, horses well-being are all
more relevant than strict interpretations of weight turnarounds. Statistically,
it has been proven that overall, if horse a beats horse b, if they meet next
time then the value is in backing horse a again, even if the weights indicate
otherwise.
Lastly, the other thing I noticed correct me if I am wrong is that a lot of your lay tips have been for the all weather. Now whenever I have watched trainers talk about their horse after their race or even before a lot of the time they say the ground wasn’t right for the horse, I hear this a lot, so I was wondering whether you think the condition of the ground is paramount to a horse running well?
Although sometimes the trainer is over inclined to blame the ground, yes, it does make a difference to the outcome of a race. The AW is good in that mostly the uncertainty is reduced although the AW surface does change, especially the fibresand at Southwell, mostly during the flood season (all year then)!
If so does this mean you take an important factor out of the all weather, i.e. all weather means a horse can run on any ground right?
Basically, the surface at Southwell would tend to suit a soft ground horse on the turf and the other tracks a good / firm ground horse on the turf. One thing that is interesting, is certain sires have offspring who go well on the aw and some quite the reverse. I take a mild interest in this although I think that it is very easy to read things into statistics that are not there. The number of horses sharing the same sire are often relatively few and I think some judges get a bit carried away. Still, it is true that the breeding can affect a horses ability to run an artificial surfaces.
I have noticed that a lot of the tips u have giving out are from races with small fields obviously u are picking horses which u think genuinely will not have a good chance, but how does the numbers game affect a race?
Although Betfair has largely removed the bias; the bookmakers over-rounds are higher the more runners - a 4 horse race might be 104% but a 20-runner bumper may well be 150%. The maths dictate that the punter has more of an advantage in smaller fields when backing.
Like todays lay you say wont perform well in a small field but surely the more horses in a race the harder it is for the one you pick to win? I am asking this as like I say it is something I have noticed.
With any race, and this is what you must be able to achieve to make the game pay, you must work on the principle of VALUE. To take it to an extreme - Man Utd vs Derby. Your gut instinct? Man Utd. What if Derby were 1000/1? You would take a chance on Derby. That is why I prefer backing in handicap - it is easier to make a value judgement in a race full of exposed horses. Betting in a large field of un-raced 2-y-o is suicidal unless you have genuine inside info. In the case you give, MYTHICAL CHARM (who is trained about 6 miles from me) is an exposed mare that I have seen race plenty of times. She needs covering up and is capable of coming home with a wet sail if her mark has dropped to the right level and everything falls right. She could of won yesterday, but the fact that her record shows a liking for big fields has been missed by the Racing Post Spotlight and probably 99% of betting shop punters. Therefore, we can say that her odds are slightly less than they should be, and that is all you need for a bet. When you can pick out these factors, you are 1/2 way to making the game play. If a bet is good value, then the field size is unimportant. Many people prefer bigger fields, as they fear a slowly run race in small fields. I think this is largely a mis-conception although on the AW tracks, slowly run races can be a real headache, whatever the field size.
Lastly about woman jockeys. Do you or have you ever taken this into account when making a bet? I have read that some tipsters give out lay tips especially when a woman jockey is on board as they say a woman jockey is not as good and generally are weak thus can not really influence a horse. I watched a few races yesterday at Kempton the 2.30 and 3.00. The jockey was Kirsty Milczarek. She won both races, so just wondering what you think about the jockey factor, but when a woman is booked for the ride? Do you think this is a good strategy to lay a horse if a woman jockey is on board, say if you laid every woman jockey would you show a profit do you think?
Interesting point. I think it's a bit like women drivers - most are worse than men but those that are good are very good. My basic theory is to be cautious over jumps. The average woman will never have the strength of the leading male jockeys. Gee Armytage back in the 80's was really capable but basically they lack the strength over the jumps to get the best out of a horse who is out on his feet after a 3 mile slog in the mud. Always avoid lady's races as the level of skill varies wildly!
On the flat I think it is a different matter. If we were looking at a big Sat h’cap at Ascot, or Newmarket - you want someone like Kieran Fallon of Mick Kinane. In these top class hcaps a good jockey can be the difference between a short head victory or loss. I think the AW is different. Some jockeys ride it better than others and not always the way you would think! I rate Kirsty Milczarek very highly indeed and trainers are fighting over her services at the moment. She rides the aw very very well and it is clear that the 5lb allowance she can claim is a huge understatement of her ability. However, this year she has become ‘famous’ and the fact that she is riding a horse is starting to affect it’s price to such an extent that it becomes more tempting to blindly lay rather than blindly back her. This is a good example of trend correction that I will discuss in ‘Systems’ later on. It will be interesting to see how she goes after she loses her claim. Hayley Turner also rides the AW very well and she is also very capable on turf. The presence of either of these two girls on any horse on the aw should be taken as a positive. In general, inexperienced girl jockeys should be avoided. The few that make it are usually very good as discussed. If you laid every woman jockey blindly, then I doubt you would make any long term gain on the flat. On the equitrack surface, horses travel very fast and are often on the turn. Jockeyship is important and if using jockeys to determine lays, a number of trainers are using the AW to cut the teeth of their apprentices and sometimes this can present a lay opportunity.
The other factor on the AW that holds true more than turf is that because of the nature of the tracks, it is harder to come from behind. This varies from course to course but a front-runner should have much more success than a hold up horse of identical ability. The 'luck in running' factor. Again, this is not always given the importance it deserves.