Surely Dynaste is fancied because he is one of the highest rated hurdlers among the likely runners and has demonstrated that he can win a novice chase at Cheltenham beating a leading fancy in Fingal Bay. Seems the most logical choice on the limited evidence available although I am not intending to back anything until February at the earliest.

Don't know why it should be in tatters soon enough. If you have a top class chase prospect, you get it chasing. I think this stat will run and run.


That presumes that every owner/trainer follows that thinking....Dynaste was clearly a well-handicapped horse at the start of last season and maybe the £42K he got for winning at Haydock fto was too good to pass up....

either way, Dynaste will be no older than 27 of the last 30 winners come March....i certainly couldnt put much store in this stat in his case

ps just off top of my head, can think of Azertyuiop, Sizing Europe and My Way de Solzen that have won the Arkle after 'extra' year hurdling....why doesnt the same thinking hold up here?

yes can't use the trends for the Arkle to argue about trends for the RSA

long established trends do get snapped now and again but in the long run they tend to remain profitable, like horses older than 10 at the Festival which have won just 3 races iirc in about 30+ years despite having hundreds of runners

anyway, will wait for him to win the Feltham then start laying

Justifications and explanations are all very well but when you are using trends to bet they barely matter (unless the trend is clearly illogical like 'grey horses' or 'horses with an R in their name' and such bollox

what interests me is long term level stakes profits and losses. Feltham winners have failed 18 times in a row to win the RSA and many of them have started as short priced favourites, so whenever one turns up at Cheltenham and is in single figures I will be against it because I know in the long run it is profitable to oppose them - and that's all I need to know. As I say it is not about being correct on every single occasion, it is about being correct often enough to make a profit. If Dynaste does win the RSA I will console myself with the fact that I have made excellent profit laying Grands Crus, Long Run and many others over the years

I have followed the trend for many many years and have never come up with a satisfactory and plausible reason that you could pply to subsequent years renewals.

The 5 yo in the CH is much easier to construct a case for isn't it? Immaturity can explain that easily, as it does for 6yo in the World Hurdle

But Supreme winners in the CH also have a terrible record in the CH over the long term. Why? I dunno but I laid Menorah, Go Native and several other Supreme winners in the race with no fear.

Anyway, hoping for a double whammy - back Dynaste in the Feltham and lay him in the RSA

PS - just to be awkward...does anyone believe that had Gloria Victis taken the RSA route instead of the ill-fated Gold Cup option, he wouldn't have absolutely hosed up? That would have blown that statistic out of the water!

I had to check on the result and Lord Noelie won it from Alexander Banquet & Toto Toscato, though the runner-up did actually prove himself to be a high-class performer.

PS - I can't remember it/them right now, but hasn't there recently been a renowned trend (possibly two) that McCririck used to spout about, that were overcome in the last 18 months?

ps as I always say, especially at the Festival, negative trends are much more powerful than positive ones. There are good mathematical reasons for this.

I wouldn't be in the slightest concerned about backing the winner if I thought he/she'd be as effective at Cheltenham. It's actually not that surprising that winners have such a bad record when you factor in a few genuine excuses for those that went to Cheltenham with good chances, statistically speaking anyway. As has already been said, Gloria Victis would likely have hosed up while Long Run ran well in a good renewal when his tender age and inability to settle cost him dear. There have also been a few average winners of late (in the last 15 years), that you wouldn't necessarily have expected to double up.

As I said earlier, if Kempton winners, or Kempton course and distance winners, had poor records in 'equivalent' Festival races, I'd be more keen to pay attention to this stat (but since novice hurdlers, all-aged hurdlers, shorter-distance novice chasers, and all-aged chasers have all done very well after winning here), I think it's a very silly one to put too much faith in.

Sorry:

I mean that horses falling into just about every other 'category' (two-mile novice hurdlers, two-mile juvenile hurdlers etc...) that have won good races at Kempton have then gone on to win similar races at the Festival with regularity, so I think it is foolish to put too much stock in the stat that Feltham winners have a poor record in the RSA, because there doesn't seem to be anything about Kempton that makes it an especially unreliable track to transfer top-class form to Cheltenham with.

And before that, I mean that there have been excuses for a lot of the beaten horses that have upheld this trend, and a lot of the others would probably not have been expected to beat their rivals anyway. It's just not that strong a trend for me when you factor these things in.

All this said, I don't especially fancy Dynaste as I think three miles at Cheltenham will be pushing him. He looks a cracking horse for the Jewson imo.

excuses exschmooses I'm afraid, they make a massive level stakes loss over many years and will in all probability continue to do so for many years

TD - I'm in agreement with you for the same reasons, but JR has a point - it's a pity between us all we can't find a valid reason for it!

I'm only playing the odds over the long term, that's my logic

have you not read the thread ffs Duncan?

so what if ONE manages to do it? That does not mean that suddenly Feltham winners will start winning every year. No, they will continue to make a level stakes loss over many years just as they have done for as long as I can remember

I want to see a change in the trend before I start betting on it that's for damn sure

judorick
26 Nov 12 22:37

have you not read the thread ffs Duncan?

so what if ONE manages to do it? That does not mean that suddenly Feltham winners will start winning every year. No, they will continue to make a level stakes loss over many years just as they have done for as long as I can remember


possibly...tho there's also the possibility that you have been fooled by randomness....how many trial races are there for Cheltenham Festival races? there's the Feltham, Reynoldstown, Moriarty for the RSA, so let's say there's 3 main trials for each Chelt Fest championship race= about 30 trial races total....is it not possible that just 1 of these 30 would have not thrown up a winner in the last 20 yrs for no other reason than coincidence, law of averages, call it what you will?....sure Kempton and Cheltenham are different types of track but many horses can be effective at both (Long Run won Feltham and a Gold Cup obv and Gloria Victus may well have done the same but for sad fall)....there's no reason why Feltham winners should start landing the RSA every year but i'm far from convinced winning the Feltham devalues your RSA chance in itself unless it also reflects a preference for flat track, going right-handed etc

The Sawyer - thanks for that Sir...I knew I wasn't dreaming but it would have taken a lot of legwork to track all that down.

I had a suspicion about Antonin being one of the horses but again, the work involved for a hunch would've taken an eternity!

PS - did you recall that from memory (then check it out) or did you devote an hour to my hunch?
Anyhow, thanks & well done

N-G

Always used to go to that Kempton meeting with the Chelt Racegoers Club - mostly got very p155ed. I had to borrow money to back Antonin and then backed him again at Chelt (so I started my research with that horse).

I don't remember MLC winning nor Balasani but vaguely recall the others - I certainly remember Elfast winning at Chelt - I backed Smartie Express.

The following year, the racecourse advertised the day as "producing 6 Cheltenham winners - come racing" or something like that, but it was my fortune (I mean luck not fortune) on Antonin that reminded me.

N-G re Katchit, no I am not, I am just confirming that his win was a freak result. Oh So Risky very nearly won after his easy win in the Triumph. Triumph winners are by definition precocious so it is not surprising that most of the 5yo's that have won or gone close had won the Triumph.

agree, and a nice lay in next seasons PP will round it off nicely

Read a report saying he isn;t thinking Arkle and will be entering for RSA and Jewson. Reporter suggested he sounded keen on the Jewson. Maybe Pipe has read this thread?

well hes a grey,and the Pipes are banging on again.so he could be!!