Last years Grand National was, to the trend students of the race, a somewhat unsatisfactory result


But it wasn't.
He scored on four important trends
He had been placed in a National (the Welsh).
He has rarely fallen or unseated in his career.
He was the right age (9, 10 or 11).
Carried 11st or under.


The one that he failed on was that he had appeared completely out of form going into the race, like Silver Birch, who had won a Welsh National, was the right age, rarely fallen and was carrying 11st or under.

Isn't the 11st trend only based on when the weights are published, and not day of race?
I didn't bother reading it when I saw RFC being advised in a 40 runner race!

angel,

I'm a million miles from being a pedigree expert but would venture I know enough to dismiss this French-bred stat as nonsense with there being very little between the 'breeds'. You often only have to go back one generation of a French-bred to see he's actualy full of English or Irish blood.

Equally, even if the horse was full of frog, how do you deal with a sire like Robin Des Champs who, I presume, will now be filling fields with little Irish-breds? I' hope no-one would say horses he sired before 2009 can't win but horses he sired after he moved to Ireland can. Regrettably, it sounds like you would and I think that needs explaining...??

front 4 home were 11-0+

trends are dead

gl

Coin toss argument is pointless. There is a clear reason why the front four home were 11st+ and that reason has been magnified this year. That is why the stat is dead.

Great read Angel, I've been telling everyone for the past few weeks that Snowy will win the National, along with about five others.

There are more of them running and they are better treated related to those lower down the handicap.

Let's say no horse had won the National carrying over 11st for the last 100 years and 5% of total runners during that time had carried 11-01+. Then, suddenly, in the 101st renewal, 95% of horses were due to carry 11-01 or more and they were all 14lbs well-in. Would you still be banking on that 11st stat?

It's an extreme example but so was your coin toss analogy and, in my opinion, the above is more relevant.

OK angel - read it quickly and still feel you are a wee bit obsessed re "the stats"!

Stats are imporatant, but you seem to totally have missed the point made earlier - that the GOING WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT LAST YEAR TO ALL NATIONALS RAN IN PREVIOUS 8 YEARS( possibly longer).

You just ignore this and are back to looking at mainly 10 year old horses ( three out of 4 suggested are 10 yods and only on e 9 yo).

Now if the going is GOOD.........then YES you can use previous years stats, as that was going mainly ......and YES there have been 3 ten year olds winning in last 10 runnings of GN.

However, there have been FOUR 9 yods winning over same period and one of 8,11 and 12 yods.

If the GOING is GOOD TO SOFT, GOOD IN PLACES..........last year's race had similar going and the result then favoured 9 year olds. There were only ten 9 yods in race last year and three of them finished in top 3......

You might call this a "freak" result and you should IGNORE that result......but IMO if the going is similar to last year ( Currently described as - National: Good to Soft-Soft in plcs. so not "similar" ).............then 9 yod horses might be where to check em out.

However, if going is as currently described, it will be the toughest test for a GN race in years..........and it is likely another "odd" result might occur.

So sticking to 10 yods may be a big mistake in horses selected...if going is as currently described........Also to ignore horses at higher odds would also be possibly a big mistake. The WEIGHT FACTOR will come more into it....IF the going is as currently described.

As we still do not know what the final field of runners will be.....nor do we know what the going will be on day .....I am not checking out race til 1 hour before.

It was an "interesting" read angel ....and GL with bets........Who knows the going might be GOOD....and your horses might come in top 4 home......

I think I'm going mad. Are people suggesting that a horse's going requirements are down to how old it is?

..and Wyndburgh..

Where have I suggested that I favour 10yos over 9yos?

I think both are perfect ages for the national and don't particularly favour one over the other.