by David Renham (August 2005)

The Great St Wilfrid sprint on August the 13th 2005 got me thinking. It was a Class B handicap over 6 furlongs with 23 runners.

Here is the result :

1st Ice Planet 10-1 (drawn 23)
2nd Pieter Brueghel 12-1 (drawn 20)
3rd River Falcon 7-1 (drawn 22)
4th Ptarmigan Ridge 33-1 (drawn 17)
5th Spirit of France 25-1 (drawn 16)
6th Mine Behind 8-1 (drawn 21)

What does this result scream out?? Yes, our old friend DRAW BIAS. Only a few seasons ago draw bias was a very fashionable tool in helping punters narrow down races, and in some cases decent profits were made. Yes, people still use it, but everyone else seems to have caught up. Most importantly the market has caught up …………. Anyway, I’ll come back to the Ripon sprint later in this article.

My comment – “the market has caught up” is best explained looking at two Beverley sprints six years apart. The first race to consider is a race run on April 13th 2005. It was a 20 runner class 3 (or “C”) handicap sprint over 5 furlongs. This 5f trip at Beverley is renowned as possibly the most biased distance in the country, in terms of the fact that high draws have a significant advantage over low draws. The result read as follows :

1st Fonthill Road 7-1 (drawn 17)
2nd Philharmonic 6-1 (drawn 19)
3rd The Lord 9-4 (drawn 20)
4th Native Title 10-1 (drawn 11)

The first three home were not surprisingly well drawn, but also well fancied with prices ranging from 9-4 to 7-1. Now for a 20 runner handicap, those prices are “tight” to say the least.

In contrast, let us look back at a 19 runner handicap class D handicap sprint over 5f run at Beverley on 8th May 1999. (N.B. there was one non runner). The result read :

1st Black Army 12-1 (drawn 20)
2nd Legs Be Friendly 16-1 (drawn 19)
3rd Nifty Norman 9-1 (drawn 14)
4th Piggy Bank 20-1 (drawn 18)

Big difference here, with the three highest drawn horses, (who happened to come first, second and fourth), being offered at 12-1, 16-1 and 20-1. Having the three highest drawn horses all at double figures odds six years on just does not happen – regardless of form etc. The draw bias is so well known now, that the prices on the best drawn horses are arguably much shorter than their true odds. Going back to the April 2005 race, the prices of the top 3 drawn horses were 9-4, 6-1 and 9-1. All single figure odds and, one of them, at the amazingly short price of 9-4 - in a 20 runner handicap! Clearly the market has caught up – the prices of the well drawn horses are much shorter than they would have been a few years ago. Gone are the days of big prices on the best drawn horses at Beverley.

Another interesting fact about the 1999 race mentioned above is as follows – on that day Dominelle was a 7-2 chance. You should be amazed to know that Dominelle was drawn 7. To compare with the 2005 race, the shortest price of the single figure drawn horses in that race was a massive 22-1. Another comparison of interest - in the 1999 race only two single figure drawn horses were bigger than 25-1; in the 2005 example, eight of the nine single figure drawn horses were 40-1 or bigger. YES – the market has caught up.

The diminishing prices of well drawn horses at draw biased tracks have generally squeezed out any value for us, the punters. Indeed these days, it could be argued that well drawn horses are often poor value. All is not lost though, when we go back to first race I looked at in this article – the result of the Great St Wilfrid at Ripon. Here, we had two of the four highest drawn horses fill 1st and 2nd, and both were double figure prices. In this example, the prices for the higher drawn horses were higher than is the “norm” these days. I believe there were 2 reasons for this – firstly, although the feeling was that high draws would be best, there was a school of thought that felt there would not be that much in it between both sides. Secondly most people felt that as long as you were drawn within 6 or 7 of the high rail, that would still be an advantage. I think many people underestimated that the ground closest to the rail is still quicker than even 5 yards away from it and that draw 23 had a better chance than say draw 17. As stated above, the prices on the best drawn horses – in this case the highest drawn horses - were better than would normally be expected.

So where does that leave us? I do feel it is hard to find value bets at some draw biased courses now – Chester and Beverley being prime examples. The prices on offer about well drawn horses offer little value. The forecast option is a possibility, but returns on those have been equally hit in recent times. Basically, as draw punters we need to stay ahead of the game. This winter for example there was serious money to be made at Wolverhampton in the sprints – the re-laid surface offered a big advantage to lower drawn horses and it is taking time for punters, and the market to catch up. Even now, I believe there is a still an edge to be had at Wolverhampton – however, assuming the bias continues, we have not got long! In addition, courses like Ripon will often offer us an edge. Problem with Ripon, and other courses like it, is that the draw bias does switch from time to time from high to low, and you can never be 100% sure that one side of the straight track will be definitely quicker than the other side. However, despite a blip for much of 2004 (4 of the 5 big field handicaps that year saw lower draws have the edge), the percentage call in big field handicaps at Ripon is to go for high drawn horses. So the potential “problem” – deciding whether high or low draws will be best – can play into our hands, because the value in the prices will reappear because the market will be faced with the same decisions. Yes, we might get it wrong from time to time, but if we stick to our guns, then there is a good chance that we will emerge with a profit at the end of it.

In an attempt to prove that there is still money to be made backing the draw, let us consider all handicap races at Ripon with 16 or more runners since the year 2000 (up to August 19th 2005). There were 41 qualifying races giving some profitable angles :

1. Backing the highest drawn horse only in win singles would have given you a massive 8 wins @ 9-1, 12-1, 12-1, 4-1, 7-2, 16-1, 10-1, 10-1. Backing all these top drawn horses in win singles at 1 point per bet would have yielded a profit of 43.5 points (+ 106% profit). It should be noted that 5 of the 8 were double figure prices.

2. If, in every race, you backed the two highest drawn horses in a 1 point reverse forecast (outlay 2 points on each bet), it would have given you 4 winning forecasts @ 100-1, 42-1, 27-1, 176-1, yielding a massive profit of 267 points
(+ 326% profit).

3. Perming the 3 highest drawn horses in six 1 point straight forecasts would have given you 5 winning forecasts (so just one more than perming the top two – the other winning bet @ 36-1). This would have yielded a profit of 146 points (+61% profit).

4. Casting the net wider and perming the 4 highest drawn horses in twelve 1 point straight forecasts would have given you 8 winning bets - three others @ 122-1, @107-1 and @ 73-1). This would have yielded a profit of 203 points (41+% profit).

To conclude - at Ripon at least I believe there still is money to be made using some simple draw bias ideas. The highest draw has an excellent record, as does perming the highest two drawn horses in reverse forecasts. These profits should continue, especially if we get the odd race where low draws dominate – we might have ourselves a losing bet or two, but it will do wonders for the prices of the higher drawn horses in future races!