Just beware with Swing Bill. I'm not convinced there isn't a bug at Pipe's yard because all his runners ran below expectations at the Festival last week and we know that other yard's have had bugs. He did have the Midlands Nat winner on Sat so that's re-assuring (and SB's disappointing run doesn't affect his GN stats as the rest of his season has been good) but it's another reason why NRNB is sensible, even at a lower price (Bet365 are NRNB, 5 places and have him at 66/1).
Softer ground it is. From tomorrow's Telegraph (J McGrath):
QUOTE Aintree bans firm ground for the Grand National
Aintree has run its last fast-ground Grand National. Starting from this year’s race, on April 6, the course will be watered as a matter of routine to provide going that is never any quicker than 'good to soft’.
In the most significant move yet to minimise the risk to horses and riders, the Aintree executive is effectively reshaping the race to fit modern requirements, at the same time trying to retain the character of jump racing’s ultimate challenge.
There will never be a repeat of Mr Frisk’s 1990 triumph when, on ground officially termed 'firm’, the Kim Bailey-trained gelding set a record time of 8min 47.8sec.
Lord Daresbury, the chairman of Aintree, said that a commissioned statistical report had supported the intuition that there was a direct link between injury to horses and the state of the ground. The quicker the ground, the faster the pace, which led to a greater risk of injury in the event of a fall.
“We looked closely at all the statistics, and in discussion with trainers, we came more and more to the conclusion that ensuring ground that was always on the soft side of 'good’ was the right thing to do,” he said.
Before Mr Frisk, the 'firm’ going winners over the previous five decades were Lucius (1978), Rag Trade (1976), Red Rum (1973) and Nicolaus Silver (1961).
Twelve of the 22 winners since Mr Frisk were successful on ground described as 'good’. In future, there will be no winners on that type of surface.
Lord Daresbury was aware of possible criticism, particularly from owners and trainers of horses with a preference for fast ground. “There have been contrary individual voices from that direction,” he confirmed.
“But when reality and logic starts sinking in, it should be different. Everybody is doing everything possible for the success of the Grand National, and I think most involved are taking more responsibility themselves for the race. There have been some critics who have said we are lowering the fences, but that is not the case.”
While they have not cut the size of the jumps, officials have introduced a softer core to the fences, with a view to lowering the risk of injury to horses who might plough through them.
The revelation regarding the future watering policy is the most significant piece of news regarding the future of the big race. Changes to the course, at Becher’s and elsewhere, the reduction in distance of the run to the first fence, and calls for fewer runners, all amount to cosmetic alterations.
However, a policy to ensure that the going is always on the soft side is a positive step that should be applauded. In the long term, it will subtly change the profile of a would-be Grand National horse. However, it might also ensure the casualty rate is lowered and the future of the race guaranteed. UNQUOTE
Thanks PM.................fingers crossed now. One thing I regret is signing up to the Bet365 'match your deposit bonus' deal which has now tied me in to 'rolling over 3 times' my deposit (£110) and bonus (another £110) which means that I have to bet £630 in total before I can withdraw a penny of winnings. But gutted about that and cross with myself for being sucked in to what (at my deposit level) is not a good decision. Probably means I will have to stake silly money (e.g. £100) on 'dead certs' like Barcelona winning against a pony team at the Nou Camp (@ odds of 1-10!!) to meet Bet365's requirements. Silly boy eh!?
Thanks PM.................fingers crossed now. One thing I regret is signing up to the Bet365 'match your deposit bonus' deal which has now tied me in to 'rolling over 3 times' my deposit (£110) and bonus (another £110) which means that I have to bet £630 in total before I can withdraw a penny of winnings. But gutted about that and cross with myself for being sucked in to what (at my deposit level) is not a good decision. Probably means I will have to stake silly money (e.g. £100) on 'dead certs' like Barcelona winning against a pony team at the Nou Camp (@ odds of 1-10!!) to meet Bet365's requirements. Silly boy eh!?
If you have not spent your 'free' bet, you can contact them (there is a 'live chat' tab) and ask them to remove the free bet from your account as you would like to opt out of the promotion. I did the same thing yesterday and they did remove it, therefore I am no longer bound by any conditions of spending/withdrawing. However I did contact them fairly quickly after depositing my money, so I don't know if that makes a difference! Once they have removed the free bet, any winnings you win with your actual money can be withdrawn without depositing anything else.
Thanks LLG.................I placed the bonus bets, simply to use them up so am probably stuffed now. Might try calling them anyway as none of the bets are 'in play' yet. Doubt it will be reversible though!
Thanks PM.................fingers crossed now. One thing I regret is signing up to the Bet365 'match your deposit bonus' deal which has now tied me in to 'rolling over 3 times' my deposit (£110) and bonus (another £110) which means that I have to bet £630 in total before I can withdraw a penny of winnings. But gutted about that and cross with myself for being sucked in to what (at my deposit level) is not a good decision. Probably means I will have to stake silly money (e.g. £100) on 'dead certs' like Barcelona winning against a pony team at the Nou Camp (@ odds of 1-10!!) to meet Bet365's requirements. Silly boy eh!?
Or place some bets for people you know, to use up the required amount. The GN is a good race to do this on, as so many folk have a bet on it.
Good news: Bet365 have agreed to cancel all of the bonus bets that I placed so that I can now withdraw any winning from my planned £110 deposit stake...............thanks for the tip LLG; much appreciated!
I know that Lincsaddick is going to be gobsmacked at this U-turn (and I’m relieved that he probably ignored my earlier advice when his price was 66/1+) but I have a STRONG SUGGESTION: Add TOFINO BAY (33/1) as the 4th selection to your betting slip (NRNB & 5 places e/w with Bet365)
TOFINO BAY As I said in yesterday’s post outlining the model’s final selections, any one of the 3 runners with Best Place Potential on Good (GF~GS) ground (Ballabriggs, Join Together or Tofino Bay), rated equal by the model, would be a solid candidate for the 4th slot on the betting slip. Any could be the winner on such going if things didn’t go to plan for the 3 Win Candidates. But I’ve plumped for TOFINO BAY as the 4th on my ticket for 2 reasons: a) his stat-profile is good for any going, including Soft~Heavy, and b) the model’s treatment of (and penalty for) one specific aspect of TB’s profile has a significant margin of error, owing to a limited and distorted sample. A not unreasonable, more favourable treatment than that used would give him the stat-score of a Win Candidate, broadly equivalent to Swing Bill’s. The issue is his status as a first-season novice but first let’s look first at TB’s overall stats because, on the face of it, they read like of a Win Selection: • Ticked stamina box when 2nd (0.5L) in the 4m Novice Chase at the Festival last week, just caught in the final yards. He cut out the pace at a relatively fast clip for the Good-to-Soft going that day but was not so much tired (he went again when the winner passed him) as idling. That could be said to be a little “novicey” but, in truth, Nina Carberry (first time to ride him) might have been more vigorous and will surely be so at Aintree, if in the same situation. • Very consistent. He has no F, UR or PU in 7 chases, 7 hurdles and 4 PtPs. There is rarely a mention of any jumping error in any “comments in running” and he’s been placed in 10 of his 14 jumps races under rules, winning 5 and within 6L of the winner in 6 others. • Season’s form is excellent. 7 runs, all chases, have yielded 3 wins (incl the Grade B Troytown Chase in November in a big field with seasoned and some decent handicappers), 3 seconds and 1 fourth. His creditable effort at Cheltenham ticks the Major Course box. • 10 year-old, due to carry 11.01 and 24 days since last race are right in the zone for a GN winner. • Most of his form is on Soft or Heavy but in 3 races on better he has fared well (winning a bumper on Gd, 2nd (4L) in top company in a Grade 2 Hurdle over 2.5m on GS and his close 2nd at the Festival, also on GS) so there is no evidence to suggest that he could not handle better ground (his sire was a decent miler winning a Group 2 on Hvy and a Group 3 on GF). So what is the problem with him being a first-season novice? The bald facts are: 1. No novice has won the GN since 1958 (8 y-o Mr. What)
2. Since 1989, 13 first-season novices have run in the GN, of which 5 failed to get past the 1st fence and only 1 completed. Until now, the model has never had to assess this issue because, since its conception, every such runner has also been a 7 year-old and, because of their similarly terrible record, the model has simply put a red-line through all 7 year-olds. Since TB is a 10 y-o and was not automatically eliminated and given the terrible record of first-season novices, I had to take a much closer look to determine the model’s treatment of this issue. We’re helped by the fact that in the 2009 GN Big Fella Thanks (a 7 y-o first-season novice) bucked the trend and came in 6th (23L) behind Mon Mome. It’s true that that may have been a slightly flattering result because, like others, he benefitted from the drop in pace when leader Black Apalachi departed at 2nd Bechers, permitting horses from mid- and even rear-division to pass weakening front-runners in the last half-mile. Nonetheless, the result is in the book. Accordingly, it has been possible to derive a degree of penalty (by reconciling BFT’s performance in 2009 to his career stats) applicable in aggregate to his status as a 7 y-o and first-season novice. Then, analysing the profile and reconciling statistically the performance of other 7 y-os that have run OK in recent GNs (Nadover 7th (46L) in 2008, Tricky Trickster 9th (50L) in 2010 and Tharawaat 8th (22L) in 2012), I’ve derived that part of BFT’s penalty applicable to his novice status. It is this penalty that has been applied to TB by the model when rating him as Best Place Potential. Now, given the very small sample for this analysis, it may be that, in completing as a first-season novice, BFT was simply an outlier, that this penalty is understated and that TB is more likely to Fall or Unseat at the 1st fence than even complete the race. HOWEVER, it could justifiably be argued that TB is altogether different gravy to any of the first-season novices running in GNs since 1989 and that the penalty should NOT be applied to him at all, in which case he would have the stat-score of a GN Win Candidate. The reasons: 1. Only 1 of those first-season novice GN runners was older than 9.
2. 8 of the 13 were Martin Pipe-trained in days when the GN was a numbers-game for him (e.g. he had 8 runners in the 2002 GN, 3 of them first-season novices – all Fell)
3. Only 1 of the 13 had won or been close to winning at beyond 25f (and that in a weak affair with 6 runners). In fact, only 3 had ever raced at beyond 3.25m.
4. None had recorded a chase win or near-miss at an OR as high as TB’s 149 (only BFT had even run at that mark).
5. TB will be only the 3rd participant in the 4m NH Novice Chase at The Festival since 1989 to run in the same-season GN but the only one to have run well in it (the other 2 were both were 6th (50L+) at Cheltenham and both Fell in the GN). Most interestingly, successful exertion in the race does not necessarily finish a season. Several recent winners or near-things (<5L) in that 4m Nov Ch have won or been placed in their next run WITHIN WEEKS. In the last 10 years and in major staying handicaps alone: • Stormez (1L 2nd in 2003), then 2nd (0.25L) in the Scottish National and then 2nd (9L) in the Whitbread; • Another Rum (winner 2005), then 3rd (10L) in the Scottish National; • Butlers Cabin (winner 2007), then won the Irish National; • Old Benny (winner 2008), then 4th in the Scottish National; and • Beshabar (4.5L 2nd in 2011), then won the Scottish National.
I rest my case, but please beware - TB also has an entry in the Irish National on 1st April and while his trainer would like to go to Aintree, his owner may decide otherwise. Back him NRNB (and 5 places e/w). Good luck.
Good news: Bet365 have agreed to cancel all of the bonus bets that I placed so that I can now withdraw any winning from my planned £110 deposit stake...............thanks for the tip LLG; much appreciated!
At the risk of boring the pants off everyone, it is curious that former Winners and Close 2nds in 4m NH Novice Chase at The Festival could be heavily represented in this GN. If they all run, there will be 1st and 2nd (all <5L) from each of the 2010 (Poker De Sivola & Becauseicouldntsee), 2011 (Chicago Grey and Beshabar) and 2012 (T43 and Harry the Viking) races and, of course, the 2nd from 2013 (Tofino Bay). That's more in one GN than have run in the last 10 GNs in aggregate. Butlers Cabin's peformed best of them, falling at 2nd Bechers when "disputing the lead and still tanking along" (Racing Post race analysis) in 2008. Blimey I hope it's not jinxed. Time for a winner!
Cheers Off It, Yadda yadda yadda......in order of best chance 1 Teaforthree 2 Cappa Bleu 3 Swing Bill and Tofino Bay (same rating) If it comes up Soft or Heavy, stick some e/w (5 places) on Tarquinius Good luck.
Cheers Off It, Yadda yadda yadda......in order of best chance 1 Teaforthree 2 Cappa Bleu 3 Swing Bill and Tofino Bay (same rating) If it comes up Soft or Heavy, stick some e/w (5 places) on Tarquinius Good luck.
Cheers PM, covered that lot with my winnings from Cheltenham. Only need one to be placed, to recover stake.
Cheers for the vote of confidence Chief - hope I don't undo your good work at the Festival. Unlike last year, at least the prices of my top 4 permit a one-place breakeven and have to say I'd be very surprised if, barring misfortune, at least Cappa Bleu doesn't make the frame. Fingers crossed for even better.
Question on the betting please...5 horses you have mentioned as I understand are; in order...Cappa Bleu, Teaforthree, Swing Bill, Tofino Bay & Tarquinious.
Best to bet NRNB at 5 places e/w - ie Bet365 for now.
If I was to bet on all 5 e/w am I able to do it in a way which means I still win if one horse comes in or would I need either a) the winner or b) a couple of horses.
Sorry, my betting knowledge is rubbish, think it is 1/4 odds for e/w but only on half your stake (unless you get the winner of course).
My usual for the National is to go for 3/4 horses e/w, get one right and still lose! Just wondering if you had an idea of what ratchet you would recommend to each horse to stop this happening...
Not sure if that makes sense but hey any advice much appreciated.
Question on the betting please...5 horses you have mentioned as I understand are; in order...Cappa Bleu, Teaforthree, Swing Bill, Tofino Bay & Tarquinious.
Best to bet NRNB at 5 places e/w - ie Bet365 for now.
If I was to bet on all 5 e/w am I able to do it in a way which means I still win if one horse comes in or would I need either a) the winner or b) a couple of horses.
Sorry, my betting knowledge is rubbish, think it is 1/4 odds for e/w but only on half your stake (unless you get the winner of course).
My usual for the National is to go for 3/4 horses e/w, get one right and still lose! Just wondering if you had an idea of what ratchet you would recommend to each horse to stop this happening...
Not sure if that makes sense but hey any advice much appreciated.
Ta.
Buenos dias Athletico,
Just a small correction: The order is (in terms of the model's rating of the best fit with the profiles of GN winners and those closely-placed since 1989): 1. Teaforthree (18/1) 2. Cappa Bleu (12/1) 3. Swing Bill (66/1) and Tofino Bay (33/1) (same rating if I ignore a questionable novice penalty for TB, otherwise he would be joint 4th with 2 others]) NRNB is important particularly for Tofino Bay (who could run in the Irish National on 1 April instead of the GN). The ratings and order of top 4 selections would vary slightly depending on the going but these variations don't affect them being collectively the 4 best-rated in the field, whatever the ground conditions. However, going is crucial to Tarquinius. If it is Soft or worse, the model rates Tarquinius as 5th best but no better than 10th on better ground. We won't get a true idea of the going until Thursday 4 April when the Foxhunters Chase is run over the same fences and we can time it. To be honest, if I were you, I would hold off backing Tarquinius until we get a clearer picture on the going. 5-place bookies (Bet365 and PP) are only 66/1 currently. 4 other bookies (all currently 4 places, including BetVictor) offer him at 100~125/1 and more should offer 5 places between now and the race [I’m pretty sure BetVictor went 6 places late on last year] nearer the time). Anything is possible but I can’t see him having a lot of punters get behind him over the next week or so but just have to keep an eye on anticipated going. I’ll be doing so.
Betting: If you are only using bookies e/w, you won’t quite break-even at current prices with the top 4 and obviously you’d be further away if adding Tarquinius. How far short of break-even you are depends how you scale your bets between horses. If you scaled them such that the pay- off would be the same if any 1 of the top 4 were placed (at current prices above: approx. 30% of stake would need to be placed on T43, 42% on CB, 10% on SB and 18% on TB) I reckon that 1 place (by any of the 4) would recover around 85% of your stake. However, if you did this, you would end up with a slightly skewed pay-off among them if you had the winner, the biggest return coming from the longest-priced (Swing Bill – approx 300% profit if he won and none other placed) and the lowest return coming from the shortest-priced (Cappa Bleu – 260% profit). You may or may not be happy with that. Obviously you could scale them to pay off the same whichever wins (in this case, at current prices, you’d want to place 30% of your stake on T43, 44% on CB, 9% on SB and 17% on TB); then a place by Cappa Bleu would cover about 90% of your total stakes, a place by Swing Bill c. 80%.……………..Pays your money……takes your choice. Betting strategy really is a personal thing. I doubt that many following this thread would employ my approach, which they’d probably consider too low a risk-reward profile. Particularly when there are outsiders in the selections, I will always take the 5th place for e/w even at lower odds (within reason). Sometimes that pays off, sometimes not but I’ve missed out on decent returns from 4-place e/w GN bets too many times - Feels Like Gold at 100/1 in 1999, Spotthedifference at 66/1 in 2004 and Hello Bud 50/1 in 2010 all came in an agonising 5th. So, I use 5-place e/w bets with bookies, topped up on the Betfair place market. I’ve got an excel spread-sheet that helps me create a book whereby a) I am more or less indifferent as to which of my selections comes in and b) a single place will (normally) give me at least break-even (the bore is that the Betfair place market is only 4 places so I may not get b/e if I just get 5th, but nothing’s perfect). That goal of one-place breakeven does dilute returns from a win (as any e/w bet does) but I’m more interested in percentages over-time rather than looking to “hit-it-out-of-the-park”. As you can imagine, putting a lot of time into the model and going for percentages, I have quite a tidy sum invested.
Hope this has been of help. Let me know if you’d like any further thoughts. Best of luck.
PS Athletico, I haven’t used them for a while but I think some bookies, nearer the day, offer place-only prices on runners (particularly long-shots) as part of their GN specials. That might be the way to top-up to achieve break-even or just add interest in a long-shot or two, if you wanted to.
Peanuts, Thanks so much for not only answering but going into so much detail. Really useful stuff.
I tend to only bet on the horses once a year for the National (except for the very odd occasion I go to watch live of course), so never really know what I am doing and am happy with a lower risk/reward strategy.
Comments
QUOTE
Aintree bans firm ground for the Grand National
Aintree has run its last fast-ground Grand National. Starting from this year’s race, on April 6, the course will be watered as a matter of routine to provide going that is never any quicker than 'good to soft’.
In the most significant move yet to minimise the risk to horses and riders, the Aintree executive is effectively reshaping the race to fit modern requirements, at the same time trying to retain the character of jump racing’s ultimate challenge.
There will never be a repeat of Mr Frisk’s 1990 triumph when, on ground officially termed 'firm’, the Kim Bailey-trained gelding set a record time of 8min 47.8sec.
Lord Daresbury, the chairman of Aintree, said that a commissioned statistical report had supported the intuition that there was a direct link between injury to horses and the state of the ground. The quicker the ground, the faster the pace, which led to a greater risk of injury in the event of a fall.
“We looked closely at all the statistics, and in discussion with trainers, we came more and more to the conclusion that ensuring ground that was always on the soft side of 'good’ was the right thing to do,” he said.
Before Mr Frisk, the 'firm’ going winners over the previous five decades were Lucius (1978), Rag Trade (1976), Red Rum (1973) and Nicolaus Silver (1961).
Twelve of the 22 winners since Mr Frisk were successful on ground described as 'good’. In future, there will be no winners on that type of surface.
Lord Daresbury was aware of possible criticism, particularly from owners and trainers of horses with a preference for fast ground. “There have been contrary individual voices from that direction,” he confirmed.
“But when reality and logic starts sinking in, it should be different. Everybody is doing everything possible for the success of the Grand National, and I think most involved are taking more responsibility themselves for the race. There have been some critics who have said we are lowering the fences, but that is not the case.”
While they have not cut the size of the jumps, officials have introduced a softer core to the fences, with a view to lowering the risk of injury to horses who might plough through them.
The revelation regarding the future watering policy is the most significant piece of news regarding the future of the big race. Changes to the course, at Becher’s and elsewhere, the reduction in distance of the run to the first fence, and calls for fewer runners, all amount to cosmetic alterations.
However, a policy to ensure that the going is always on the soft side is a positive step that should be applauded. In the long term, it will subtly change the profile of a would-be Grand National horse. However, it might also ensure the casualty rate is lowered and the future of the race guaranteed.
UNQUOTE
They've basically given you a free bet but they make you work for it !
The GN is a good race to do this on, as so many folk have a bet on it.
I've used Bet365 regularly for years and that's always been the case
Add TOFINO BAY (33/1) as the 4th selection to your betting slip (NRNB & 5 places e/w with Bet365)
TOFINO BAY
As I said in yesterday’s post outlining the model’s final selections, any one of the 3 runners with Best Place Potential on Good (GF~GS) ground (Ballabriggs, Join Together or Tofino Bay), rated equal by the model, would be a solid candidate for the 4th slot on the betting slip. Any could be the winner on such going if things didn’t go to plan for the 3 Win Candidates.
But I’ve plumped for TOFINO BAY as the 4th on my ticket for 2 reasons:
a) his stat-profile is good for any going, including Soft~Heavy, and
b) the model’s treatment of (and penalty for) one specific aspect of TB’s profile has a significant margin of error, owing to a limited and distorted sample. A not unreasonable, more favourable treatment than that used would give him the stat-score of a Win Candidate, broadly equivalent to Swing Bill’s.
The issue is his status as a first-season novice but first let’s look first at TB’s overall stats because, on the face of it, they read like of a Win Selection:
• Ticked stamina box when 2nd (0.5L) in the 4m Novice Chase at the Festival last week, just caught in the final yards. He cut out the pace at a relatively fast clip for the Good-to-Soft going that day but was not so much tired (he went again when the winner passed him) as idling. That could be said to be a little “novicey” but, in truth, Nina Carberry (first time to ride him) might have been more vigorous and will surely be so at Aintree, if in the same situation.
• Very consistent. He has no F, UR or PU in 7 chases, 7 hurdles and 4 PtPs. There is rarely a mention of any jumping error in any “comments in running” and he’s been placed in 10 of his 14 jumps races under rules, winning 5 and within 6L of the winner in 6 others.
• Season’s form is excellent. 7 runs, all chases, have yielded 3 wins (incl the Grade B Troytown Chase in November in a big field with seasoned and some decent handicappers), 3 seconds and 1 fourth. His creditable effort at Cheltenham ticks the Major Course box.
• 10 year-old, due to carry 11.01 and 24 days since last race are right in the zone for a GN winner.
• Most of his form is on Soft or Heavy but in 3 races on better he has fared well (winning a bumper on Gd, 2nd (4L) in top company in a Grade 2 Hurdle over 2.5m on GS and his close 2nd at the Festival, also on GS) so there is no evidence to suggest that he could not handle better ground (his sire was a decent miler winning a Group 2 on Hvy and a Group 3 on GF).
So what is the problem with him being a first-season novice? The bald facts are:
1. No novice has won the GN since 1958 (8 y-o Mr. What)
2. Since 1989, 13 first-season novices have run in the GN, of which 5 failed to get past the 1st fence and only 1 completed.
Until now, the model has never had to assess this issue because, since its conception, every such runner has also been a 7 year-old and, because of their similarly terrible record, the model has simply put a red-line through all 7 year-olds. Since TB is a 10 y-o and was not automatically eliminated and given the terrible record of first-season novices, I had to take a much closer look to determine the model’s treatment of this issue.
We’re helped by the fact that in the 2009 GN Big Fella Thanks (a 7 y-o first-season novice) bucked the trend and came in 6th (23L) behind Mon Mome. It’s true that that may have been a slightly flattering result because, like others, he benefitted from the drop in pace when leader Black Apalachi departed at 2nd Bechers, permitting horses from mid- and even rear-division to pass weakening front-runners in the last half-mile. Nonetheless, the result is in the book.
Accordingly, it has been possible to derive a degree of penalty (by reconciling BFT’s performance in 2009 to his career stats) applicable in aggregate to his status as a 7 y-o and first-season novice. Then, analysing the profile and reconciling statistically the performance of other 7 y-os that have run OK in recent GNs (Nadover 7th (46L) in 2008, Tricky Trickster 9th (50L) in 2010 and Tharawaat 8th (22L) in 2012), I’ve derived that part of BFT’s penalty applicable to his novice status.
It is this penalty that has been applied to TB by the model when rating him as Best Place Potential.
Now, given the very small sample for this analysis, it may be that, in completing as a first-season novice, BFT was simply an outlier, that this penalty is understated and that TB is more likely to Fall or Unseat at the 1st fence than even complete the race.
HOWEVER, it could justifiably be argued that TB is altogether different gravy to any of the first-season novices running in GNs since 1989 and that the penalty should NOT be applied to him at all, in which case he would have the stat-score of a GN Win Candidate.
The reasons:
1. Only 1 of those first-season novice GN runners was older than 9.
2. 8 of the 13 were Martin Pipe-trained in days when the GN was a numbers-game for him (e.g. he had 8 runners in the 2002 GN, 3 of them first-season novices – all Fell)
3. Only 1 of the 13 had won or been close to winning at beyond 25f (and that in a weak affair with 6 runners). In fact, only 3 had ever raced at beyond 3.25m.
4. None had recorded a chase win or near-miss at an OR as high as TB’s 149 (only BFT had even run at that mark).
5. TB will be only the 3rd participant in the 4m NH Novice Chase at The Festival since 1989 to run in the same-season GN but the only one to have run well in it (the other 2 were both were 6th (50L+) at Cheltenham and both Fell in the GN).
Most interestingly, successful exertion in the race does not necessarily finish a season. Several recent winners or near-things (<5L) in that 4m Nov Ch have won or been placed in their next run WITHIN WEEKS. In the last 10 years and in major staying handicaps alone:
• Stormez (1L 2nd in 2003), then 2nd (0.25L) in the Scottish National and then 2nd (9L) in the Whitbread;
• Another Rum (winner 2005), then 3rd (10L) in the Scottish National;
• Butlers Cabin (winner 2007), then won the Irish National;
• Old Benny (winner 2008), then 4th in the Scottish National; and
• Beshabar (4.5L 2nd in 2011), then won the Scottish National.
I rest my case, but please beware - TB also has an entry in the Irish National on 1st April and while his trainer would like to go to Aintree, his owner may decide otherwise. Back him NRNB (and 5 places e/w).
Good luck.
If they all run, there will be 1st and 2nd (all <5L) from each of the 2010 (Poker De Sivola & Becauseicouldntsee), 2011 (Chicago Grey and Beshabar) and 2012 (T43 and Harry the Viking) races and, of course, the 2nd from 2013 (Tofino Bay).
That's more in one GN than have run in the last 10 GNs in aggregate. Butlers Cabin's peformed best of them, falling at 2nd Bechers when "disputing the lead and still tanking along" (Racing Post race analysis) in 2008. Blimey I hope it's not jinxed.
Time for a winner!
Don't want to read it all, but I love it anyway. :-)
Now, where do I put my £1?
Yadda yadda yadda......in order of best chance
1 Teaforthree
2 Cappa Bleu
3 Swing Bill and Tofino Bay (same rating)
If it comes up Soft or Heavy, stick some e/w (5 places) on Tarquinius
Good luck.
Unlike last year, at least the prices of my top 4 permit a one-place breakeven and have to say I'd be very surprised if, barring misfortune, at least Cappa Bleu doesn't make the frame.
Fingers crossed for even better.
Come 4.30 on 6 April, very much hope these boys give us some cheer (.....aswell as 11 others).
UPDATE
According to Paul Nicholls, What A Friend won't run if he carries top-weight and the going is soft.
Question on the betting please...5 horses you have mentioned as I understand are; in order...Cappa Bleu, Teaforthree, Swing Bill, Tofino Bay & Tarquinious.
Best to bet NRNB at 5 places e/w - ie Bet365 for now.
If I was to bet on all 5 e/w am I able to do it in a way which means I still win if one horse comes in or would I need either a) the winner or b) a couple of horses.
Sorry, my betting knowledge is rubbish, think it is 1/4 odds for e/w but only on half your stake (unless you get the winner of course).
My usual for the National is to go for 3/4 horses e/w, get one right and still lose! Just wondering if you had an idea of what ratchet you would recommend to each horse to stop this happening...
Not sure if that makes sense but hey any advice much appreciated.
Ta.
Just a small correction:
The order is (in terms of the model's rating of the best fit with the profiles of GN winners and those closely-placed since 1989):
1. Teaforthree (18/1)
2. Cappa Bleu (12/1)
3. Swing Bill (66/1) and Tofino Bay (33/1) (same rating if I ignore a questionable novice penalty for TB, otherwise he would be joint 4th with 2 others])
NRNB is important particularly for Tofino Bay (who could run in the Irish National on 1 April instead of the GN).
The ratings and order of top 4 selections would vary slightly depending on the going but these variations don't affect them being collectively the 4 best-rated in the field, whatever the ground conditions.
However, going is crucial to Tarquinius. If it is Soft or worse, the model rates Tarquinius as 5th best but no better than 10th on better ground. We won't get a true idea of the going until Thursday 4 April when the Foxhunters Chase is run over the same fences and we can time it.
To be honest, if I were you, I would hold off backing Tarquinius until we get a clearer picture on the going. 5-place bookies (Bet365 and PP) are only 66/1 currently. 4 other bookies (all currently 4 places, including BetVictor) offer him at 100~125/1 and more should offer 5 places between now and the race [I’m pretty sure BetVictor went 6 places late on last year] nearer the time). Anything is possible but I can’t see him having a lot of punters get behind him over the next week or so but just have to keep an eye on anticipated going. I’ll be doing so.
Betting:
If you are only using bookies e/w, you won’t quite break-even at current prices with the top 4 and obviously you’d be further away if adding Tarquinius.
How far short of break-even you are depends how you scale your bets between horses. If you scaled them such that the pay- off would be the same if any 1 of the top 4 were placed (at current prices above: approx. 30% of stake would need to be placed on T43, 42% on CB, 10% on SB and 18% on TB) I reckon that 1 place (by any of the 4) would recover around 85% of your stake.
However, if you did this, you would end up with a slightly skewed pay-off among them if you had the winner, the biggest return coming from the longest-priced (Swing Bill – approx 300% profit if he won and none other placed) and the lowest return coming from the shortest-priced (Cappa Bleu – 260% profit). You may or may not be happy with that. Obviously you could scale them to pay off the same whichever wins (in this case, at current prices, you’d want to place 30% of your stake on T43, 44% on CB, 9% on SB and 17% on TB); then a place by Cappa Bleu would cover about 90% of your total stakes, a place by Swing Bill c. 80%.……………..Pays your money……takes your choice.
Betting strategy really is a personal thing. I doubt that many following this thread would employ my approach, which they’d probably consider too low a risk-reward profile.
Particularly when there are outsiders in the selections, I will always take the 5th place for e/w even at lower odds (within reason). Sometimes that pays off, sometimes not but I’ve missed out on decent returns from 4-place e/w GN bets too many times - Feels Like Gold at 100/1 in 1999, Spotthedifference at 66/1 in 2004 and Hello Bud 50/1 in 2010 all came in an agonising 5th.
So, I use 5-place e/w bets with bookies, topped up on the Betfair place market. I’ve got an excel spread-sheet that helps me create a book whereby a) I am more or less indifferent as to which of my selections comes in and b) a single place will (normally) give me at least break-even (the bore is that the Betfair place market is only 4 places so I may not get b/e if I just get 5th, but nothing’s perfect). That goal of one-place breakeven does dilute returns from a win (as any e/w bet does) but I’m more interested in percentages over-time rather than looking to “hit-it-out-of-the-park”. As you can imagine, putting a lot of time into the model and going for percentages, I have quite a tidy sum invested.
Hope this has been of help. Let me know if you’d like any further thoughts.
Best of luck.
Athletico,
I haven’t used them for a while but I think some bookies, nearer the day, offer place-only prices on runners (particularly long-shots) as part of their GN specials. That might be the way to top-up to achieve break-even or just add interest in a long-shot or two, if you wanted to.
I tend to only bet on the horses once a year for the National (except for the very odd occasion I go to watch live of course), so never really know what I am doing and am happy with a lower risk/reward strategy.
Cheers
Glad to help.
All the best.