What the percentage of favorites to be a good runner?

[eminbe]

Hi

Would any one know what percentage of favorites to be a good runner?

I would like to see any reference online please.

[SeaHorseRacing]

I will help you if you could be more specific with your question.

I dont quite understand your meaning of "to be a good runner"?

Do you mean percentage of winning favourites?

Over the flat is around 32% of favourites win and I know over NH (Jumps) is slightly more depending on hurdles or chases. However this is something I have read in the past so no hard facts. Other then that I dont really understand your question

[jimibt]

I will help you if you could be more specific with your question.

I dont quite understand your meaning of "to be a good runner"?

Do you mean percentage of winning favourites?

Over the flat is around 32% of favourites win and I know over NH (Jumps) is slightly more depending on hurdles or chases. However this is something I have read in the past so no hard facts. Other then that I dont really understand your question

I also know from hard experience that if you are ever going to play the stats, you need to be consistent. you'll find that you'll have days where the stat is blowing in your direction and the faves all fade literally at the 50% mark, thus a higher than avg success rate. you'll then have other days when the mf's just keep romping home and there's nothing you can do about it (btw -i'm assuming you are reading this as a lay strategy!!). it's on those days that you have to then look at how you intend to make sense of this [very obvious] chaos theory in action.

many peeps take the retro step of looking at picking likely back to lay candidates as part of a mix'n'match strategy where they are looking for outsiders to challenge and fail, as well as good dobbers to produce a 20-50% contraction in their prices. SHR, you mentioned this very attribute in another post by saying: A horse that travels on the bridle alot would suggest that it is a strong traveller and will most likely reach low odds in running on most races even if they dont win. So another reason to learn.

all i can say is that you may have to hover a level higher than blunt closing price stats to make headway. if you're in the game for in-play profit, then i'd urge you to really look at tradeable scenarios, rather than looking at how to sneak a winner (or lay high drifters etc...)

as an aside, i've got limited experience in how to do any of this successfully 100% (make that 75%) of the time either, so said stats in action yet again.

[SeaHorseRacing]

This is what I find extremely interesting about betting with statistics- Maybe slightly off topic.

We all know its about the long game. So if you had a successful long term statistic where you profit. How long do you leave it to come to the conclusion that it is no longer a winner.

For instance if you had a system on the grounds of a statistic that was in profit over 10 years... how long would until you throw it out and realise it is no longer in profit? 1 month, 1 year?

Good points there Jimibit!

There are so many variables with racing statics and people who think follow a stat will win is doomed to fail. There would never or rarely be something as simple as following a stat. You would need to consider so many variables..

Also a late going change or late Jockey change? What if because of such bad weather last winter this year the track is riding 15 yards further in on the track. This could turn a slow deep ground trainers stats go tits up just because the ground just rides nothing like it does 15 yards out. Although the going would be describe the same it infact would be different.

[SeaHorseRacing]

Again i am going completely off topic, But topics and conversations like this fascinate me as they lead to other subjects.

So I will enter it hear. I believe one reason for Peter Webb success stems from curiosity.
I believe he has a personality trate of someone who is curious growing up and I believe a good statistic alone is no good without a trait of being curious. Oh and I guarentee he works harder then 99.99% of people in any job in the country.

[jimibt]

There are so many variables with racing statics and people who think follow a stat will win is doomed to fail. There would never or rarely be something as simple as following a stat. You would need to consider so many variables..

if anything comes out of racing stats, it's that amazing synergy that exists between unconnected events that produces what is known as the zero sum game. i find this absolutely fascinating. i come from a stats background (for many years i was a developer at ITV with the main responsibility to determine the sneaky tricks of the advertisers when placing campaigns into *apparently* mis-matched demographs [in the industry, it's called The Ratecard]). of course the reason for this was that having to pay full whack on an abc1 adults ad campaign made the whole scenario less profitable. therefore, the shylocks would pitch their campaign at a lower (paid) demograph. fwd wind to racing and we see these shannanigans at play yet again. the handicap system!! i won't profess to having got my head around this, BUT i can say that i feel similar ripples of hoodwinking going on here that can be interpreted in terms of likelihood of a runner fulfilling their determination.

Now, how does that play on me... not a jot -lol. for all this talk of stats, i actually (in automation) opt for an approach that monitors the relationships between (virtual) connected runners and their odds. i then have a few benchmarks that indicate back or lay (if the price is right ). strike rate!? - not as great as i'd like it, BUT it allows me a disconnect from the stats that i know are there to be bent and manipulated, so i'd therefore rather create my own playing field (one i imagine that contains many ghosts on here!).

right... let's put that amazing plan into action

[SeaHorseRacing]

There are so many variables with racing statics and people who think follow a stat will win is doomed to fail. There would never or rarely be something as simple as following a stat. You would need to consider so many variables..

if anything comes out of racing stats, it's that amazing synergy that exists between unconnected events that produces what is known as the zero sum game. i find this absolutely fascinating. i come from a stats background (for may years i was a developer at ITV with the main responsibility to determine the sneaky tricks of the advertisers when placing campaigns into *apparently* mis-matched demographs). of course the reason for this was that having to pay full whack on an abc1 adults ad campaign made the whole scenario less profitable. therefore, the shylocks would pitch their campaign at a lower (paid) demograph. fwd wind to racing and we see these shannanigans at play yet again. the handicap system!! i won't profess to having got my head around this, BUT i can say that i feel similar ripples of hoodwinking going on here that can be interpreted in terms of likelihood of a runner fulfilling their determination.

Now, how does that play on me... not a jot -lol. for all this talk of stats, i actually (in automation) opt for an approach that monitors the relationships between (virtual) connected runners and their odds. i then have a few benchmarks that indicate back or lay (if the price is right ). strike rate - not as great as i'd like it, BUT it allows me a disconnect from the stats that i know are there to be bent and manipulated, so i'd therefore rather create my own playing field.

right... let's put that amazing plan into action

The handicap system is only there so we have 10,000 races a year that is it. The principles are just ridiculous if you really think about it. Its suppose to make all horses equal so "shit" horses can win races.

The saying "its the straw that broke the camels back" is exactly that of the racing handicap system. A horse rising 5lbs could mean absolutely nothing yet an extra 1lbs could infact make that same horse run at the ability of 20lbs less

If you have a horse that you now know is carrying a ridiculous amount of weight relevant to its class. Are you going to train it the same way? No.

Only the trainer really truly has an idea if its a weight (handicap mark) is too high. How will they know?simply through experience and through training. I think I have said it before on this forum. You can only get a horse in peak physical condition and maintain it for approx 3/4 weeks. It can take 6 weeks just to get a racehorse fit then another 10 weeks until it peaks could be another 1 week depends on so many aspects.
As we know it today, on the way horses are trained and fed, its simply impossible to have a race horse maintain its peak fitness any longer than about a month. When a horse is in this peak a 10lbs rise is very unlikely to make any effect.

So lets look at like this. Lets say your horse has just won and it is currently on 50% feed and 50% hay daily intake. We know a horse at its physical peak will be on a diet of 65% feed and 35% hay. A 10lb rise from that win is infact has no relevance. And in reverse. If a horse is on a 60% feed 40% hay diet. 6 day a week work out and has risen 10lbs from its win. Its likely just 3lb will break the camels back. Even if it won 20 lengths! So the horses weight is rising yet its ability (performance) is digressing.

This is what frustrates me about racing and the racing post etc... I dont want to know if the horse won well last time. I want to know the trainers intentions, Is the horse trying? Is the horse now on a digressing diet plan?

Every horse is so unique and the weight rising and falling does nothing other then ensuring a trainer an excellent excuse to land a coup or an "unexpected win."

If the handicap system was trully fair or if racing was truly fair. Trainers should have to enclose the horses weekly diet and exercise plans and their race intentions- Jockey instructions if any etc.

All the bookies would need to do is adjust their odds. Just means more favs would win and less value. Then again this method could say goodbye to a punter as a 33/1 shot would probably happen one a year.

[jimibt]

as i said, abc1 adults, traded as lower demograph. the parallels are the same, the data alas not so readily available, otherwise we'd have a golden ticket here from what you say!!

[SeaHorseRacing]

as i said, abc1 adults, traded as lower demograph. the parallels are the same, the data alas not so readily available, otherwise we'd have a golden ticket here from what you say!!

It works this way in many areas of life.

Its just if people truly understood the meaning of the handicapping system and racing. Very little people would never even have a bet on a horse.

[jimibt]

It works this way in many areas of life.

Its just if people truly understood the meaning of the handicapping system and racing. Very little people would never even have a bet on a horse.

in all honesty, you have illuminated the discussion 100 fold.. i thought it was just weight etc but of course, like athletes, there's a peak performance monitoring campaign going on that we are not privy to. only on race day/parade etc will that flag up for the more savvy. for me, it's just a case of monitoring IR to see if some sort of waveform is produced as result of these combined behaviours... all for another day of course

[SeaHorseRacing]

It all boils down to a horses class. "Useful" horses still win races regardless of diet and fitness regime.

Group 1 horses are generally just so talented that they are able to maintain a kind of peak ability throughout the year which is boiled down to the horse natural athletic ability.

[jimibt]

It all boils down to a horses class. "Useful" horses still win races regardless of diet and fitness regime.

Group 1 horses are generally just so talented that they are able to maintain a kind of peak ability throughout the year which is boiled down to the horse natural athletic ability.

shr - i'm going to thank you for the (very useful) potted history/outline of the system and will retire with thoughts of how to exploit that (if anything, it's probably a great guide on what to avoid!)

will keep you posted