|
by David Renham (August 2005)
With the
2005 flat season just starting to get into gear, I thought it was
time to share more research with you. Many so called “profitable”
systems use course winners as an integral part of their “successful”
system. However, do previous course winners actually offer more of an
edge than horses that are not course winners? The following table
looks at each individual course with results taken from 1986 to 2004.
It compares the overall strike rate of all horses, compared the
strike rate for course winners. Please note that this for flat racing
only. The profit / loss figures are also shown :
|
Course
|
Overall Strike Rate
|
Profit / Loss
|
Strike rate for Course winners
|
Profit / Loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ascot
|
8.7 %
|
– 26.0 %
|
12.0 %
|
– 12.6 %
|
|
Ayr
|
10.4 %
|
– 23.5 %
|
10.0 %
|
– 28.3 %
|
|
Bath
|
9.2 %
|
– 30.5 %
|
11.4 %
|
– 29.3 %
|
|
Beverley
|
9.1 %
|
– 37.4 %
|
12.5 %
|
– 18.1 %
|
|
Brighton
|
10.3 %
|
– 29.4 %
|
11.5 %
|
– 29.0 %
|
|
Carlisle
|
9.9 %
|
– 32.7 %
|
10.6 %
|
– 38.2 %
|
|
Catterick
|
9.5 %
|
– 34.1 %
|
12.9 %
|
– 22.7 %
|
|
Chepstow
|
9.0 %
|
– 31.7 %
|
11.1 %
|
– 23.8 %
|
|
Chester
|
11.2 %
|
– 26.2 %
|
12.0 %
|
– 15.2 %
|
|
Doncaster
|
8.1 %
|
– 34.0 %
|
10.0 %
|
– 23.7 %
|
|
Epsom
|
10.1 %
|
– 27.9 %
|
12.1 %
|
– 4.9 %
|
|
Folkestone
|
9.4 %
|
– 33.4 %
|
12.3 %
|
– 29.2 %
|
|
Goodwood
|
9.7 %
|
– 26.2 %
|
11.5 %
|
– 21.1 %
|
|
Hamilton
|
10.7 %
|
– 26.2 %
|
11.3 %
|
– 34.5 %
|
|
Haydock
|
9.5 %
|
– 30.7 %
|
11.5 %
|
– 22.6 %
|
|
Kempton
|
8.6 %
|
– 30.1 %
|
11.0 %
|
– 14.6 %
|
|
Leicester
|
7.9 %
|
– 38.1 %
|
10.9 %
|
– 22.2 %
|
|
Lingfield (aw)
|
9.8 %
|
– 30.4 %
|
13.2 %
|
– 22.5 %
|
|
Lingfield (turf)
|
9.1 %
|
– 36.3 %
|
11.5 %
|
– 31.3 %
|
|
Musselburgh
|
10.6 %
|
– 35.4 %
|
12.6 %
|
– 17.4 %
|
|
Newbury
|
8.6 %
|
– 31.3 %
|
10.2 %
|
– 31.9 %
|
|
Newcastle
|
9.7 %
|
– 31.4 %
|
9.5 %
|
– 35.0 %
|
|
Newmarket (July)
|
9.6 %
|
– 29.0 %
|
12.4 %
|
– 21.3 %
|
|
Newmarket (Rowley)
|
7.6 %
|
– 34.7 %
|
11.2 %
|
– 23.4 %
|
|
Nottingham
|
7.9 %
|
– 37.1 %
|
9.7 %
|
– 22.1 %
|
|
Pontefract
|
8.7 %
|
– 33.3 %
|
10.3 %
|
– 27.5 %
|
|
Redcar
|
8.7 %
|
– 37.1 %
|
10.8 %
|
– 24.2 %
|
|
Ripon
|
8.6 %
|
– 41.0 %
|
10.5 %
|
– 23.3 %
|
|
Salisbury
|
8.8 %
|
– 34.6 %
|
11.7 %
|
– 9.0 %
|
|
Sandown
|
10.0 %
|
– 27.8 %
|
11.6 %
|
– 29.2 %
|
|
Southwell (aw)
|
8.8 %
|
– 33.3 %
|
12.0 %
|
– 25.8 %
|
|
Thirsk
|
9.1 %
|
– 37.2 %
|
10.1 %
|
– 28.3 %
|
|
Warwick
|
8.5 %
|
– 32.6 %
|
12.0 %
|
– 10.5 %
|
|
Windsor
|
7.7 %
|
– 41.0 %
|
13.2 %
|
– 16.3 %
|
|
Wolves (turf)
|
8.6 %
|
– 34.9 %
|
9.5 %
|
– 33.3 %
|
|
Wolves (aw)
|
9.8 %
|
– 29.7 %
|
12.5 %
|
– 23.8 %
|
|
Yarmouth
|
10.5 %
|
– 26.7 %
|
12.7 %
|
– 20.3 %
|
|
York
|
9.0 %
|
– 31.0 %
|
8.9 %
|
– 32.3 %
|
In
general, this table indicates that previous course winners win more
often than the “norm”. In order to look at each course in
more detail, I have taken the relative “strike rates” and
calculated an impact value for each course. The higher the impact
value, the more significant it is to be a previous course winner :
|
Course
|
Impact
Value
|
|
Windsor
|
1.71
|
|
Newmarket (Rowley)
|
1.47
|
|
Warwick
|
1.41
|
|
Ascot
|
1.38
|
|
Leicester
|
1.38
|
|
Beverley
|
1.37
|
|
Catterick
|
1.36
|
|
Southwell (aw)
|
1.36
|
|
Lingfield (aw)
|
1.35
|
|
Salisbury
|
1.33
|
|
Folkestone
|
1.31
|
|
Newmarket (July)
|
1.29
|
|
Kempton
|
1.28
|
|
Wolves (aw)
|
1.28
|
|
Lingfield (turf)
|
1.26
|
|
Bath
|
1.24
|
|
Redcar
|
1.24
|
|
Chepstow
|
1.23
|
|
Doncaster
|
1.23
|
|
Nottingham
|
1.23
|
|
Ripon
|
1.22
|
|
Haydock
|
1.21
|
|
Yarmouth
|
1.21
|
|
Epsom
|
1.20
|
|
Goodwood
|
1.19
|
|
Musselburgh
|
1.19
|
|
Newbury
|
1.19
|
|
Pontefract
|
1.18
|
|
Sandown
|
1.16
|
|
Brighton
|
1.12
|
|
Thirsk
|
1.11
|
|
Wolves (turf)
|
1.10
|
|
Carlisle
|
1.07
|
|
Chester
|
1.07
|
|
Hamilton
|
1.06
|
|
York
|
0.99
|
|
Newcastle
|
0.98
|
|
Ayr
|
0.96
|
Previous
course winners at Windsor therefore have a very good record and that
is certainly a fact you should take into account if backing at that
particular course. In contrast, York, Newcastle and Ayr are places
where previous course winners are actually less successful than non
course winners.
The other
“angle” to consider here is the profit / loss one. For
example, there are courses where previous course winners significant
improve the “loss” figures : Epsom course winners cut a
deficit of 27.9% to just 4.9%; Salisbury course winners cut a deficit
of 34.6% to just 9%; Warwick course winners cut a deficit of 32.6% to
just 12%, while Windsor course winners cut a deficit of 41% to 16.3%.
Other courses to note in this respect are Ascot, Beverley and
Musselburgh, and to a lesser extent Catterick, Chester, Leicester and
Ripon.
I decided
to delve a bit deeper and look to see if I could find any course and
distances that profits could be made by backing course and distance
winners. Here is what I found :
|
Course & distance
|
Strike rate for previous course
and distance winners
|
Profit
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salisbury – 5f
|
10.8 %
|
+ 47.4 %
|
|
Warwick – 1 mile
|
13.8 %
|
+ 25.8 %
|
|
Ascot – 2 miles
|
17.8 %
|
+ 20.7 %
|
|
Chester – 1 mile 2f
|
15.7 %
|
+ 15.8 %
|
|
Kempton – 6f
|
10.3 %
|
+ 14.3 %
|
|
Chester – 1 mile 4f
|
20.9 %
|
+ 13.8 %
|
|
Newmarket Rowley – 1 mile
|
12.3 %
|
+ 13 %
|
|
Pontefract – 2 miles 2f
|
14.4 %
|
+ 12.8 %
|
|
Newmarket July – 1 mile 4f
|
18.8 %
|
+ 12.7 %
|
|
Epsom – 1 mile 114yds
|
13.3 %
|
+ 9.6 %
|
|
Salisbury – 1 mile 4f
|
16.5 %
|
+ 8.8 %
|
|
Catterick – 6f
|
24.1 %
|
+ 7.5 %
|
|
Epsom – 6f
|
17.3 %
|
+ 3.5 %
|
|
Beverley – 1 mile 100yds
|
12.8 %
|
+ 1.7 %
|
|
Goodwood – 7f
|
16.4 %
|
+ 0.6 %
|
Clearly
backing “blind” previous course and distance winners is
never going to produce real profits, however, the above table
indicates that course and distances have better chances than others.
To
conclude, course winners and certain course and distance winners are
definitely worth noting. I hope this article has helped in
determining which are the best courses, (and course and distances),
for this approach.
|
