I did n't say it was worthless, did I? I said I don't really buy it - big difference, means I'll apply a different weighting to it than other stats, trends and aspects of form.

You obviously disregarded the 'no FTO winner of Totesport Trophy' stat if you backed Zarkandar today. How much of a bigger trend than that do you want? Don't know how many of tried, having said that - how many 5yos are there in the CH generally? How many are as good as Zarkandar potentially?

I respect the stats and trends but won't be straitjacketed by them.

No, I backed Zarkandar on the day the ante post markets opened at 8/1 with everything I could get on then went in again at 6s and 5s...

because I knew the price was going to collapse and I would be able to lay him for green all round

had nothing to do with trends and the Triumph form (Grandouet et al) screamed that 151 was lenient

Well, you claimed that Katchit winning at least devalued the trend. For me it is one of the strongest trends and 5 yos will continue to make a massive level stakes loss in the Champion Hurdle for as long as I am alive (1 out of the last 87 5yos to run have won and he was lucky)

Katchit winning clearly does devalue the trend otherwise it would be 0 from 87 would n't it? That's a statement of fact.

Your backing of Zarkandar clearly implies that you apply the trends in some cases but not in others.

Where does the concept of 'luck' fit into the trends?

Its got to be tough for a 5yr old,they are sill improving at that age and not yet reached thier full potential.Stands to reason that they are at a disadvantage,and only in a poor year can they figure in a CHurdle imo.
SE would have won Katchits race,and the race that Bino and CH placed just behind Punjabi was another pretty poor year.Bino was obviously a better horse potentially than Punjabi but just fell short having not had an ideal prep,and he proved it the next year.

The trends are ok until freak of horses turn up

but freak horses turn up very rarely because they are freaks - so if you apply the trends as a long term strategy you will win in the long run even though once in a while a freak will do you


Katchit winning clearly does devalue the trend otherwise it would be 0 from 87 would n't it? That's a statement of fact.

pedantic but does not increase the validity of your original statement


Your backing of Zarkandar clearly implies that you apply the trends in some cases but not in others.

nope this is plain wrong as I already explained - backing Zarkandar had absolutely nothing to do with trends whatsoever, it was purely a trading decision based on experience that told me the horse would shorten significantly in price. As I posted on Monday, I laid the horse back to green up evenly all round

.

It's a lazy stat and a false stat

it remains SIGNIFICANT that 5yos have a terrible record and they make a massive long term loss to level stakes at SP, which is what I care about. What you are doing is called "chunking down" which is fair enough but I am happy with long term global trends that either make good profits or big losses to level stakes over many years because that is how I think about my punting

the less than 15 starts trend is one I also apply but for me it is a different trend

Good news, Noel Fehily to ride Rock On Ruby in The Champion, a man who can sit and wait and push the button at the right time. Form is in the book and he's got to be there with a chance at the last with a bit of luck plus he'll get every yard as you'll need to.

I didn't apply any trends information in the race involving Zarkandar, I just thought "that will go off much shorter than that" and so I backed it for all I could believing I would be able to lay it at much shorter and have an all green screen. That is exactly what happened. The fact that it won and overcame a trend was entirely coincidental to my betting on the race.

I will use whatever I believe to be significant. If there is a trend which I think is weak or irrelevant then sure I might ignore it especially ones relating to things like " no favourite has won" and stuff like that because there is no logic (if the horse drifted and was not favourite you would back it but if was heavily backed and was favourite then you wouldn't? Them sorts of trends I will happily ignore but things like the Supreme Novice winner in the Champion, or 5yos in the Champion etc that have large samples and long histories are worth paying attention to)


Ah, I see what you mean about applying trends in some cases and not others now. Well, yes, but that depends on what I am betting on. In Zarkandars case I was banking on a market move and did not even consider the trends because I wasn't looking for the winner of the race, I was merely trading a price. That's the difference. Had I been looking for the winner and studied all the trends and all I might have done something else. So I use whatever means I decide gives me the best advantage. Today at Sandown I decided to do back to lays on all the Topspeed top rated runners and set the lay to win me 15% of my initial stakes - every single one worked and some worked pre race - and there was not the use of a trend in sight

Thanks for the explanation - I don't think we're actually saying too much different. Analysing races is a bit of a black art which is why it is so appealing - my approach is similar to yours (though I don't really trade) - I also use the trends selectively - I agree totally about the market trends - I disregard them primarily for the same reason i.e. might miss out on one at a big price.

Judorick - I was like that too...the satisfaction gained from the odd occasion I've found a forecast after studying ONE race for over an hour is priceless!

I don't do it anymore, but the last time I did (4/11/08, last occasion in a bookies) I backed Mistress Nell at 28/1 but I just couldn't split that & Present M'Lord who was 16/1 pre-race.

For a change I backed the right one, and I didn't do the forecast!

There was a half length between them and a 25 length break to the third home - hugely satisfying

Like you, I can't see the point any more when I can obtain free bets, as well as snatching the easy fractions on the right event.
It's as if I bet by numbers nowadays

In my original post i said i thought Zarkandar was value at 12/1 for the CH and after yesterday's effort i can go green if i choose. I thought it was a very decent performance with things not going totally to plan i.e no pace,getting shuffled back 3 out but on the plus side he jumped well, showed a good attitude to come between horses and in my opinion had a bit up his sleeve at the finish.
   All in all a very good prep and if PFN has as he says left a lot to work on i still think he is the most likely challenger to the FLY,S crown.

I think Zark was quite fortunate that Brampour ran though.

If Brampour wasn't in the field, Zark would have been top weight and I don't think he would have won carrying 11 stone 12.

If he did, he would have finished unplaced imo and could easily be a 12/1 now instead of an 11/2 shot.

guzzling Brandy?? blimey?!!

ill have a few pints later,but Brandy?

TLU - I honestly wondered whether you were a bookie (I joke...) but then maybe your name would have been Low Life instead (I joke again...).

Any news on Zark's wellbeing?

Not great so far, Dildar was disappointing, Michel le bon never jumped before being PU.Dodging Bullets ran a decent race tho.

was 7/4 fav, 3rd fav fell at 1st, 2nd fav pulled up

just saying

4 wins and a 2nd is pretty good.I'm not to concerned about stable form, now its more a case of Zarkandar being good enough.

Thats correct crescent,i was at Westmantown last night,and anyone who heard Ruby talking about Zarkandar would be put right off,he certainly put me right off,thats not to say he wont run well,id still be confident he'll be place,just cant see him winning after Rubys comments