This is article was originally published by The Betting School Insider’s Club (www.betting-school.com) in their December 2011 newsletter.
MISSPENT YOUTH
I have been betting on horses for 40 years. I learnt to read using the Sporting Chronicle Handicap Book and my arithmetic improved in leaps and bounds when my father explained to me that 5 divided by 2 was 5/2 or 2.5 to 1. Before I was 10 years old I knew all about Round Robins, Yankees and the ITV 7. Up and down doubles held no fears and each way equally divided trebles were second nature.
Many people would see this as a misspent childhood but in addition to reading and numbers skills beyond my years I also learnt that gambling should be done with money you can afford to lose. While it was always possible to win it could not be achieved without hard work and looking after your money. It was impressed upon me that unless you put the work in you had no right to expect to win.
In my late teens I began compiling handicap ratings for sprint races which yielded some success. Being in a good full time job I could not devote the time required to take it too seriously but I always suspected that I had the right idea. I also knew that to satisfy my own work ethic I needed to be sure that I had put the hours in and had all the information at my disposal.
PUTTING THE LONG HOURS IN
In the 80’s and 90’s several new writers came to the fore with Mark Coton, Alan Potts and Nick Mordin being some of my favourites.
Mark Coton’s Value Betting broke new ground in suggesting that more winners was not the answer and he was willing to forgo short priced winners in favour of winners at value prices. He also provided a points based system to quantify his version of value.
Alan Potts’ version of value was in betting Against The Crowd. His was a battle against his fellow punter not the bookie and if you could beat them you would be in profit.
Nick Mordin’s writing instilled a more scientific and research based approach to finding winners and he also advocated some of the methods adopted in the US. For a while I compiled my own speed ratings using the method he outlined.
More recently my betting became more serious once it became possible to view every race in full on the dedicated racing channels. This coincided with a redundancy and not only was the required amount of time available to me but also the required amount of information. Now I could compile my handicap ratings not just from in running comments but I could form my own opinions on the validity of those comments and spot things the commentators missed. This looked like a recipe to satisfy my hunger for complete information and to allow me to “put the long hours in” without which I could not justify substantial betting.
Over the last few years there have been a number of successful gamblers and TV tipsters making the headlines. They all have their own unique approach which helps them to make profits but the two common themes tend to be value and hard work.
Dave Nevison never appears on RUK without uttering words like “the favourite is the most likely winner but it won’t be carrying any of my money at that price”.
Hugh Taylor only tips horses which meet his criteria on price. Neither of these two have plucked their notion of value out of the air. They have built up their ideas over years of careful observation. Hugh Taylor particularly displays a thoughtful and considered approach which probably comes from his time as a jockey’s agent when he would need to study form to identify the best horses and spend hours on the phone to trainers trying to secure the rides.
Patrick Veitch may be one of the most flamboyant characters to emerge in recent years but let’s not forget that he studied Maths and by his own admission he has to be part brain surgeon to do the research. He watches hours of re-runs in order to acquire the knowledge he needs to be successful. He also says that his betting improved when he had to go into hiding and put his life on hold to escape from a criminal. Everybody needs to put the long hours in to achieve success.
DISGUISED FORM = VALUE
Since my redundancy and the opportunity to devote my time to racing I have not really looked back. I have always had value as my watchword and it was the basis of my service called Flat Ratings Pro. I would tip several horses in a race and specify a “value price” at which each should be backed. This aimed to give a high strike rate and make a long term profit. I calculated a “tissue” price for each horse in great detail. It was very specific and unambiguous but I offered no insight into how the selections were arrived at or why they were value.
Over the next few months I will be writing a series of articles explaining some of the methods I use to find winners at value prices. I hope these articles will be informative and will give an insight into a more “intuitive” approach as opposed to calculating a betting forecast to the “nth” degree. My hope is that readers can use the insights to make their own decisions if they have the time available and the necessary application.
Unique Handicap Ratings
The mainstay of my winner finding is my database of handicap ratings. This is time consuming and involves watching re-runs of races. In order to save time I specialise in handicap races for 3yo’s and above and I further reduce the workload by limiting myself to races up to 10f on the all-weather and 8f on the turf.
I tend to concentrate on ordinary races. You may have heard commentators say that you would get a different result every time if they were re-run. They are full of seemingly exposed horses but I tend to look for those aspects of a horse’s past form which are disguised and which can therefore be overlooked by many.
My first consideration is always to be sure that I think the horse can win off today’s BHA rating. I consider recent form to be more relevant than back form and adjust expectations accordingly. If a horse has run to today’s mark on its last run, all things being equal, I would consider it value at a shorter price than a horse which ran 5lbs below on its last run. This is reasonably obvious and the betting markets usually have horses with good form last time out at short prices. They also tend to have horses at relatively short prices that have come down in the weights.
These situations are where unique ratings come into play as I am able to consider all aspects of a performance. In spite of my “hunger for complete information” I must be clear that I do not pick up on everything (nor do I try to – there is not enough time) but watching re-runs whilst considering the variables can give a valuable insight into why a horse is over or under-priced. If you spot something which has been ignored by the Racing Post you may well have uncovered a well-disguised value bet.
Don’t Seek Perfection
I’d also like to point out that there is no such thing as the perfect bet. In the absence of the holy grail of “complete” information we can only aim to know a little more than the majority. If we only bet when everything is in our favour we would have very few bets, procrastination would set in and we would also never forgive ourselves for backing a loser. We are looking for solid value bets which means that if we find enough of them we will win in the long term. We forgive ourselves for backing losers as we are satisfied that we made the bet knowing that the value makes up for a number of losers.
In this first article I’d like to go through the general points I try to cover in my ratings. In certain instances I will ignore a poor run altogether but often adjust ratings to offset the adverse effect and sometimes reduce ratings where an unusual advantage has occurred.
The value of knowing when to ignore a run is fairly obvious if you consider my point about recent form being more important than back form. If you can eliminate poor runs thereby turning back form into recent form you have an edge over the market. Put simply if you can make a case for old form which is good enough to win today’s race to be treated as if it was last time out you have found value.
FACTORS TO CONSIDER
AW form v Turf form – this is a very powerful tool ( see article written in June 2010 – Official Handicap Ratings BHA – AW v Turf ) which involves analysing disparities between aw ratings and turf ratings. A recent example of the effectiveness of this type of analysis came on Saturday Nov 19th in the 17.50 at Wolverhampton. Elna Bright and Sir Geoffrey had both been running on the turf during the summer and were back on the AW. Elna Bright won at 12/1 and Sir Geoffrey was 3rd at 40/1 and a Betfair place SP of 13.50.
I think my comments show the value of assessing AW and turf form and making “back” form into “recent” form to uncover a value bet.
ELNA BRIGHT – All Weather form is better than turf form and he has recently won over 5f on turf. His last two AW runs were in Listed class so we could make a case for ignoring them but he ran to 90 or so in the 1st one and was bumped at the start in the 2nd. I ignored the 2nd and assume he can run to 90 as I had previously rated him at 92 and 94. Speed figures up to Class 2 make him a leading contender. The fact that the form is somewhat hidden may mean a value price.
SIR GEOFFREY – At first glance appears to be declining as his mark has fallen during the turf season. However, if you take the view that he is consistent on the AW and prefers that surface it is likely that he has a chance of running to his AW best of 85. His last 3 AW runs are 82,84,84 so I put him in at 84. Combining this with his speed figure at Class 2 level makes him a leading contender. He is better however at 5f.
Class – Where a horse has run poorly taking a step up in class to listed or a big field heritage handicap and is now running back in its class I will ignore the run. It is also useful to look at the BHA ratings of horses contesting a race. For example if the highest rated horse running in a class 3 is 87 the race is nearer to a class 4.
Going/Track/ Distance unsuitable – I will ignore a poor run if today’s conditions are suitable.
Draw – I attempt to adjust the ratings where there is a draw bias and ignore the run if it is clear that a horse stood no chance from its draw. It can help to treat races which split into groups as two or sometimes three separate contests. Draw is also connected to pace as inside draws may demand a front runner to take advantage or be blocked in and outside draws are more disadvantageous to front runners than hold up horses.
Trip – I often adjust for horses caught wide round a bend or that are stopped in their run. I sometimes adjust or ignore runs if a front runner is slowly away and it appears to be a one-off.
Pace – I will ignore a run where front runners go much too fast. I will often downgrade a front runner winning with an easy lead and will upgrade closers in a slowly run race and conversely upgrade front runners contributing to a fast pace.
It is not easy to assess pace so it is always wise to be cautious. The times are no help either as fast races are more easily run off an even pace. A slow time can result from an easy lead and also from a very fast early pace which collapses.
It is therefore useful to assess pace before the race as if there are several potential front runners and they are all vying for the lead in the actual race you can be fairly certain that the race was run at a good pace. I assess the likely front runners by looking at the running style adopted in each horse’s last three runs in my pre-race analysis.
My analysis of the race won by Elna Bright showed that there were 3 potential front runners and 5 other horses that were likely to keep them honest by chasing the pace. This pointed even more strongly to Elna Bright as he was one of only two confirmed hold up horses.
Something in hand – I am always interested in how the winner looks at the end of the race. I add a few pounds to the winner’s rating if it looks like he has something left.
Speed Figures – In addition to my “traditional” handicap ratings I use Dave Bellingham’s speed figures from Raceform Interactive as a secondary check on class. The figures do not account for weight (unlike the RP’s Topspeed figures) so they are a measure of how fast the horse ran after adjusting for the going.
There are pars for each grade of race so a class 4 par is 105 and a class 3 107 for 4yo horses. Horses under 4 are assessed at improving by 1 point every 2 months so if a 3yo ran 102 in May or June it would be the same as running 105 as a 4yo. I account for this “improvement” in my pre-race analysis. I also give more importance to recent figures and on the whole this approach provides a good backup to my handicap ratings.
I hope this has given an insight into the kind of thought patterns I employ.
I will share the ensuing Betting School articles here at RaceReader.co.uk in due course.