GETTING TO KNOW ABOUT FORM SELECTIONS
By Ted Davis and Alan Jacobs
THE MEANING OF FORM
We hear enough about the "meaning of life' these days, don't we? But I'm prepared to bet that dedicated punters are more interested in the meaning of form! How do you understand good form? How do you assess one horse against another?
Let's put form in some sort of context: As horses go about their 'job' racing, their physical condition alters from run to run. For one race they might not be fit, for another they'll be almost fit, and for the next they'll be fit. Training regimes can affect this physical condition just as much as the raceday outing does.
Can intricate study of form and training patterns help you to make greater profits, or suffer fewer losses, than the Man who doesn't bother to examine formlines? Often the answer is no, because those who do study form may draw incorrect conclusions! Many base their form assessments on the wrong races, much as scientists have been accused of doing in the "greenhouse" debate (i.e. their computer models were fed incorrect data and so the computer projections were wrong).
My own theory is that only RECENT form has a substantive basis. Some years ago, the New York-based 'speed handicapper' Henry Kuck analysed more th-an 24,000 runners at a wide variety of US tracks and found 3,668 which he said met the definition of what he called "good recent form'. It's interesting to look at Kuck's conclusions.
His working definition of form is this:
Horse must have raced within the last 20 days and must now be racing in a suitable Class.
It must have finished no worse than 3rd last time out, beaten no more than 10 lengths.
It must not be going over 100m or more longer for the current race than the trip it raced over at its latest start.
According to Kuck, these 3,668 form horses represented approximately 50 per cent more winners than he would have expected, based on probabilities, but, alas, they also returned a 16.8 per cent loss on level stakes bets! But the expert refined his approach with elimination and separation rules. Most are applicable to US racing, so I won't go into them here, but we can use Kuck's form theory as an ideal base for our own Australian interpretation of form.
Can we use his findings, in conjunction with other angles, to narrow down a field into main chances? It's very possible. What if we were to combine prize-money earnings, win and place percentages, and price factors into the conundrum? It could well lead you to some very sound each-way propositions.
I believe the element of prize-money earnings, and average earnings per start, is a neglected area of form in Australia. Far more attention should be paid to how much money a horse has earned, and in how many starts he earned it, if we are to get a reliable measure of Class. Sometimes it's just not enough to rely on formlines alone.
Which leads me to a fuller discussion of Australian form, and how to read it, and make sense of it. The Sportsman's formlines are probably the most representative of the sort of formguide that Aussie punters use. Similar formlines are published in daily newspapers, though not in such depth. The Sportsman tells you much about a horse's past performances, though not all.
Unlike in America, the Sportsman does not tell you exactly where a horse was placed at various sections of the race, and how far off the lead it was, or how far in front it was. Many say this is a key failure of Australian form, though we are much better served in the way of turn-and-finish photos than punters in the USA.
We'll look now at the Sportsman's formlines. In order, they list the following details about each runner's various races:
Horse, age, owners, colour, sex, breeding, trainer, training venue, racing colours, prize-money earnings, number of starts, number of wins, 2nds and 3rds, past performances on good, dead, slow and heavy going, previous racing history at the track where the horse is now racing, ability at the distance of the race, distances of horse's wins to date, win strike percentage, place strike percentage.
Then comes the "latest form' aspect of the Sportsman's coverage:
Placing in race (i.e. 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th etc.), date of race, margin won by or beaten by, track, name of race and details, $ value of race, distance, weight carried, jockey, barrier draw, number of starters, Limit Weight, winner's time plus 600m or 800m sectional time, track condition, price fluctuations, name of winner or 2nd placegetter, 2nd or 3rd placegetter, plus their weights carried, description of where placed during the run (3rd settling, 4th turn), summary (struck interference near post, tongue over bit etc.).
You can see that when you boil the Sportsman's form down like this, it takes on a context all its own. It is a most comprehensive guide to how a horse fared in its recent races. There is certainly more than enough information to allow you to dissect each horse, and to compare one against another. In this way, systems are developed, and selections made on racedays.
You can discover the meaning of form by checking out, say, a horse's running position throughout a race, and by the summary made of the run. For instance, a horse could have been, say, 15th settling. 10th at the turn, and finished 3rd, beaten a length. The summary might say that the horse was checked near the 200m, or perhaps was blocked for a run.
Taking these, things into account, you might reasonably decide that this horse could have finished closer had it not been for that check, or the blocked run. After all, it was well back 15th and 10th in the early and middle stages, and still managed to finish 3rd. You might now decide to check on the turn-and-finish photos to get the run into even more perspective. These will tell you how far the horse was behind on the turn. This is important.
The horse may well have been 15 lengths, or maybe just two lengths off the lead on the turn, even though in 10th position! Some fields are strung out, others pack up tightly when making the final bend. So the formline of '10th turn' can be misleading. You need to check a bit further to see the actual margin between the horse and the leader on the turn.
Only then can you accurately judge how well it finished. It could be that a horse was 10th on the turn, 2 lengths behind the leader, and although it ended up running 3rd it could have been beaten 3 lengths! It might have LOST GROUND in the run home.
On a more basic level, we can use these formlines to work out the 'best' horse in the race via prize-money earnings. All you do is divide a horse's earnings by the number of starts it has had, and you get what is called "average earnings" and these can often split the meek from the mighty. Sometimes, you can find a horse who is 'classes' above the opposition - not on recent form, perhaps, but on lifetime earnings and starts.
You can never under-value the importance of a horse's prize-money earnings. They are a barometer of its class, and they are one of the few ‘constants' in understanding what a horse's form is all about, and what it is actually worth.
A punter seeking, to "weigh up' form has to perform a delicate balancing act. He must pit each horse against another to see how each one measures up. His aid in this problem is the formlines. Most of all, Class' enable you to do the job as best and as safely as you can.
You can tell 'Class' by the actual classification of a race (Class 1, 2, 3 etc, Welter, Open etc.) and you can bolster this by looking at "average earnings'. A Class 1 horse, say, racing in Class 5 should, on the surface of things, be outclassed. In contrast, a horse which has won a race in Class 5 can be switched back to a Class 1 (providing, of course, it has won only the one race), and it would, on the surface of things, be easily able to win that Class 1.
Finally, self-confidence is required when assessing form. Without this self-confidence and ability to rely on your own judgement profitable results will be difficult to achieve. You have to devote as much care and judgement when making your selections as you would in any outside line of speculation.
While saying this, I have to stress that a punter should never try to be over-cautious. I know this streak of conservatism brings many punters unstuck. They become so cautious they are more or less afraid to back or select any horse! In the end, they find themselves losing in the long-term by backing horses which are odds-on in the betting.
The ‘meaning of form' is there for you to find. You have to study it carefully. Find out which details are the most pertinent. Find out which are the BEST horses in the race. Utilise all segments of the form which is available to you. Assess each horse carefully and with respect.
Often the most rough-looking chance can hold, somewhere in its form, the seeds of a win! This is where the bolters come in! The longshots we all dream about.
Ted Davis and Alan Jacobs disclose the secrets of discovering the vital facts in the formguide lines
DIGGING FOR WINNERS! (Part 2)
What is Form? Simply put it's the record of a horse's past performances and it is your truest and most reliable guide to the horse's ability.
Therefore, we must take great note of Form. And especially take note of recent form, because you'll find that it is the most positive guide you are likely to get when assessing the prospects of any horse in any race. Strong form, in whichever Class the horse happens to be racing, is extremely reliable.
There is, though, a sliding scale of reliability as you take into account the 'true' Class of a horse. That is, the better the horse the more reliable are the recent form indicators; the more inferior the horse the more unreliable is the recent form.
Form and fitness are key ingredients of finding winners. Fit horses equal good form. Unless a horse is race-fit it is most unlikely to produce its best form in a race. The problem facing punters is that they have to work out for themselves, using form as a guide, whether a horse is fit or not.
We believe there are some factors that can be reliably taken into consideration. Firstly, if a horse wins easily when not at the peak of its fitness, you can assume fairly safely that it will improve. In contrast, a horse that wins when at peak fitness is much less likely to show further improvement.
Form changes continually. After each performance, the punter has to decide if a horse is going to improve further or whether it has peaked and thus entered a downward phase in its campaign. These are the difficulties of form study.
Often, of course, a horse may not need to improve m order to post a win. But, generally, if a horse wins and he is penalised with extra weight, then the horse has to better its previous performance in order to win again.
The actual 'date' on form is an essential element of understanding the importance of a given performance. We regard 'recent form' (RF) as being between one and 14 days, then you get to 'less recent form', (LRF) which is a last-start performance between 15 and 28 days previously, and then doubtful past form (DPF) which is a performance of 29 or more days previously; obviously the further off a performance then the more risky is the formline.
If we were to put ‘stars’ (*) on these three factors, we would award 5 (*****) for RF, 3(***) for LRF and 1 (*) for DPF. This gives you a clear indication of the worth of the form as far as recency is concerned. Split into 9 sections (say 11 per cent) the recent form is worth 55 per cent, as against 33 per cent and 11 per cent.
Be wary, then, of form which is 'dated' or can be termed 'ancient form'. The older it is, the less notice you should take of it. A horse may well have been able to win a 1200m race 12 months previously, but that win cannot be considered a true pointer a year onwards. You have to search for much more recent form.
The same thing goes for horses resuming from lengthy spells. Their past form can be a guide, but it can be most misleading if the horse returns to racing unfit, and obviously older and possibly slower!
Bearing all this in mind, we can hear a lot of you remarking that it's all very well to suggest form study, but who has the time or inclination for it? Well, a lot of people do have the time and the inclination though many of them probably don't do it as thoroughly as they should.
What we now propose is a method of speedily assessing horses, to be used when you have sorted out the main chances and, hopefully, given each of them a Base Rating. We have devised what we feel is an effective, all-embracing approach to giving penalties and bonuses to the various runners, taking their form into account. You are, in essence, digging deep into the form to find the winners.
The assessments take in the following seven factors:
DATE OF LAST START.
BARRIER DRAW.
LAST-START PLACING.
IMPROVEMENT.
COURSE ABILITY.
DISTANCE ABILITY.
ABILITY IN THE GOING.
We have already stated that recent form is best form, so the allotment of points for the 'date of last start' factor is along the lines we have already indicated by way of asterisks. That is, five for a last-start run between one and 14 days previously, three for a last-start run 15-28 days before, and one point for 29-42 days. There are no points for horses resuming after more than 42 days.
Barriers are not assumed to be of major importance, but obviously in some races at some tracks, you are going to have to take the draw into account in some way. On some tracks, wide draws are difficult to overcome, and they have to be accounted for when you are analysing a horse's chance. So we make suggestions to this factor.
Then we have the last-start placings, in which we take into account where a horse finished last start.
These are important because a great majority of races are won by horses which ran in the first three placings at their last start. These points are only given if the horse had its last start within the previous 28 days.
The improvement factor is probably one of the most contentious. We have tried to put it into perspective by deciding on a series of bonuses for the various stages of a horse's campaign, on the assumption that a horse will show the most improvement after the fourth and fifth runs of a preparation.
This won't always be the case, but it certainly will be in a large majority of instances. In the 'same way we have allotted bonuses for expected improvement so we have built in a penalty factor for horses which haven't raced for some time. These penalties range from one to 10 kilos (or points).
The penalties will vary according to how much time a horse has had between its last start and the current start. They will also vary according to the type of horse. For instance, a 2400m stayer resuming after -a long break, and racing over an unsuitable 1200m trip, will be handed the biggest penalty (10).
In contrast, a sprinter resuming after along spell and racing over 1200m might well be very close to a solid run, and therefore would probably be handed only a 2kg to 5 kg penalty on its Base Rating.
In these cases, you will have to use some subjective judgement (in other words, your own opinion!) to try to get it right. Sometimes you'll be wrong, but many times you'll be right, and that's the name of the game as far as selecting the correct horses is concerned.
Then we come to the course, distance and going factors, all very important. A horse which has won on the course is given three points, if it's been placed on the course it gets one. A horse which has won over the distance gets three points, if it's been placed over the distance it gets one point. A horse that's been a winner in the prevailing track going (good, fast, dead, slow or heavy) gets a bonus lift of three points.
Performance on the prevailing track conditions becomes a most important element during the winter months when tracks are likely to be affected by rain. You must always ask yourself whether a horse can act on the ground conditions. Some horses are hopeless on wet tracks.
We're confident that these factors can be used effectively to pinpoint the major chance in a race- as long as you can just as effectively isolate the top chances to begin with. That is, you examine a field of runners, pick out, say, the top four or five, and then apply our factors.
Better still, if you have access to Class or Weight Ratings (in this regard we cannot do better than point you towards the excellent service provided by George Tafe).
If you have Ratings, you can very easily trim a field down to the main in chances, simply by looking at the most recent ratings. Then, sing our factors, you can put the top fancies through a final 'grilling' to determine which ones earn the most points.
If you are a serious punter, you will attempt to bet on only a handful of races. On a Saturday, why not pick out two good races at each meeting in Sydney and Melbourne? That's four races in all. You will have time, then, to study each race carefully.
Draw up our list of important factors on a sheet of paper, write down the name of each of the top four or five fancies in each race, rule off the columns, and then check each horse's form and write in the necessary points.
Men you've done this task, you'll have a much clearer idea of which horse has the best chance of winning the race. With just a handful of races to handicap you'll find it won't take long at all to run through our factors and thus make some real sense of the mysteries of form.
Digging for winners
FINDING THOSE FORM SELECTIONS (Part 3)
It's easy enough in racing to talk about how to find the winning selections. This is a matter we wrote about in last month's issue of P.P.M. We showed you how to apply various form factors to arrive at a logical conclusion.
The task facing any punter BEFORE, assessing form in a race is to decide which races to bet. It's not overstating the case to say, quite emphatically, that most punters tend to overbet, particularly if they have a good win. With confidence high, they plough on into far too many bets, and subsequently emerge losers.
It has often been said that you cannot beat the races, but you can beat a race. Many punters do so, systematically, carefully, thou unemotionally and scientifically. You, too, with intelligence and patience - and self-control - can use the factors we revealed to provide yourself with a lucrative part-time business (winning at betting!).
This success, though, must come with a great degree of commonsense.You cannot always beat a given race with absolute certainty - there are just too many variables involved and too many ways to lose a single race.
You have to choose the right races. Usually, these will be the main races on any race programme. The Open handicaps and the Welters. During the big carnivals you can also throw in Weight-For-Age events. In the long run, a judicious pruning of a programme will help you beat the races, of that we have no doubts at all.
Remember this: No professional, in any sphere at all, is ever successful without exacting preparation. No lawyer goes to court without detailed briefs (and we don't mean his underpants). In short, then, you must be prepared, be professional; analyse your mistakes and pay for them ungrudgingly.
While we are confident you can find many winners using our form factors approach, we admit at the same time that you will only strike a certain percentage of winners. Should you apply, the principles to every race, irrespective of class or worth, the win strike rate is certain to be lower than if you carefully choose the right races.
If we look at a recent Saturday lineup in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane, we can show you which races we chose to look at. In Sydney (July 18), at Rosehill, the main race was the Winter Cup, with the second-best race being the Blue W, inter Handicap. We decided to assess both race's because the formlines were well exposed and we anticipated that a 'formful' horse would win each race.
In Melbourne, at Caulfield, the main race was the Sir John Monash Stakes, followed by the Syme Welter. This latter race comprised ordinary gallopers and we weren't confident at all that the winner could be found in a few selections, given some of the erratic performances of quite a number of the runners.
We assessed only the Sir John Monash Stakes. In Brisbane, at Eagle Farm, the Tattersalls. We was the main race. This day's card at the Farm was brimming with big fields, and the Tatts mile was no exception. We decided it was too hard to handle and, instead, turned to the final race on the card, which looked easier to assess.
So, on the day, we had a look at just four races in three metropolitan areas m three different States. You might think to yourself that four races is not going to provide much fun, action or profits - but you can't consider fun and action in the same vein as potential profits.
Winning has to be put before any other self-indulgences, like betting on every race, or even every other race. Why do bookmakers prosper? Because they treat racing as a business, while 99 per cent of punters regard it purely as a sport.
Let's look now at our assessments for the Winter Cup at Rosehill. Firstly, the form factor points method clearly indicated that Moods were unlikely to win. It came up with only a handful of points.
On our ratings of previous races, we had more or less narrowed the field down to Destiny Boy, Anything's Possible, Sir Creag, In The Money and Aulone Star. We paid close attention to all these runners.
Using our Key Rules for Assessment, we came up with Destiny Boy, Anything's Possible and Sir Creag as the final three to consider. Given that Anything's Possible and Sir Creag had higher previous ratings than Destiny Boy we eventually decided these were the two to bet.
We were more confident about Anything's Possible than Sir Creag, mainly because Sir Creag, although a last-start winner, was facing a steep rise in class, and we had suspicions about his ability to handle the class rise and repeat the rating he had registered at his last start.
We did, though, decide to take a small 'saver' bet on him at the longish odds available. Our main bet went on Anything's Possible and it's pleasing to report that he won easily at 3/1. In second place was Aulone Star, who had been in our initial main five for consideration.
Remember, then, that you must try to pick out the best races, and try to stick with races that do not present you with big fields of between eight and fourteen runners are normally enough. Anything beyond this makes your form analysis just that much more difficult, and poses the likelihood of upset results, along with possible interference to your fancied runner(s).
THE ABC OF FORM (Part 1)
Where do you start when you analyse a field of racehorses? How do you pick the bones out of a mass of form figures? How, in fact, do you arrive at a decision about the best horse in the race?
All these questions continue to be asked by new and old punters as they square up to the rigors of winner-finding six days a week (remember the old days when it was mainly just the Saturday meetings that got all the attention!).
Doing the form should be split in different sections; you have to build it up block-by-block, like an ABC alphabet that grows until the final Z. With a race in front of you, your first task is an easy one: ESTABLISH THE CLASS.
If it's a provincial race you might be looking at a Class 2 race. This is now firmly stuck in your mind. Class 2higher than Class 1 and a Maiden, lower than Class 3. That's very simple to work out and notate in your fevered brain. Okay, with that safely ensconced in the brain matter, you can continue to the distance of the race. It might be 1600m. This is noted.
A Class 2 over 1600m. Okay. Let's note the track conditions next. The track is going to be firm-that is, Good or Fast. So now we are fully clued up on the race in hand. We know what we have to examine. This line of thinking goes for each race you look at. Each has its own limitations and conditions and, therefore, its own intrinsic Class. By closely following Class conditions, you can start to accurately measure one horse against another.
For instance, you might see a horse which has performed well in a Class 6 race entered in a Class 2 race. What does this tell you? It tells you that in Class 2 this horse should be able to give a good account of itself--on the basis that it has performed well before against better horses, those in Class 6.
As you analyse each horse, you take note of Barrier Position, Jockey, Fitness, Form and Consistency. These are the backbone of form study. Especially Fitness. Form and Consistency. Without a full and sensible analysis of these three factors your assessment of a race has to incomplete.
Firstly, though, you look at a horse's ability to handle the distance of the race. Refer to its previous efforts at the same distance, or distances very close to it (i.e. 1200m, 1175, 1215m, 1225m, etc.). If a horse's record clearly shows that it is UNSUITED at the distance, you can penalise it. How you do this is up to you. If you are working off Race Ratings (those from George Tafe, or perhaps Warren Block, or your own personal ratings) you can deduct the amounts you think are necessary. If you do not have specific ratings figures to work from, you can merely start from a zero base and, say, penalise a horse anything from 1 to 20kgs for its inability to handle the distance.
Do not, though, penalise a horse simply because it has not started at the distance. Penalties should be imposed when a horse is attempting a distance which is a lot more, or less, than at a previous start. Let's say a horse coming back from 2600m to 1800m, or from 1600m to 1200m. You also can penalise for a horse's continued failure at the distance.
The Barrier draw is next to be looked at. The barrier draw MIGHT affect the outcome of the race. It depends a great deal on which track, which distance, which barrier. The disadvantages, and even the advantages, of barrier draws can be overstated.
If you want a straightforward approach, I suggest that you adopt Don Scott's penalty system (outlined in his books Winning More and Winning In The 90s) or perhaps follow these suggestions:
Barriers 10 to 15: Penalise 0.5 to 1kg
Barriers 16 to 20: Penalise 1.5 to 2kgs
Barriers 21 to 24: Penalise 2.5kgs.
(There are exceptions: Down the straight 1000m and 1200m at Flemington, the outside barriers often have a distinct advantage so do not penalise horses drawn 16 to 24 in these type of races).
Now we come to the rider: Most punters will have their own ideas about the individual worth of jockeys. There is no doubt that some are better than others, but there wouldn't be a great deal between the top 10 to 15 riders.
Personally, I never penalise a horse's jockey more than 3kg, even if the horse is to be ridden' by an apprentice - BUT I never take an apprentice's allowance into account, either; I always work from the handicapped weight the horse has to carry.
In form apprentices, and successful apprentices, usually soon ride out their claims, anyway. I usually rate top apprentices alongside senior riders. By all means, take some account of the jockey factor, but not too much. There may be instances where you have two horses exactly level and the only way to split them is to pick the one with the best jockey. The jockey experience factor may be the telling Point in the end-but not always, that's the rub!
Now we come to Fitness, Form and Consistency. Fitness is a hard thing to equate, and much depends on how you, the punter, assess what a horse has done. Generally speaking, only a good horse will be' able to win first-up. My own approach is to penalise 'spell' horses those returning after being off racing for 60 days or more--anything from 5 to 15kgs. But if I know, from its past history, that a horse races 'well first-up then obviously I will not penalise it, or I will make only a small penalty.
A fit horse, to my way of thinking, is one that has had recent racing (two, three or at least four races). Second-up horses must be counted, in the main, as risks, though I know a proportion of them win, but my experience has always been that the majority of second-up horses will fail.
Be wary, too, of horses that are coming back after a break of more than three weeks (21 days up). Even if their previous form was good there could be a question about their fitness level; check out their form to see how they have raced before when returning after such a break from racing.
Form is your next obstacle. But this is a reasonably easy one, because a horse's credentials are clearly set out in its form record. Wins and placings indicate good form, as do close-up 4ths and 5ths and 6ths. Concentrate on these horses, but always make sure they are racing in the right Class. If ' there is good form, ensure that it is form equal to the Class it is racing in now. This is very important. Good form against weak horses is okay, but a rise in class could offset it altogether.
Consistent horses win races. Put a lot of emphasis on a horse's win and place strike rate. Be wary of horses which have had a lot of races for a low win strike. Any horse with a win strike under 10 per cent is to be treated with caution. The higher the 'win strike the better the horse. That's the thing to remember.
After taking all these, points into consideration, you should be able to easily work out the three or four main chances in any race. But how to separate them? Which one is best?
You now have to look at the Weight angle. How much weight is each leading contender to carry? Has it Won before carrying such a weight? Is it up a lot of weight on its last run? Can it handle the weight increase? Has it dropped in weight? Will that drop help its chances today?
I have always found that a racehorse will improve SHARPLY rather than SLOWLY. That is, from one race to the next it can find many lengths' of improvement. My estimate is that improvement of up to about 5kgs is not unusual (on an average basis). Some horses can improve a lot more than that. In the same way, a horse's form can peak and drop off sharply as well!
Allowing for improvement from race to race is one of , the most difficult assessment tasks for any student of form-you can be wrong many times, especially when dealing with ordinary horses, as opposed to quality gallopers. But you have to try! So, broadly speaking, you can think in terms of horses improving say 2 to 3kgs from one race to the next.
Some horses are so good that you may feel confident in giving them an improvement factor of more than 3kgssay 4.5 to 6kgs. I would confine such improvement figures to top-class horses only. With horses that have been' lightly raced-and this means mostly 2yos and 3yos-the improvement factor is also a wide one, and these horses can often dramatically improve their ratings.
This is always worth keeping in mind. With these younger horses who haven't had much racing, the improvement factor is, often very surprising indeed. They can literally 'find lengths' from one start to the next. Another interesting phenomenon--one that has surfaced more or less in recent years-is that there is now very little difference between colts and fillies in the 2yo and 3yo age bracket. Years ago, mares were said to be
weaker (and they were then) but today's female racehorse is built on much tougher lines, and we find that fillies often clearly outpoint the colts in classic races. There is a definite case to be made out for dropping any standard weight advantage given to fillies in these major races.
You have now, then, taken into account all the key factors in form assessment. You have considered Class, Distance, Barrier, Weight, Fitness, Form, Consistency and Jockey, and you should be in a position to say: "I believe Horse A will win this race because. . ." And there will be your reasons, all dearly and rationally laid out in your mind, and hopefully in front of you on paper.
In each race, you should be looking for the top three or four chances. In doing this, if you work out your selections in a sensible and rational manner, you will strike most winners. Not all, of course, but certainly enough to help put you in front.
KEY FORM ANGLES
CLASS: A horse must be capable of competing in the Class of race in which it is entered. Ignore horses racing right out of their Class.
BARRIER: Barriers are important, but don't let wide barrier gates overawe. you. Get a copy of 'Barriers' from Blue Ribbon Press and study it carefully.
JOCKEY: A good jockey can outride an ordinary jockey, but there isn't much skill difference among the top bracket of riders.
FITNESS: Recent solid racing means fitness. Absence from the racetrack indicates non-fitness. Be wary.
FORM: Good recent form should be looked for. But it must be form that measures up to the Class of today’s race.
CONSISTENCY: A horse's past performances record will tell you everything about its consistency, or lack of consistency. Check the form!
WEIGHT: Some horses can carry big weights, others cannot. Check the form. Be ready for sharp improvement from race to race, especially in younger horses.
FOOTNOTE: Rick Roberts will contribute another article in this series later in the year. Watch out for it in your P.P.M. magazine.
Click here to read Part 2.
By Rick Roberts
THE ABC OF FORM (Part 2)
What IS form? How can we quantify it to our advantage? How can we get it clear in our minds exactly what constitutes form, and how can we 'manage' the form statistics to our advantage?
Form is a horse's exposed ability on a racetrack in terms of its actual past performances. Much as a human being is assessed on his past job qualifications, so a racehorse is assessed on what it has achieved in the past.
Signs of true speed over various race distances, courage, stamina, potential for improvement and elements of physical strength or unsoundness, are all form pointers.
The study of form produces an essential background to a race. Without it, the punter would not know which way to turn. Without form at your fingertips, the punter gropes in the dark.
So, the initial lesson is this: Never bet at all unless you have the time to study form. Learn to tell the difference between good recent form, best overall form, poor recent form and form from many months before - old form. Old form can be misleading, but it can provide subtle keys to the future.
Think carefully about the following points:
Good recent form plus the best overall form in one horse usually equals the favourite.
Good recent form usually means full fitness.
No recent form means a probable loser, subject to the punter examining the reasons for recent poor runs.
Winners, of course, cannot be consistently discovered on one factor alone. Every factor is relative to other factors, so we have distinct plus and minus signs. Warning devices, really. For example: A horse may be fit, have a weight advantage and the services of a good jockey but all these advantages could be cancelled out by a poor barrier draw, or a race over an unsuitable distance, or a race on track conditions the horse cannot handle.
It is not always possible to find direct form lines between horses in a race. Men this happens you must look for indirect form lines, through other horses. Race ratings can help in this regard because they can often accurately measure one performance against the other (see Winmaster Volume 2 for skilled ratings of 400 horses).
Getting started on serious form study is not a difficult task, but it does take a firm decision to set your old habits aside. This often can prove as difficult as, say, giving up smoking for the Iongtime nicotine addict. Many people who pick up a formguide never really know how or where to start, despite the fact they look at such guides every racing day. It might surprise you how many punters would be unable to explain the different abbreviations in a formguide like the Sportsman or the Wizard.
The form can represent to them a bewildering maze of figures and statistics which they find impossible m dissect and understand. Some punters inevitably end up seizing on one outstanding run as the only real clue and thus wind up backing the obvious but not necessarily the logical horse in the field.
My main purpose with these ABC of Form articles is to impress upon you the importance of a proper start and a proper long term approach to getting the form facts right. In any undertaking, getting started in the correct way is half the battle, and this applies particularly to the intricate and tricky art of selecting likely racetrack bets!
The essential tools of trade for the race selector are reliable form references, plus a personal knowledge of several contributing factors to the outcome of most races, including the horse itself and the jockey. You must, of necessity, learn as much as you can about each horse and rider. You will then be able to slot them into their proper categories; this will assist you greatly when the time comes to make comparisons, and estimate relative qualities.
Form study is all about comparisons. You are constantly comparing one horse against another. It's vital, then, that you read as much as possible about racing, particularly in the area where you bet the most, be it Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, etc., or country tracks. It shouldn't take long for you to 'grade' the various journalists who write in the newspapers and formguides. Look closely at their tips and evaluate their success or failure.
Now, it doesn't cost much to buy indexed notebooks. Whatever expense is involved will be money well spent. Into these notebooks you can enter notes which commonsense tells you will be of value to you in the future. Don't be disheartened if you find you really do remember most of the information you have indexed because the fact that you actually wrote it down would have implanted it in your brain's memory bank! The day will come when a forgotten memo will assist you to land an important winner, or save you money which you would have lost on 9 weak investment.
The purchase of large exercise books is also a necessity because I am suggesting that you paste in two things-results (preferably from major newspapers where all the run-ons are given, and comments made) and general articles about how horses performed. You can also paste in stewards' reports, which often can help to land winners.
You will frequently find it enlightening to turn back to a horse's previous run. By checking comments made about it, and by looking back at the turn and finish photos of the race (see Sportsman and Sporting Globe, and Sunday newspapers) you can very often find clues to what the horse might do in the future. Form is a tool of trade, so you cannot know enough about it. Remember that.
Incidentally, always keep your Sportsmans. If you have no room for them then at least retain the turn and finish camera charts on the Sydney meetings. They can be most helpful. Now all this information may seem elementary but it IS important. It allows you to get yourself into a shipshape approach-reasoned and ordered.
Let's now consider what constitutes playable races. A playable race is one in which all the horses have past performances dependable enough to enable the punter to make an accurate assessment of how each horse might be expected to perform in relation to the other. When you strike a race containing some horses which have no form (first starters) it's always advisable to avoid the race, because you have no way of estimating the ability of the first-starters.
When you have analysed a race, the top selection must have some 'Class' ability or superiority over the other entries. The 'conditions' of a race could have an important bearing on whether or not the race is playable, since these conditions control the kind of horses which will be running. Some horses are better suited in certain races, especially top-class gallopers in weight-for-age races.
In handicap races, the full responsibility for the weights assignments rests with the club handicapper. In theory, the handicapper tries to 'weight' each horse so the entire field goes across the finish line locked together in a mass deadheat. It never works out that way, naturally. In other words, he is trying to give each horse an equal chance of winning based on the form they have shown in the past.
He shifts weights around in order to bring in all the contenders with equal, or near equal, prospects as far as relative weight is concerned. One of the fallacies of racing is that when it comes to assessing chances on weights the skilled club handicapper cannot be beaten. He can, and is, practically every raceday. Remember that the handicapper does his work well ahead of the raceday and has no knowledge of riding engagements, the state of the going, barrier positions, the final composition of the field, or the true physical condition of each horse, or how the race might be run!
What you, the punter, has to do is to be constantly alert for horses which are definitely ADVANTAGED by the race conditions, especially in the area of handicapped weight. Some horses do win when they are at a disadvantage, but most often they will lose.
As I have stated before in P.P.M., recent form is, to my way of thinking, the safest form on which to base your predictions. And of all the races which appear in a horse's formlines it's the LAST START which has the most influence on the average punter. While horses with good last-start performances win a lot of races, it's also a fact that horses who ran ordinarily, even poorly, last start also win! In many instances, these wins are regarded as surprises and they pay off well.
The number of times these surprises happen is more than you might think. Certainly the entire issue of a bad last start outing deserves closer examination, because if every now and then you can find a loophole in the poor past performance through which a ray of light may be visible, it would certainly help you to pick those shock winners.
The fact is that some of those surprise wins by horses after a poor last-start effort really aren't the upsets they are claimed to be. Many of them cannot be explained but there are times when a discerning punter can recognise that such factors as age, sex or track condition may have contributed to the failure.
Additionally, you could often reason that the bad race might have been just one of those things that could happen to any horse, and you could say that the remainder of the horse's form record brought him in with an undeniable chance. The lesson, then, is to look beyond the basic form lines.
If a horse ran badly, look for a reason. Was it outclassed and is it now racing in its own class? Maybe it couldn't handle the track conditions last start but now it can. There are many, many reasons why a horse performs out of character. You have to track them down, detective-style.
Finally, a word about consistency. Consistent horses are usually good horses, and always remember it. A good winning percentage is 30 per cent and higher. A horse with, say, six wins from 14 starts has a win strike rate of 42 per cent, and that's very good indeed. In contrast, be wary of those horses which have had a lot of races for very few wins.
As I said in my first article, consistent horses win races. Horses with low strike rates must be treated with the utmost caution, and the more races they've had for a low strike rate makes them even more of an object to be avoided. They are non-winners.
PEAK FORM BETS
By Richard Hartley Jnr
How do you know when a horse is at, or approaching, peak fitness? PPM's Richard Hartley Jnr tells all in this article, and explains how you can instantly find major prospects in a race.
Every preparation a horse has, whether it wins or loses, reaches a peak. The riddle for the punter is deciding when that peak is close to being reached and when it is starting to fall away.
You have to study form carefully. If you learn to do it properly, and with cautious skills, you will soon discover the art of 'fine-tuning' a field within a matter of minutes. One thing you have to keep in mind is that there are three aspects to any horse's form:
(a) The horse's form is improving.
(b) The horse's form is steady and at a peak.
(c) The horse's form is deteriorating.
You have to decide at which stage a horse has reached. It is very likely, according to my research and that of other notable form students, that the average horse, in a preparation spanning about 10 races, will 'peak' between the 4th and 8th starts.
I always assume that a horse needs two or three runs to achieve a race-winning fitness level. When the 4th and 5th runs come along, the horse should-if it has been making the necessary improvement-run sound races, and then hold that form or even improve on it, for another three runs, possibly four, before form slips.
This average horse is relatively easy to follow. The horse that isn't is the one that runs its 'peak' races without much rhyme or reason to them. It can produce a flash run and then sink badly for several starts before producing another run close to the peak level it achieved earlier.
These type of horses are the ones that show winning form very soon after resuming from a spell. In other words, they don't need two or three runs to get fit. They 'hit' first or second-up from the spell.
Students of form who study ratings, and use them, can usually plot a horse's rise and fall in form through the ratings revealed by their actual race performances. Don Scott and George Tafe are two of the 'masters' in the ratings game. (You can read all about a horse's peak fitness levels, and how they are achieved, in Don's book Winning More.)
Let's say a horse resumes after a spell and has a race rating of 51 in its first outing. You expect its form to improve. You can allow around 2 kgs to 3 kgs for improvement at its second start. If it achieves this, then it's rational to assume it can improve that amount again. By its fourth start, it should be ready to strike the expected level of 'peak' form which you anticipate (say 10 kgs from its first run back, which translates into about six lengths).
My plan for a quickly-assessed major prospects list is to mark off the past performance races in your form guide for each horse, dating from the first run back from a spell, in the following manner:
FIRST RUN BACK (from spell) A
SECOND RUN BACK B
THIRD RUN BACK C
FOURTH RUN BACK D
FIFTH RUN BACK E
SIXTH RUN BACK F
SEVENTH RUN BACK G
EIGHTH RUN BACK H
NINTH RUN BACK I
TENTH RUN BACK J
The races upon which you concentrate are those marked C, D, E, F and G, and you consider only those horses which are currently in that bracket. A horse that has just completed an A,B,C trio of races can, generally, be expected to be very close to producing a winning performance. The same goes for horses which have reached the other levels of D, E, F and G.
They are all in the prime 'peak' runs area. Horses A, B, H, I and J can be considered somewhat risky, in that the first two are probably not fit, and the last three indicate that their peak has been reached and passed, and thus form is on the decline.
Always remember that when a horse resumes from a spell it is usually not fit. Horses that win first-up from a spell are the exception rather than the rule. A horse resuming is probably anything from 3 kgs to 20 kgs below its peak fitness generally about 7 to 10 kgs inferior.
So, if a horse had a top rating run of, say, 63 during its previous preparation, you should assume that when it resumes from a spell it is capable only of returning a rating of around 51 to 53 kgs-that's 10 to 12 kgs (or up to eight lengths) off its best potential.
To find the contenders for any race, use a coloured marker pen to put your A, B, and C's on each horse's past performance, and then concentrate your attentions only on the ones with C, D, E, F, and G, markings. You'll find you are left with the main-chance runners m any race.
The ones I like are those that have finished 2nd or 3rd at ~ immediate last start, especially %%-hen they are 'E' horses-that is, they are hay' ng their 5th runs back from a spell Keep a very dose watch on these of runners.
They will be FIT, they will have shown they are CLOSE to a %%in, and as a result they invariably run well. Race 1, Canterbury, Dec. 13:
Contenders using the 'lettered race' formula: Karma Girl (A,B,C,D), Wave The Colours (A,B,C), Creative Pride (A,B,C), Ideal Company (A,B,C,E,F), Jathken (A,B,C). Karma Girl which came in as having her ‘E’ race, had finished 3rd at Canterbury at her 'D' run. She won the race at 6/4.
FORM UNDER PROBE (Part 1)
By Neale Yardley
In this, the first of a three-part series, PPM's computer expert Neale Yardley passes on the results of his computer research aimed at weeding out the important from the not-so important formguide details.
Over the past couple of months I have been devoting all my 'time to a new handicapping package for computer owners (hence my absence from these pages). In doing so I have been pouring over the form of around 500 horses every week and exploring every possible factor likely to pinpoint upcoming winners.
The results of my efforts have been particularly interesting. Not only have I come up with a handicapping package that will literally amaze computer users, but I have been able to confirm without a doubt which form factors are the most important. Many of these factors you will already be aware of although you may be unaware of how important some of them really are. One of the factors I have come across (number of starts into current preparation) can be particularly important and is probably one you have not given much attention to.
The purpose of this series of three articles is to share these secrets with you.
In this and next month's article I will examine in detail the factors I have found to be most relevant to picking winners. In the final article I will show you how easy it is to use these form factors to identify value horses without having to use any complicated ratings or pricing calculations.
READING THE FORM
Knowing how to properly read your form guide is a skill that comes with practice. The more you read them, the better you should become at using them to pick winners. I say 'should' because if you read the form the wrong way there is a danger you will always get it wrong. It is essential that you know which form factors are the most important if you are going to improve your form reading abilities.
As I mentioned at the beginning of this article, I have been pouring over a lot of form recently as part of my work developing a sophisticated handicapping program that automatically handicaps races by taking all the form details required from a database. The aim of the package is to do all the form reading and race analysis for you, but more on that next month.
Of all the form factors there are available, there are a handful that I always consider in any handicapping program I write. In perfecting my latest program I had to include all of these factors and make sure I correctly identified the contribution each one mad e towards a horse's winning chances in a race.
In the remainder of this article I will start discussing the more important form factors so you will know what to concentrate on when next reading your form guide. As I go, I will also discuss the relative strengths of each factor so you will learn which ones to place more importance on.
FITNESS
Fitness is probably the most important form factor in determining whether a horse is able to win or not. Since there is no one form statistic that tells you whether a horse is fit, we have to consider a number of form details to decide how fit a horse is. Although the results of such form reading are not always conclusive, the effort is more than worthwhile as fitness is that elusive factor that can easily make the difference between winning and losing at the races.
Since not many of us are fortunate enough to watch the horses in the mounting yard just before a race, we have to look at form to get an idea of fitness. The most important indicators are, without question, recency of last start and number of wins or placings at recent starts.
Recency of last start is very important. A horse that raced seven days ago is likely to be fitter than one that last raced two weeks ago. Similarly, a horse that last raced two weeks ago is likely to be fitter than one that raced three or four weeks ago.
Horses resuming from a let-up (a break of more than four weeks) or a spell (a break of more than three months) are unlikely to be race fit-especially when it comes to distance races. There are exceptions, though, like the homes that always do well first-up. These horses are trained specifically to achieve success on their it run back from a spell-an ability you will best be able to identify from either a good memory or form records going back a couple of years.
To give you an idea of the importance I place on recency of last ~, consider the following penalties and bonuses I give horses based on the nu~ of days since their last start. (I use these in my handicapping programs but - is no reason why you can't use them yourself in any points based - you may be using.)
For horses that have raced within seven days, I apply a bonus of up to one kilogram. Where the last ~ was between one and two weeks ago, I apply a bonus of half a kilogram. For horses who last raced more than three weeks ago I apply a penalty equal to one third of a kilogram for every week that the horse hasn't raced (e.g. 2 kgs for six weeks, 3 kgs for nine weeks, etc-).
Next month I will continue our examination of fitness and then turn to the consideration of two more extremely important factors, namely form improvement and consistency. Penalty and bonus points will be suggested for each of these factors for those of you interested in using them.
FORM UNDER PROBE (Part 2)
In this, the second of a three-part series, P.P.M's computer expert Neale Yardley delves further into which form factors are the most important.
As discussed last month, fitness is one of the most important factors in determining whether a horse is likely to win a race or not. Since no one form factor signals whether a horse is fit or not I chose to look at a number of form statistics relevant to fitness. The first, discussed last month, was recency of last start.
The second form statistic that can be of great help in highlighting fit horses is the strike rate or win percentage achieved by a horse--particularly over a recent period.
Many formguides these days give a horse's win strike rate expressed as a percentage. These percentages are a useful indicator of a horse's consistency. Unfortunately they are not always a good indicator of fitness because a horse's overall consistency may not be the same as its recent consistency.
The more relevant indicator of fitness is a horse's consistency over recent starts. Such a consistency, say over the last eight starts rather than career to date, can be easily calculated by looking at the form for a horse's recent starts.
Most good formguides like the Sportsman, Truth or Sporting Globe give you details for each horse's last eight starts. From this information you can easily determine how many wins any horse has achieved over this recent period. You can then argue that a horse with a number of wins to its credit over its last eight starts is likely to be much fitter than a horse that hasn't won during its last eight starts.
Remembering what I just said about the importance of recent wins, you should realise that even a horse with the highest overall win percentage (that is career to date) is unlikely to be fit if it hasn't won during its last eight starts. Conversely, a horse with a low overall win percentage can still be fit and have a winning chance if it has won a number of races during its last eight starts.
Even if you don't use one of the formguides referred to above, you can still utilise this approach as it can be argued that the number of wins over a horse's last three or four starts are much more important than the number of wins over the horse's last eight starts. For example a horse with two wins from its last four starts is likely to be much fitter than one with only two wins that were five or six runs back.
Another thing that is important when it comes to reading recent form is the number of places a horse has achieved. Second and third placings over recent starts can be just as important an indicator of fitness as wins over recent starts.
Following is a system of points based on win and place consistency over recent starts. When added to the bonus and penalty points considered last month for recency of last start, the results should give you a good indication of the relative fitness of horses in a race. (Note that the fittest horse will have the highest points score and the least fit the lowest score.)
No wins out of last four starts or one place out of last four starts attracts a point score of minus two.
One win out of last four starts or two places out of last four starts attracts a point score of zero.
Two wins out of last four starts or three places out of last four starts attracts a point score of one.
Three wins out of last four starts or four places out of last four starts attracts a point score of two.
Four wins out of last four starts attracts a point score of three.
Before leaving the discussion of win and place consistencies, you may be interested to know that it is always possible for a horse to have had too many wins. Three or four wins in a row can often mean a horse is coming to the end of its winning streak. Ideally you need to know when a horse is at the beginning of its winning streak and when it is coming to the end. Being able to do this will greatly increase your profits as prices usually become shorter after a horse has had a number of wins.
Since it is impossible to predict with 100 percent certainty when a horse will win, I suggest you look for horses that have just started winning (say one or two wins at the most) and have been placed at three or four of their last four starts and last raced within seven to 14 days. Even if these horses don't always win at their next start you can at least be confident in the, fact that they are likely to be fit and more able to win than at any other time in their preparation.
Next month I will introduce you to the concept of analysing a horse's performance as it moves from start to start through its preparation. We will see that such an analysis can indeed help us try to predict when a horse will start winning.
FORM UNDER PROBE (Part 3)
In this, the final part of a three-part series, PPM's computer expert Neale Yardley passes on the results of his computer research aimed at weeding out the important from the not-so-important formguide details.
Last month I suggested that the more wins and places a horse has had over its recent starts, the more likely it is going to be fit enough to win a race.
I also pointed out, however, that it is possible for a horse to have had too many wins and be near the end of its winning streak. An analysis of preparation profiles will help us decide whether this is about to occur.
PREPARATION PROFILES
I will use the term preparation profile to describe the variation in a horse's performance as it progresses through its preparation from being first-up to its final run before its next spell.
Studying preparation profiles will help you identify periods of fitness. It will also illustrate the fact that different horses reach their peak performances at different stages of their preparations. Some horses, for example, peak at the beginning of their preparation while others peak in the middle or towards the end of their preparations.
If a horse is going to win a race, it is most likely to win during one of these periods of peak performances. Since not many of us have the time or data to be able to find patterns in every horse's previous preparations, we must rely on a few rules of thumb to predict when these winning performances are likely to occur.
Results show that most horses need a number of runs before they are fit enough to win a race. This is especially true when it comes to the class of races held on Saturdays and public holidays. (The only exceptions are those above-average class horses that have proven on more than one previous occasion their ability to win first-up from a spell.) At the other end of their preparation you will find that horses are less likely to win after too many runs without a spell or let-up.
With the exception of horses that win very early or first-up in their preparation, we can attempt to predict when a horse is going to reach its period of peak performances from the number of runs it is into its preparation. This information is fairly readily available from most good formguides since all we need to look at are the dates of horses' recent runs. (A knowledge of previous preparation profiles will only be necessary when we want to identify the ability of first-up horses.)
The first rule of thumb we can make is that the majority of horses are unlikely to win a race before their third or fourth race into their preparation. These horses are easily picked as any horse that has only had one or two runs during its current preparation will have an or 'S' against its name in its recent form numbers, for example 52X6 for a horse that has had only one run in its current preparation and 3X74 for a horse having had only two runs in its current preparation. The horses we are interested in are those without these spelling symbols against their names.
It is a little bit more difficult to predict when horses are likely to reach the end of a sequence of peak performances since some horses can race for up to six months without needing the benefit of a spell while others only perform well over much shorter periods. It is easy to note when a horse starts preforming poorly (e.g. a sting of wins or places is followed by a number of unsuccessful runs where a horse is unplaced at more than five lengths behind the winner) but it is not as easy to predict a decline in form before it actually happens.
The best way we can try to predict a decline in form in advance is. to refer to the number of starts a horse has had in its current preparation as we just did when tying to predict when a horse is about to begin a winning streak. We can also look at whether a horse has won 'too many' races as we will see a bit later.
Since the best of formguides like the Sportsman, Truth or Sporting Globe give details for horses' last six to eight mm or so, we can at least tell whether a horse has had more or less than this number of runs in its current preparation. In the absence of additional form, I suggest you treat with caution those homes that have had more than six to 8 runs in their current preparation (ie. those for which no spell or let-up breaks can be identified between any of their previous runs listed in the formguide).
You should be careful in applying this rule of thumb because I am not suggesting that horses having had more than six to eight runs in a preparation cannot win. Rather that horses having had only three to six runs since a spell have, on average, better chances of winning.
The following system of points allocation may be useful to help you apply the above-mentioned criteria for identifying when horses are likely to be at their fittest.
Resuming from a spell attracts a points score of zero.
One start back from a spell attracts a points score of one.
Two starts back from a spell attracts a points score of two.
Three to five starts back from a spell attracts a points score of four.
Six or more starts back from a spell attracts a points score of two.
Like the points systems I have discussed in the first two articles of this series (for fitness related factors of days since last start and win consistency), the horse with the highest point score is the most favoured.
While on the topic of the first two articles, you should note that best use of the points system described above will be achieved if you add the points obtained to those described in the previous two articles. In this way you will arrive at a total point score that takes into account days since last start, win consistency and number of starts into current preparation.
I made passing reference earlier on to the possibility that a horse can have 'too many' wins. What I mean here is that a horse can only win so many races *m a row before tiring and needing a spell. You should be careful backing horses in this category as their chances of winning are reduced and the price on offer is usually much less than it was a few starts back at the beginning of the horse's winning streak.
FORM
So far m this series I have considered form details that are indicative of fitness. This is because fitness is arguably the most important factor when it comes to picking winners. After all, if a horse is not at its peak fitness then it represents a risk no matter how highly it rates under other considerations.
Probably the next most important factor is form, or rather form improvement. Homes that are performing better from one start to the next are improving m form and expected to continue doing so. Such improvement can be identified by examining preparation profiles (if we graph performance against time) but to do so we need to measure performance.
As many of you will know, performance is best measured by class weight ratings which take into account weight carried, class of race and beaten margin. The formula for calculating such a class weight performance rating is to. take a horse's recent start, allocate it a race class rating, add the weight carried over the limit by the horse and subtract one and a half for every length by which the horse finished behind the winner.
This calculation is best done over at least a horse's last two starts. An upwards or downwards trend can then be identified and a prediction then made as to how the horse might rate at its next start. The prediction can be made by simply assuming that the difference over the last two start ratings will be duplicated over the next two. A couple of examples will illustrate this.
Suppose a horse improves its rating by three from 45 to 48 over its last two starts. Assuming an equal increase in rating to its next start we can predict a rating of 51 for the horse's next start (48 plus 3). Similarly a horse that has rated 57 and 55 can be expected to return a rating of 53 at its next start.
These weight ratings should be adjusted for weight to be carried over the limit in the hones next race if meaningful comparisons are to be made between horses in a race. Those of you with computers can write to me for a free program that automatically calculates past performance class weight ratings in the manner just described.
Everything discussed so far in this series of articles can be used as the basis of a ratings system since all you need do is take a horse's predicted rating and add to it the point scores for days since last start, number of recent wins and number of starts into current preparation. The final number arrived at can then be used to rank each horse in a race so you can identify the top two or three to concentrate your bets on.
In concluding this series I must stress that horses have to be fit if they are to have any chance of winning a race.
My studies have shown that consideration of factors like days since last start and recent win consistency are essential if you are going to have any hope of separating the fit from the not-so-fit horses in a race. Although class weight ratings form an important basis for handicapping too many people over-emphasise horses' chances because they ~ high class weight ratings can make up for lack 'of fitness.
The fact that many punters incorrectly place less importance than they should on fitness means that if you take dose note of fitness when picking your selections, you will be more likely to get good, priced winners. The theory here is that if you do something different from everybody else and it is right then the prices about your selections will be much better than everyone else gets for their selections.
Being different can often be profitable. I will discuss this topic next month in a new article that will tell you how you can make money on the tote by concentrating on bet types that are being increasingly ignored by the majority of tote punters.
0 Comments