What are your principles you use in picking winners,here are some for you to ponder over to get people started. A good jockey, a good horse a good bet.A poor jockey a good horse a moderate bet. Study the likes and dislikes of a horse in regards to tracks. If there are two or three fast horses in a race two will quit before the end, look for the intelligent jockey. In handicaps top weighted horses are always at a disadvantage,unless they are a very good horse. There are few trainers who can send a horse to post first time out in perfect condition. One race for a horse is equal to three private trials. Horses are the same as humans where condition is the test of superiority. Winners repeat frequently, while the defeated will almost continue to be defeated. Depending entirely on time for an outcome will in the end be wanting. Special knowledge is not a talent, it must be aquired from hard work. Some jockeys excel on heavy tracks. A good mud rider will bring a not so good horse home. The basis of speculation is the amount of profit to be attained on an investment. And lastly my favourites, Honest horses, ridden by honest jockeys are sometimes beaten by honest trainers.Instructions are given to jockeys that mean sure defeat, when intended to be the best. When you feel yourself getting out of form take a rest. Condition has more to do with a horse winning a race than the weight it carries. The less one thinks about crookedness and and trickery in racing the more successful will be his handicapping. Look for the defect in your calculations rather than the cheating of others. Know when to put a good bet down and when not to
Islander, a good and innovative Article!! Here's my principles for backing horses: 1. Back the class horses in stakes/conditions races. This is an area where you can win if you are a good judge of a class animal, but you need patience and discipline. Also,it's easier to evaluate a good horse running against another good horse at level weights than it is an average or bad horse against another of the same ilk. 2. If you back in handicaps, limit it to small stakes and accept that you are unlikely to show a profit long term. 3. Discipline is the key. Do not back horses for the sake of it- unless you are happy to accept financial failure. 4. Do not "follow a horse blind." If you keep backing the same horse until it wins, you can afford not to be on it when it does! 5. Where the "draw" is crucial or unpredictable-especially in sprints, do not bet for profit- or avoid the race altogether. 6. Get rid of any "emotive element" when you bet. Good example: Carlton House in the Irish Derby....."He was unlucky at Epsom" (Rubbish); he's trained by top trainer,ridden by top jockey; owned by the Queen (irrelevant); media and most punters want him to win (emotive claptrap). Irrespective of whether you thought Treasure Beach would win the race, there was no logical reason nor judgement why Carlton House would turn the tables in Ireland. 7. If you employ "statistics" for trying to pick winners, pick the ones that matter. Eg. I know someone who follows Paul Nicholls' horses all the time- and loses money. He was surprised when I told him that, of all the jumps trainers in Great Britain, a small Irish trainer shows the best percentage return for win and placed horses combined -namely John Kiely. 8. Do not follow trainers or jockeys "blind." Punters tend to pick top trainers and jockeys and yet this does not show a profit. 9. Use your own judgement and do not be sidetracked by tips, newspapers, gossip, or false expectations. 10. Do not bet more than you can afford- nor chase your losses. Finally, if you lose, then smile. It's only money!!
I don't really like selecting unraced horses on breeding. Sure if a horse is chosen along these lines, it certainly has a chance, but I much prefer to back an animal that's at least shown a little form on the track. I've seen many a race where most of the field is made up of unraced horses, with just a couple with exposed form, thrown in for good measure. I'd much rather take a punt on a horse who's just missed a place in a 10 horse field that to try and second guess whether an untried horse has ability. My brother was wickedly quick across the ground, but I couldn't run out of sight on a dark night. We both have the same parents. If we're going to try to make a serious effort to make a buck, it's best not to use race day as a source of entertainment. I think it's wise not to bet too often. Be very selective. Try to find that one single horse that stands out above all others, and back it alone. All to often, we can look at the cards on offer, and find nothing that stands out as a good bet. But we plough right in anyway. Either we're addicted or we are in it for the fun. If we're addicted and looking to make much needed money, we're ill and need help. If it's just fun, then enjoy it. But the principle is the same, either way. The more bets one has, the lesser the chance of winning a decent amount at the end of the day. As for finding that one bet, I'm a firm believer in horses for courses. The horse must have good recent form and a quality rider who has experience on the animal. I prefer the racing to be on top of the ground and the horse's form to be in such conditions. I like the horse to be an on pace runner. To draw inside, and to be able to sit on the pace is very important to me. This is a product of a nation where racing is almost exclusively on the circle, and on fast ground. The optimum distances would be either five or six furlongs. Eight runners, for a possible each way bet is also important to me, as I prefer the better value. Of course an even money bet can look amazing value, but I'm not one for risking large amounts of my hard earned cash, just to try and double it. There are times when you can feel just as certain about a five to one shot, as as odds on chance. It happened in the Queen's Plate in Canada. I did all the home work and thought the race came down to just two really solid chances. I gave the favourite one chance, the filly one chance, about four others, one chance between them, and to the rest of the field, I consigned a single chance. So in effect, the filly, who had great form, went into the race with a one in four chance to win the Plate. She won at 11-1, and returned a better price for finishing in the placings, than I'd allocated her for winning the race. I guess we just have to be very selective, if we want to get the best from our punting. But most of us are in it for the fun. So what the hell, my best advice would be to just enjoy the thrill of the buck each way. P.S. Nice piece Islander.
"My brother was wickedly quick across the ground, but I couldn't run out of sight on a dark night. We both have the same parents." Cyclonic, perhaps you were a late foal- or just never developed!
Nah Tam, I was just bloody slow, but I could whup him at chess. And I could brow beat the crap out of him, because I was the eldest.
"And I could brow beat the crap out of him, because I was the eldest. " That's if you could catch him! Checkmate!
Speaking of being a late foal...etc. I have a mate who many moons ago, worked as a window cleaner in Sydney. His missus was always on him about getting a kitten, but he hated cats. One day at work, he met a bloke who had a puppy to give away, he said that it was pure bred whippet. When asked why it was being given away, the bloke said that was because it was the runt of the litter. My mate asked if he could have the papers as well. Normally breeders don't give the papers away with sub average dogs, for fear of breeding crap offspring, but on this occasion, he relented. So my mate is then off walking the dog on a daily basis. One day he runs into someone in the street who's smitten with then 6 months old pup. He said the pup had a lovely head was well conformed. He should think about entering the mut in some shows. Well to cut a long story short, the dog was a late bloomer. After two years doing the show circuit, the "runt" won an Australian Championship. So maybe, even at 60, there is still a faint glimmer of hope for me yet.
No hope at all, I'm afraid, Cyclonic- but if you visit the UK, you'll be able to get a free bus pass to visit all the dogs you like!
Tam, I like your list and it is not too far from the principles I personally try and adopt. Point 3 - Discipline is definitely the key ingredient, knowing when to bet and not to and when to walk away is imperative. I also found point 6 and the example you gave particularly relevant. One thing I am guilty of is subconsciously following my best friends suggestions, he has been in the game longer and spends nearly all his spare time studying and betting. He also seems to win BIG regularly, although I am sure I am only hearing about the big wins and not the BIG losses. All week I was going to bet Treasure Beach but after listening to him go on and on about Carlton House's interuppted preparation for the Derby and SMS being the man I fell hook line and sinker for it yet again. I suppose that's what makes us human, but it certainly the one thing I wish I could eradicate from my own betting. I could have just smiled and say hey ho its only money as you suggest but in reality I was raging.......lol.
Jumpers, I did think Treasure Beach would win-but not with any great confidence. Too many factors I didn't like eg. O'Brien running several horses; Epsom form doesn't always transfer to other tracks. I left the race alone,but I suppose the best bet, if any, was a good "place only" on Treasure Beach on Betfair- if you'd have been happy with 1/2. I certainly didn't think Carlton House was worth backing at his idiotic price- or any price for that matter.
Tam, That's the really annoying thing. I thought Treasure Beach purely on his Epsom running was the most likely of AOB's to win. All week I kept looking to see if I could get a bet on any AOB horse winning but couldn't find one via my PP app which is the tool I use to do all my betting, I very rarely frequent a betting shop these days or go fully online from a pc or laptop with the exception of at work (as I am doing now, lol). But the one thing I was certain of, was that Carlton House would not win, he was a lay all day for me. But as stated, as soon as I let my mate wax lyrically about the virtues of CH being a good thing that was me sold. I think deep down I am conscious of him going on and on about winnings so when he tips something up I can't resist following him, whereas in reality I know he doesn't win all the time and often my opinion has proved superior to his......just one of these hurdles I need to get over.
I am not really one for this sort of thing, the only maxim for me is that the more you put in the more you get out. Simple as that for me.
Refuse to be tempted to look at races that should be avoided. If the prize money is hardly worth winning there is a strong possibility that many of the horses have not been trained with this race in mind and an even stronger possibility that a horse that appears to have no right to win, has been. Handicaps are dodgy and require more skill than just studying the form. If a horse runs in (say) 6 handicaps in a season, how are we, the punter, to know which races are being contested to get the horse's weight down and as a result how do we assess that this horse is actually a "ton" better than his form indicates. Every single day, you can just put a line through most races. I used to put a line through: low value handicaps apprentice races amateur rider races ladies' races 3yo maidens 2yo maidens (with one exception) selling races claimers Probably others as well. This leaves just a few races on which to concentrate. When I had the time I would try to find a reason why every horse in the race had a chance of winning. So often it is possible to look at the winner afterwards and think "If I had spotted that piece of form I would have backed it or, more likely, not backed against it". If you can't rule out at least all bar 3 leave the race alone. If you can narrow it down to one or two check the odds of the 2 against the field and see if that is a better risk than going for one or the other. If you spot a horse that looks massively over-priced there is a good chance that others will spot it so get on early and lay it off for a bet to nothing if the odds shorten. When you have selected the race(s) where you might have a bet, try to look at the video form and study the whole race. Did the jockey give the horse every chance, was it put out of the race and running on nicely without being knocked about. Basically, from your viewpoint, is the horse x lengths better than the form book indicates and does this give it y lengths on the rest of "today's" field? When you have convinced yourself that this horse should win by 2l or more and it's odds against, back it. Unfortunately (or fortunately) I found that I ruled out most races and then couldn't convince myself to bet on anything in the race(s) left. Unless you are betting for fun and write off your investment as soon as you put the bet down, you need a serious amount of time to study a race. Reading the form book is not sufficient. You do need to study those videos.
The fundamental maxim has to be never, ever back a horse who is a shorter price than you believe he or she should be. Only ever back one who you think represents value. Re handicaps it is important to note that the vast majority of horses all have a mark that they are capable of winning off (be it 100 for a top handicapper or 45 for a very moderate one). It is vital to gauge the mark of horses and seriously consider them when they fall below said rating but avoid them, like the plague, once over their ‘ceiling’ mark. I’ve always felt that who trains the horse is far, far, far more important than who steers them as a trainers input is considerably more. However, I would advise, and a maxim I follow, is to quickly attach yourself to promising apprentice/conditional riders. There 5 and 7 pounds allowances can prove highly lucrative and are often overlooked by ‘mug’ punters.
Agreed. Generally speaking the allowance merely makes up for the inexperience but occasionally some exceptional apprentices come along and, whilst still claiming 7, 5 or 3 lbs are actually much better than many fully fledged jockeys. So in such cases you can actually add that allowance to the horse's rating. Good point Barney.
Lived eight years in North America. Learnt just one important thing about their racing. The weight the horse carries hardly counts, it is virtually unimportant, in fact the wind factor would be something to consider before weights. What is important is the speed rating of the horse, that is totally significant. OK, tracks are usually "fast", seldom "slow" and "heavy", on the old dirt tracks, but "sloppy" certainly was something to take note of. Some horses skimmed over it, others hated it. Islanderpei brings an interesting point about jockeys who do well on "sloppy" ground conditions; this is a new one on me and something I never even thought about when out there! Nowadays, the synthetic tracks are being introduced so I am of course way out of date, no doubt. However, I still stick to the view that the weight a horse carries on the standard ovals of North America is insignificant, unlike Europe, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, where it certainly is.
I completely disagree in regards weight, I think it makes all the difference, and its very important. It shows how differently punters look at racing.
Certainly in Europe, and most places outside of North America it is important, but in the latter region the weight range was always fairly narrow and therefore relatively insignificant. If one dwelt too much on weight it was a waste of time. Speed figures were the statistics to examine first and foremost. Much more important than in Europe with its extraordinary mixture of left-hand/right-hand, switchback, uphill, downhill, undulating, figure-of-eight, and other strange-shaped racecourses; some are even flat!
