Last time I pondered whether to run another “Horses to Follow” segment after the small loss achieved with my group of hopefuls in the autumn. However, I was reading a column from British writer Robin Oatley, who in the Spectator over the years, has offered up twelve to follow over the carnivals there often with good success.
Not so this carnival just completed as from 37 starters there were only 5 wins and a loss of nigh on 30%. However, he noted there had ben no less than 10 seconds and I felt instant empathy! Not deterred, he mounted the horse again with another twelve for upcoming events. Inspired by such courage I have decide to venture into the field once more – although not with twelve – merely seven – (The Magnificent seven?).
So here they are. I have tried to avoid the clearly obvious such as Farnan, Collette and Verry Elleegant although I expect all to acquit themselves with glory. It is the price (and greed?) that leads me a little off the main path with some selections, as well as personal bias – I just liked their work and wins last time.
We start with those out of the two-year-old flock. I have chosen Tagaloa and King’s Legacy. The former surprised all by taking out the Blue diamond and then I thought ran a sound race in the Slipper. King’s Legacy came out in the latter part in the carnival for impressive wins and may mature into a longer distance horse. The issue with these two is will they compete in the same races at times? I have had Covid in mind as for these and others crossing the borders may not be on so they could mostly run apart.
Of older horses I must stick with Loving Gabby as both her two-year-old and three- year- old form stood up well and she gave me a good win – I did say I had bias in my choices!
Rubisaki likewise won several races with my support. Is he up to the best that he will now challenge? I believe he could be. Another to add in here is Brandenberg – of whom a little more later. His campaign started with a major upset win but then he continued to perform solidly at a high level. The Epsom? And maybe another race on the way there.
To round out the hopefuls I have added in Constantinople and King of Leogrance. Constantinople ran a slasher in the Caulfield Cup and okay in the Melbourne. This year saw an aborted campaign because of physical issues but now gelded I am expecting a return to that previous form. The King came through a campaign of steady improvement and comfortable wins but in year when our staying races may be less influenced by overseas starters the locals should have a chance to pick up major trophies and I see him being right in the mix.
Do not forget the game is to play all horses for all starts until, say, end of November. Perhaps one of the stayers will take out a shorter race at a good price. Hope is back with a Spring in the step!
ANGLE ANALYSIS.
I mentioned last time that over the quiet winter months I was going to experiment with small cash outlays on a couple of angles for selecting bets that had caught my eye. One is jogging along with some promise but as I am still tweaking the guidelines, I will leave it to later columns to report on any finished product. But I thought I would run over the one I have rejected to show the process of analysis but also to see if any of you out there have a variation of it that is working or can succeed where I failed!
I had backed some winners over that carnival that were chosen for a mixture of reasons, but I saw what I thought was a frequent characteristic so decided to pursue it further. Some had a 50% win ratio and/or others a 100% placed in first three form pattern so could this be taken further? My colleague The Optimist has always been keen on those 100% placers! So, my first question was – how many starts? Obviously, a horse with two starts for two wins may be particularly good or could have just been placed well in weaker company. After some research I accepted a minimum of six starts but if a horse had won three of seven was willing to stretch the friendship and count it as a 50% contender.
While I had had those good results recently getting a larger sample as is so often the case gave a more pessimistic story. A decent loss overall. So, I tried various elimination tactics. Not first up. That failed to improve the result and cost me the longest priced winner in Brandenberg ($41) who I regarded as an outlier. A punting colleague in the past said I should not throw out these long priced winners when looking to find selection approaches but a systems analyst in England was firm on statistical grounds that you should take out your top three or even five prices and if still showing a profit in your samples then you were likely on to something. I then looked at no bet if worse than fourth last start. No real improvement. If a 100% selection, then what minimum win ratio? Too high and you lose Brandenberg again as he had only won one in seven – but had five seconds.
You can see I tried but could not show a profit, so it is out.
I finished the year a little behind. If Sandbar won instead of an unlucky second at the end of June (see Steward’s reports – not just me whinging!) I would have been in front, so it was close! The last four months were encouraging as I recovered ground and reviewed selection patterns from a bad start to the financial year and so far this year has been profitable. Now to hang onto it!
Until next issue – have fun punting!