Boodles [prev Fred Winter] stat - [Sir Andrew Mount]

Second or third last time = losers
So does that mean first or fourth last time = winners?

Sounds like coincidence, though I suppose there just might be a basis in the way handicapping works with the second and third being put up too much but then why not in all the other races?

So does that mean first or fourth last time = winners?

Believe he mentioned those as being profitable overall.

Doubt he would have come up with it at all had the front two not met the criteria.

I'm not saying it is not true, just that it sounds more like a chance happening that cannot be relied on in future. It sounds oddly specific. Why 2nd and 3rd and not 2nd, 3rd and 8th? It is too easy to think of a rule that explains the past without predicting the future. What's a trend and what's a coincidence?

That said, by way of hedging my bets I've also given a reason it might be valid.

But the main thing about the Boodles/Fred Winter is it is usually won by a rag (7 of the past 11 25/1 or bigger, it says in the Weatherby's Cheltenham Guide) so any rule putting you off the front of the market will seem true. Avoid Willie Mullins' first strings, for instance. (And what I'd not realised when I wrote that sentence is that Willie has never won the race.)