Cheltenham Festival
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 329 comments are related to the topic:
Dynaste CANNOT win the RSA Chase
Dynaste CANNOT win the RSA Chase
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 329
|
By:
enjoyed reading this thread as very good how to look at why a hot shot might not win at chelters.
alot here are argueing with the stats against the form in what i can see,so the big question seems to be why should the stats prove to be right, lets look at this race first, it is a novice chase for horses that are novices who are learning there trade now jumping bigger fences, now that stat alone makes it possible for injury and pulling muscles early on in race ,now they have to go 3 miles in big chelters race alot of pressure on every one to get this horse ready for the big one, now look at form it has beat other novices who are learning the trade so is the form as good as we think, more than possibly not as good as we are half mindedly thinking of there hurdle form before,then we look at horses who won the races beating the so called hot shots years before does it usually end up being won by superstar, not really just as much chance being won by a very good stayer in making like grand national runner in future years,so why do so many hot pots get beat was the question people where wondering and what prove, my guess is because there usually and this is usually only not that great at all which is proved after this race not before it,lets put it like boxers many time do you watch a boxing match and think wow this guy unbeatable then they step up to world class and find they where only average, well novice chasers do this all the time .even after winning the rsa they still need prove its the real deal next year so why should they be thought of it before hand,any short odds in a novice chase of any sort should be either race left alone or opposed but deff not bet. its not the stats that say dont touch it with barg pole its the fact" NOVICE" |
|
By:
Pipe stated in Saturday's post that Dynaste "probably" runs again before March and most likely in the Denman Novice Chase on Tote Gold Trophy day.
|
|
By:
Interesting thread.
I think you have to be careful laying on the stats alone. I remember a debate about whether Sea The Stars could win the Derby. The stats said that 2000 Guineas winners didn't win the Derby anymore. It hadn't happened in quarter of a century. We came to the conclusion that stats only matter if there is a sound reason the stat exists, which comes down to a matter of opinion. Some people said that nowadays classic hopefuls are trained as either milers or middle distance Derby types and winning both races was a thing of the past. Hindsight is a wonderful thing and obviously Sea The Stars and Camelot prove that to be false. So, what I'd be interested to hear is (as someone who knows hugely more about flat than jump racing) the reasons behind the stats. Earlier in the thread there were remarks as to why a second season hurdling would count against a novice chaser, but is there a theory as to why Feltham winners can't win the RSA? Did someone say it hadn't happened in forty years! Beware the stats... |
|
By:
Richie-O
this argument about stats rears it's head every year in the Cheltenham forum and I will just say what I always say about the use of trends, as I call them, in a betting strategy. As with all methods used to make betting decisions, the punter has to be aware that on some occasions it is not going to work out as predicted and this in inevitable so worrying about how or why is not necessarily useful. Identifying strong trends with a true long term betting edge is what is required. If the punter wants to ponder on the reasons why then that's fine but I doubt it is really possible to come up with a genuine and believable answer in most cases. I mean, why do Supreme Novice Hurdle winners have such a poor record in the Champion Hurdle? And would it make any difference if you knew the answer? My own approach, especially with the big festivals, is to look at a very long term picture across the whole meeting. I mean by that that I am looking to gain an edge overall and that I accept that sometimes I might make a bet that might seem counter intuitive or even downright daft because my expectation is to make a profit in the long run. Every so often a horse will snap a long held trend (like Kauto Star becoming the first horse ever to regain the Gold Cup) but for the most part these long held, strong trends stand up time and time again which gives confidence that you can make a profit by following them. Indeed, it is quite incredible how frequently horses with major trends against them are heavily backed and often at short prices too which just shows how the market often ignores these trends meaning there is tremendous betting value to be had elsewhere in the market or simply by laying them. With regards to this thread, even if Dynaste does go and win the RSA this will not change the long term trend which has shown that Feltham winners and those who had a second season hurdling both make a huge level stakes loss in the RSA Chase. It will take much more than one horse winning the race to reverse the trend and until such evidence presents itself I will relentlessly oppose such horses in the years ahead with a strong belief that they will continue to make a huge level stakes loss. It might be nice to know why but as I say it seems unlikely the real reason will ever become evident. Rather than beware the stats, punters should embrace them in my opinion because there are many that stand up every year and you can make a profit almost blindly following some of them. |
|
By:
disagree....unless you can come up with some explanation for a stat, you are clueless as to its validity...and sample sizes involved of 10 or 20 yrs arent robust enough for blind faith imo
|
|
By:
dynaste will not win the rsa because UNIONISTE will win it, this horse is improoving at a rapid rate, id say the reynoldstown at ascot is next on the agenda. The horse has improoved so much he also has an entry in the RYANAIR, i hope connections go the RSA route and yes that it my pocket talking lol
|
|
By:
disagree all you want, I can't explain why Feltham winners don't win the RSA but I am miles in front on the race by laying them over the years and I am not going to waste valuable time trying to come up with a reason that may or may not be true. There are so many races to analyse that it's not worth worrying about for me. The proof is in the pudding as far as I'm concerned.
|
|
By:
judorick, interesting points again.
This thread is called Dynaste CANNOT win the RSA Chase. It would surely make more sense to call it Dynaste is poor value to win the RSA Chase. In the same way that 2000 Guineas winners are often poor value to win the Derby. The guineas-derby double can be done and no doubt the feltham-rsa double can also be done but it is such an obvious selection that it will be poor value. I would still prefer to know the reason behind the stat. That way you can make a better judgement on whether a horse will fit the stat or not. Camelot wasn't a typical 2000 guineas winner and laying him on the basis that 2000 guineas winners are unlikely to win the derby wouldn't be my cup of tea. Or you could say that he was such a short price that he was worth opposing and that long term laying Guineas winners in the Derby pays. If you're making money just on stats then good luck to you, but it's not for me. How many results have to buck the trend before a stat becomes invalid? If Dynaste wins the RSA do you ignore the stats or just take it as a blip? |
|
By:
trends do change over time and a sensible punter will be watching carefully for them, and if you can, the reasons why
a good example is the Grand National where for many years it was considered almost impossible for horses carrying more than 11st 2lbs to win - however changes in the way the weights are calculated and an increase in the quality of runners (a function of the massive prize money on offer) have resulted in more horses carrying higher weights being competitive to such an extent that I am no longer using this trend. I guess this evolution took about 10 years or so. as I stated before, I use the trends only for major festivals really and my profitability increased sharply when I did - made me look at runners in a new way and in particular it stopped me backing shorter priced runners with major trends to overcome which I might have wasted money on had I not paid attention to the trends. |
|
By:
i'm not saying there's nothing to be learnt from trends, far from it, but for me the way i look at the trends has to be rooted in some logic rather than relying on some mystical power that stops Feltham winners in the RSA (in this instance)
...the Feltham's an obvious trial for the race but obviously Irish horses rarely come over for it and they have won 4 of the last 9 RSAs ....also, the difference in track is a factor for some horses and was prob the reason why (RSA winner) Denman didnt run in the Feltham, as he wouldnt be a Kempton horse personally think Long Run just had an off day in the RSA, with the possibility that dropping back to 2m between Kemp and Chelt was not the ideal prep....obviously he was good enough to have won RSA and has no probs with the track, so trends followers prob dodged a bullet that day |
|
By:
I'm with the stats guys as far as Cheltenham is concerned. Try to use them as much as I can elsewhere and come a cropper more often than not - but at Cheltenham they are solid as a rock. Only meeting I've made a profit for all of the last 5 years. As for the feltham RSA debate, it could well be the track, hard race, ground, Irish not participating etc, but until a feltham winner wins the RSA I will blindly back against it!
|
|
By:
i think he would have a better chance in the ryanair, couldnt have this at all for the RSA
|
|
By:
you mean the Jewson as he will surely run in a novice race
|
|
By:
no mate i mean the ryanair, thats if he,s been given an entry, the trip is perfect. next year he,ll be facing the same horses that are in the ryanair through the season, why not do it a race sooner???
|
|
By:
they won't do that is what I am saying
it's either the Jewson or the RSA, they won't be taking on the older horses this year |
|
By:
of course you are right judo, my meaning is i think he would have a better chance of winning the ryanair as i believe the stat stands up well and he cant win the RSA being a feltham winner but he could win a ryanair as the trip is better for him
|
|
By:
well that maybe true, the Jewson is 2 and a half miles and he would be very strongly fancied for that - they won't be taking on Cue Card et al in the Ryan Air though
|
|
By:
One particular problem I have with following trends blindly is the sample size and probability that what you are seeing is significant.
A trend needs to establish itself strongly over at least 20 years, I would say, for it to be considered a real, strong trend, but as judorick said a little earlier, things evolve, which means you might be playing in a different ball park by the time your genuine trend has become apparent. I also wonder how many people are aware that laying a 3-1 shot (pretty short, even for a favourite at the Cheltenham Festival) means you are basically backing an outcome at 1-3 (for it not to win). It's not overly surprising that such trends hold up as, in most years, you have a whole field of very smart horses running for you. It's like the five-year-old horses have a hard time in the Champion trend. That one has more obvious logic attached to it as it is a championship race and most horses of that age are not at their physical peak. Yet it was bandied around as a hard and fast rule by some, who quoted something like 70-odd runners had tried and failed. They neglected to mention that the vast, vast majority of these were 1-20 or shorter to lose! I know that a few shorties have been turned over in the RSA of late but there have often been reasons why, so I do think it's a dangerous ploy to lay Dynaste on that basis alone. Personally, I am not sure he is a stayer and will not be a player, but it's not the Feltham victory that's putting me off. |
|
By:
well I will be posting my trend based selections at the Festival
but I have to say I do nothing 'blind', I take extreme care over betting decisions |
|
By:
Look forward Judo to that as use every year for festival with decent results,obviously with many others factors eg form, going, distance, stable form etc. Only 6 weeks now cant wait!
|
|
By:
I'll be laying Dynaste. I also follow the trends and I think Dynaste will get beat.
I followed Judorick's stats in the Arkle last year. He very knowledgeable and he has good input on these threads. |
|
By:
That Feltham stat is weak at best. Here is how the last 10 winners of the Feltham fared in the RSA:
1 - 2nd 2 - 3rd 1 - 4th 3 - Didn't Run 3 - Ran but weren't even in the first 3 in the betting Now take into account that 4 of the last 10 RSA winners were Irish trained and this stat looks very weak. IMO!! I'll gladly take all of your lay bets. Time to mortgage the house.  |
|
By:
the last 18 feltham winners to run in the rsa have all lost and they include Long Run and Grands Crus who were both very short
looking at a sample of 5 years is not likely to be significant |
|
By:
I looked at the last 10 years and found the data to be very telling. IMO the Feltham/RSA stat is very weak but of course, as with all stats, they're open to interpretation. gltu
|
|
By:
Make that 10 years (7 winners of Feltham to run in RSA)
|
|
By:
anyway, as I keep saying, for me it's not about whether a trend, or set of trends, stands up in one race in one yeah
it's about whether the whole set of trends provide profitable betting angles across all races at the meeting over many seasons so again, even if Dynaste does overcome the two trends identified in this thread I won't be rushing to think 'ooh that's them trends fooked then' as we already know some will get bust from time to time... but they are so rare that even those who don't follow trends are aware when one gets snapped (Katchit CH, Kauto CGC and .. err, yeah struggling to remember too many more off the top of my head) |
|
By:
I went back as far as Djeddah, who won the Feltham in 1996.
Since then, 10 horses have run in the RSA and lost. Their SPs were 100-30 (3rd). 9-2 (P), 11-2 (2nd), 9-1 (6th), 4-1 (2nd), 11-2 (3rd), 11-1 (6th), 7-1 (6th), 11-4 (3rd) and 6-5 (4th). The probability that none of those would win, assuming the prices were accurate, is around 9-1. Make your own minds up as to how significant that is. My opinion is that because 50% of those horses were placed, and because they were all different types (some speedier than others) there is absolutely no reason to follow this stat. As Judorick rightly says, you don't need to know the exact whys and wherefores for a stat to be profitable, but this is something of a red herring/catch 22; I would counter that suggestion by saying that although it is 100% right, philosophically, it is only right if the stat is actually real, and that is something you can't ever know. We can all backfit data and show that we'd have made a profit by following these trends but they are not guaranteed to hold true in the present and future. Good luck all! |
|
By:
so again, even if Dynaste does overcome the two trends identified in this thread I won't be rushing to think 'ooh that's them trends fooked then' as we already know some will get bust from time to time...
Absolutely right and something most will overlook, and by the same token, if Dynaste does get beaten I won't be rushing to think 'ooh that trend is genuine'... |
|
By:
so in 2014 you would still consider backing a Feltham chase winner, who had a second season over hurdles, in the RSA chase even if Dynaste makes it 19 Feltham winners beaten in the RSA in a row? interesting
|
|
By:
Why wouldn't I if I fancied said Feltham winner that had run over hurdles for two seasons?
I'm not backing Dynaste because I don't think he's a stayer, not because I believe this perceived 'trend' has any validity. To me, it is not that surprising that nothing has won in so long when you consider the probability of that happening. Let's face it, Grands Crus stopped at Cheltenham last year in a similar way to how he has stopped in his races this season, which makes me nigh-on certain that he did not give his running that year. Long Run pulled way too hard and jumped badly in what was a very good renewal of his. Take those two out of my list of 10 from above, and you'll see that the probability of none of the others winning is nearer 3-1. Hardly significant in my view. It is also easy to argue that Jair Du Cochet would have won his renewal with a better ride. One other thing that, to my knowledge, has not been brought up on this thread yet, is that genuine trends are often self-evident and logical: Five-year-old horses will be likely to struggle in the Champion Hurdle as they are not likely to be at their peaks, and you need to be to win the best two-mile hurdle of the season. Horses having two seasons over hurdles before going chasing might have some weight if they go chasing at a late stage, but not if they do it at a young age. Dynaste is not too old. He ran in top-class hurdles races and is more professional and experienced as a result. To say it is a negative to his chances because you have backfit some data is bordering on ridiculous. I understand your angle completely, but answer me this: You acknowledge that trends change over time (like the National one with horses carrying over 11 st). Yet you (rightly) wouldn't ditch this RSA stat if Dynaste bucks the trend and wins this year. So how do you know when a 'trend' has changed? Surely you would need a few Feltham winners to follow up in the RSA before you would accept this one had, but by that point you'd be in one heck of a financial hole having laid them. Which is why I think following what is only a 'perceived' trend based on old data is a very risky proposition. |
|
By:
Dont bother arguing the toss with those that uese stats/trends,just let them get on with it.
Its personal choice whether to use them,if thats their way of punting thats up to them. Must admit,i do find it amusing when people say a horse cannot win a race cos it won a race earlier in the year,but there yer go. If its proving profitable then its justified,but ther are other ways to work out races,and probably more interesting. Still.like i say,each to their own. |
|
By:
A lot of people seem to follow stats and as such it's taken into account in the betting. Everyone knows the Feltham stat and thats
one of the reasons he's 5/2 and not 7/4. Theres no reason why it should effect Dynaste ,he's won around Cheltenham and will probably prefer it to Kempton. A lot of horses have shown ability to act around kempton and Chelt over 3m plus Best mate ,Desert Orchid,Long Run and Kauto star. He won on Heavy at Kempton off a decent pace on Heavy ground and cann't see stamina being an issue. Think he'll be very difficult to beat. |
|
By:
I'm a bit coy about this entire thread. What if he goes for the Jewson ?
|
|
By:
Surely he's the winner of the 2 1/2 mile race if he goes there and will take all the beating if he runs to within 5lbs of his 161 rating in the 3 miler. 161 is a very high rating for a novice pre Cheltenham and his form with Unioniste looks very good.
|
|
By:
Graeme83
30 Jan 13 12:41 I'm a bit coy about this entire thread. What if he goes for the Jewson ? If he runs in the Jewson and not in the RSA then I'm pretty sure the original poster will be correct. You have to be in it to win it. |
|
By:
Fair enough Roger. I don't think Dynaste will win the RSA, for the same reasons i don't think Millhouse, Black Beauty or Warhorse will win it. Non participation.
|
|
By:
You seem pretty confident he'll run in the Jewson Graeme ,have you lumped on him at 18/1 presently available for it on here?
|
|
By:
I didn't know he was that price
 |
|
By:
Great stuff Graeme. Go start a really interesting thread about Black Beauty not being able to win the RSA and I'll keep this one going telling you why the highest rated horse in the race and 5/2 favourite can't win.
|
|
By:
You're some man Roger. It must be really tough picking out a horse that can't win when there are dozens of entries. Good luck in your thread. It's not obvious that you want to lay at 5/2, creative a mega negative vibe in the hope that he goes to 4/1, so you have a lay for nothing. It hasn't been done before.
|