Thoughts on Long Run via BST

(3 weeks ago)

The move to front-running Long Run only emphasizes the general point, although that can only be taken on trust once they line up.
It may help both horse and amateur jockey - the only thing to worry about from the front is getting the fractions right with no distractions. Most of his opposition are hardly going to be inclined to want to force it, in the way Nacarat always wanted to, and Kauto was out-the-ballpark good enough to.
Riverside is likely to sit second with his stamina now more in the confirmed box.
The reason i emphasize the 3m runs/form point is because at 2.5+ miles those in behind the front 2 are really going to start hurting. Providing there are no real thumping mistakes from Long Run that means they have to go into overdrive to overtake him at the very point where they're hurting the most because on paper they don't have the conditioning to stay well enough.
It's hard to envisage Long Run folding easily from 1st place because he always runs a very similar level of race.
Smaller field races aren't going to be much of a guide if they're going at LR's pace from the very start of the race - but that depends on SWC asking for no let-up at all on his mount and for LR to get into the kind of rhythm that saw him win it 2 years ago.
Lots of ifs, Kauto showed them how to do it last year though. 

 (19 days ago)

No change of gears definitely - he's one-paced absolutely no question.
Be very prominent/front-run - definitely, he finds it very hard to quicken at elite level pace.
Jockey - whatyagonnado aye
King George winner, Gold cup winner, dual Betfair Chase runner-up, Aon winner, King George runner-up, Gold Cup 3rd - for a horse aged 7 (and for any horse of any age) he has exceptionally strong form and sustained G1 3m top class ability.
Because of the nature of his extraordinary winning season he has since been assessed as if defeat is impossible: he must win every race to be a superstar and an unbeatable champion but that's not the M.O of the horse or necessarily the trainer: Long Run has been the victim of his own success. It points again to the sheer futility of "prices" in that because he's favourite he has to win and if he doesn't win he's not that good. Big Buck's puts that 'pressure' into perspective.
Here Sizing Europe is a fine example. A stunning Arkle winner but he was beaten all ends up in every single one of his starts after that until returning for the QMCC. That's not really very good at all is it? Some of them were by quite some way whereas LR very rarely gets beaten far (because he's actually got a really rare ability to sustain elite level 3m pace).
So yes Long Run has lost some battles. Last year he lost the races you highlight but what was going on? Was he ever really right. He got into an almighty war with one of the best racehorses of all time and got his ar$e handed to him fto as a result. Physically and mentally he was probably shot by that and, to boot, he was more than likely still progressing physically, or trying to. That's one hell of an ask and yet he still only went down narrowly in a KG managing to lunge at Kauto one last time too. It may have been his best effort to date all things considered?
Favourite for the King George: does he not have to be? Irrelevance of prices once more: were he 6 or 7/1+ everyone (nearly) would be saying that is "value": a crazy price for a KG winner & KG runner-up against a field with little 3m form. If anything one could say he 'should be' shorter but really it's all very pointless from an assessment p.o.v...

... The reaction to the Betfair Chase highlights some of the above. How on earth has he been beaten again, it's ridiculous, he's slow and not the horse he was.
I thought he looked the best he's ever been. I'm no expert on that, maybe he just had a shiny coat or something but he went through the race comfortably. If he's one-paced how can he possibly win a G1 slowly-run, stop-start affair against a horse who is in the form of his life, a superb 3m chaser and not far off favourite for the Gold Cup afterwards? Henderson had all but said they would tail him round without racing because of his hard race against Kauto last year. He's not been beaten far, what if Silvi wins the Gold Cup? How would the 2nd placing fto going easy look then?
Variety of thought.
Is the KG weaker? It might be. Didn't Al Ferof win a handicap in which only 6 finished? Should he be favourite? Should Cue Card be favourite, the buzzy Arkle runner-up that's never been 3m?
Then the race itself: it's a war, I think? I can't think of many "speed" horses winning a KG, Kicking King the last, but didn't he win a Gold Cup anyway, as Long Run has? Hell for leather from the off it's a brutal staying 3m like the World Hurdle where flashier, speedier, shorter-trip types get hurt badly and fade badly, that's assuming they're G1 class to start with.
Or is the race destined for the highest-rated chaser, the best 3m chaser in the race, a previous winner and runner-up of the race, a horse that can maintain 3m+ at one pace, elite pace?
##
That's obv the pro LR bit but it seems to make a whole world of sense.
Unless the horse is just "gone". 

(17 days ago)

Whilst I like most agree it's not as if there needs to be a clock in his head, Long Run has elite level pace and stamina it's more that SWC has to do what Ruby did and not wait around if it's a bit of a dawdle. I'd think it was a no-brainer but if he's not thinking and waits 3 fences the race changes shape a bit..
Couldn't disagree more with HDB trying to push that SE is a 3m horse with no worries. Small field Graded races in Ireland are often muddling and he appeared not to stay in either attempt - ground can't be an excuse because he won a Tingle on deep ground.
There's also an assumption, myself included, that SE would have won the Champion Chase but for the final fence issue. Two things though: this confirms SE as a 2miler through and through and anything but a 3m stamina horse; and that level of form isn't necessarily red hot: Finian's struggled a bit until that day and had lost his Arkle before that. 

(16 days ago)

Is Nicholas Mordino's conclusion an example of the confusion surrounding LR's abilities?

He says Silvi Conti's (sectional) times in the Betfair indicate him winning 4 out of 5 gold cups.

Yet being just 2.5L behind Long Run has gotten slower and less agile as a result of sizeable physical growth over the last two seasons.

If Conti is that good - and I think he certainly is - how can LR be so negatively evaluated when he's so close to him in a race that they were taking a shade easy and which had no pace until Conti injected it tactically (causing The Giant Bolster no end of problems as he points out)?

Do hypotheticals help? Had Kauto been retired LR's form figures would have been 1113 last season.

Watched Riverside's Ascot win again and he didn't half move through it well. 

(3 days ago)

Cue Card is a very good G1 horse and a fast one too. Part of what makes him near top class, I think, is that he gives his all in his races. Exuberance at the start (over fences he has more or less led from the start in every race) and at the end: winning distances of 6L, 8L, 13L, 8L before fences and 3.5L, 4L (7L clear at the last) & 26L.

His jumping is adequate and not under scrutiny (needless) but he is far from foot perfect and makes enough mistakes for a horse with elite level pretensions.

Soft ground, it is reasonable to deduce, will have him in the red zone at the second last, if not before. Given his exuberance/determination to give everything, emptying the tank appears far more likely than running to the line. 

Good luck to all betting on the King George.

Structured consistency: approach rundown

What better to get stuck into than a fair few non-winning selections? As a preface I'll take the opportunity to stress that the ultimate concern in my thinking is finding the likeliest winner of a race. In that respect backing three, four, five and more horses in any one race makes no appeal - that in itself is very easy to do. Trading holds no place whatsoever in analysis either. The other point of note is the general ethos behind winner finding: how accurate is the analysis trying to be, how predictive and how intent on reading the race correctly or more seeking a pay-out / ROI.

The strongest conclusion (as I've already thought about this a little) is likely to be that the process is sound (this will require mentioning successful bets from BST from last season but then this blog is merely an extension of that anyway) but has structural deficiencies arising from a) the timing of race analysis due to work commitments; b) variance; and c) a lack of focus on ROI. The latter one is quite surprising but it seems to be the case that initial financial return of any kind has been overlaid by backing a singular strand of analysis. All that should become clearer as I explain my losing bets posted on here; anyone reading where I went wrong AND how I was unable to steer myself onto the correct path may derive some benefit for their own approach.

Paddy Power Gold Cup

Perhaps one the trickiest things I find is weighing up the absolute quality of a race. On this occasion it wasn't a problem. It was a shocking renewal on desperate ground. I had little interest in the race having initially identified Notus De La Tour (more on him later) and with activity elsewhere focus on the race was below the required standard (#error). Because of the poor nature of the race in absolute terms (I did not rate Walkon highly at all before the off) it seemed clear that if Grand Crus reproduced his Feltham win he was by far the likeliest winner. A breathing problem (at least) ensured he was pulled up. The main #error was approaching the race from a very early point of view. Last season and indeed whenever possible decisions were left as late as possible. A combination of work commitments and poor overall focus led me to tackle the race early. This caused two problems: firstly, having decided on the shape of the race before confirmed runners and ground were known, I was blinded to the late swell of activity and betting moves for the winner Al Ferof. Secondly this meant I was unable to give Al Ferof due consideration and instead relied on an overall impression of him from last season. Whilst this is still probably accurate (I think) it meant he was not assessed in the context of this race and its super-weak field. This led to an improbable u-turn on the fav - whom I had raised considerable doubts about on these pages - due to the initial weighting of the race as poor and there being almost no alternatives (this in itself is often not the case of course). Whilst I didn't back Grand Crus for the race outright (he went into some small multi's instead) the lack of focus and desire/need to play the race early led to a poor conclusion. 

Hennessy Gold Cup

The above was compounded by a classical timing + analytical error in this race. In essence, this race boils down to Graded class ability v handicap (progression) ability. With a deluge of rain mid-week and the favourite Bob's Worth perhaps unlikely to run in such conditions (or if running on a bog) I again played the race ante-post and again it was unsuccessful. With deep ground the call was made to side with handicappers who had shown fair form and who might operate best over the trip. In terms of actual finishing positions the selections were good: taking away the top three who were all Graded class they finished in second and fourth (fifth & seventh). Whether the ground was in fact ever a concern for the analysis (class outs) is a kind of mute point as the ground dried significantly and the three Graded class horses ran through the deep end of the race to the line. With day of race conditions the decision not to side with fair handicappers would have been much easier but even here we have a key #error: "In essence, this race boils down to Graded class ability v handicap (progression) ability." so the correct play would have been one of each, a handicapper and one of the classy crop. Given I have continuing doubts as to the residual class and resolution of First Lieutenant then the winner could have been included in a strategy designed on ensuring an ROI. Strange as it sounds, I was happy to double-barrel the handicappers rather than take a more balanced approach which has to be noted for future runnings where the final decision is deemed marginal (which it was here during the downpours). This is also linked to the Likeliest Winner approach as covering all race scenarios leads to unwarranted numbers of bets on several horses in one race. The handicap picks were good; the approach to the race balance was not, ultimately leading to a poor conclusion.

December Gold Cup

Much less self-criticism required here as this was more than anything simply variance given my overall approach. A strategy I am very happy with is to rarely ever back 4yo's in big(ish) handicaps and to never back horses aged 12+. It simply rules out a lot of horses that return a miniscule win ratio. Of course there is a contra point that surely it is best to assess races on their individual merits and work from there and that is viable but I had already had a reversal in this race with a 5yo (as mentioned, Robinson Collonges) and despite Unioniste's "tougher" profile he was still a baby in my eyes! That overall explains why I said he "should be a million". Of course were it solely that it would be a slightly enigmatic approach but there was of course a very interesting candidate on paper that reminded me a little of Great Endeavour and it was a shame that Notus De La Tour developed a physical problem or just wasn't right on the day. Walkon has now finished second in both big intermediate handicaps. Analytical flaw? Quite the opposite and I am very happy to always field against this type of animal, for all that he has actually run quite well! He just hasn't looked like winning either race and for all the media coverage and shortness of price his profile is just neither progressive nor does he have performances of residual class in the bank following his time on the sidelines when injured. There is a good post on BST (not by me obviously) that shows the potential benefit for those who took Unioniste on merit rather than age. They'll win bad races like that now and then but little else outside of their own age group at that level.

The Betfair Chase was a quietly compelling race that was fine analytically with the winner pin-pointed. The real benefit was, potentially, doubling up the winner with Long Run in the King George. This is part of an overall strategy of pot control this season - to not get caught up in the here and now of any one race but also to maximise correct thinking across a number of races for a bigger return later down the line (should such longer term thinking bear fruit). This example gave 14/1 about Long Run on Boxing Day. The downside is not maximising the on-the-day win but in terms of the races highlighted here we can see that that's not a problem! Had they won though the potential for greater returns would kick in which is something I'm happy to pursue this season for a number of strategic reasons.

The Becher Chase saw another selected runner pulled up (this time with an abject display) but as a returning hero this is again more variance than anything else, particularly as the winner was a 14yo! West End Rocker remains well handicapped in part because he is just so impossible to be consistent with. Well, he may have the odd mental issue too. As an overall strategy he goes hand-in-hand with other returning heroes like Merigo and Always Waining and as such they will not always repeat win and this was a case in point. In theory the process was solid because had he performed then based on his demolition of Niche Market last season he would have accounted for a field led by the admirable but now retired (!) Hello Bud.

The fact that the four handicaps failed to produce a winner, whereas the Grade 1 contest proved accurate has personal ramifications. Handicaps are often best approached as late as possible when all information is known except in those circumstances where a horse has been tracked specifically with a certain race or conditions in mind. Handicaps in particular often take on different complexions as stable information is slowly revealed and certain runners come and go, with ground conditions assured (many times they are but this season has provided a good example of rapid change from stated/suspected descriptions). 

In contrast the abilities of graded horses can be more accurately defined from some way out: intentions are often clearer, preparations much more significant and traceable. In the Betfair for example, from a long way out it was made clear that Long Run would have a gentle introduction and that Silviniaco Conti was race-fit and firing on all cylinders for the race making assessment easy. 

Focus, patience and tactical betting all require further work with a keener eye kept on ROI policies, strange as that may sound: without an A-Game mentality analyses can wend a winding path leading to the kind of errors identified above.

Paul Stewart IronSpine Charity Challenge Gold Cup

Another big handicap set to be subject to rapid ground change presenting caution as the watchword. Anyway:

I remember backing Robinson Collonges in this a couple of years ago. He had looked all set to hammer Wishful Thinking in the Rising Stars at Wincanton but fell instead. Dotted up in a racecourse gallop afterwards to show well-being so the money went down. But he was a 5yo. He was traveling comfortably enough under Walsh but he hammered 3 out and that was it: taken out of his comfort zone he eased home 9th beaten 45 lengths. Tough ask for one so young. His form figures since that day perhaps reveal how hard a race he actually had overall: PP305P0.

Unioniste should be a million. Maybe his 2 - two - chase starts in this country have him prepared for the grueling mental and physical demands these types of handicaps place on very young horses. PN, you would think, knows otherwise and the Novices Chase entry seems far more sensible for the baby horse.

Walkon is interesting for a number of reasons, although he too I plain can't have. Quantitativeeasing was second in a rip-roaring (handicap-level-wise) renewal of the Paddy Power and came to this race and won a thriller of a top-class renewal (all-round). I'd suggest Walkon has neither the steeply progressive aspect nor the proven class in the bank to be effective as a bet option. Error? He did beat the uninspiring Zaynar at Exeter AND Notus De La Tour who was 3rd. NDLT was giving away 8lbs that day as a 5yo, and he was building slowly towards being a festival plot horse (I'd suggest). Now it's a 12lbs swing in NDLT's favour with Walkon exposed a) by being beaten 50L in 3 top class races before puling up in a Scottish National and b) not winning fresh with cut off 143 (now 5lbs higher).

Heavy rainfall would aid his chance however.

For me the race revolves around the Pipe stable and NDLT. Originally ear-marked as being well-forward and second up in the RPTV stable stars tour, the amount of concrete news on him has been meagre. Suggestions of slight hold-ups in training aside it seems a simpler case that Grand Crus was their Paddy Power horse and NDLT their December one. He went close to winning a G1 in soft ground before being sent off 5/2 for the Irish Arkle that Flemenstar took apart. NDLT led early and remained prominent for a long way until the winner's outrageous ability took over. They were perhaps finding out in part just how good their horse was but at the same time gaining a low-ish handicap mark and he duly turned up for the Byrne Group Plate as an 8/1 shot jumping three fences sweetly before lacking the appropriate landing gear on descent. 

NDLT had some high-level handicap hurdle form also and everything appears in place after a summer of further maturation for a huge run off a very feasible handicap mark in a weak renewal. Cristal Bonus could be the danger despite a stiff OR. Over to the Pipes!

Champion Hurdle 2013 - Grandouet

The 2012 Champion Hurdle really wasn't very good at all. The winner and second are honest prominent gallopers and another one of those, Celestial Halo, finished 9th after helping to set the pace. Oscars Well had the choke out as has been standard for him (fading into 6th) and Zarkandar, like Hurricane Fly, came to the race off only a 1-stop preparation, leaving them physically weak and unprepared. Binocular had finished 4.5L behind Overturn in the Fighting Fifth and, having beaten the winner in the Christmas Hurdle, drifted a further 2L behind Overturn in 4th in a more physically demanding race. Overturn himself is admirable and tough, in some ways like Binocular himself, without either being a hurdling star in any way (although many will argue Bincoular was on one occasion at least). 

Given the weak texture knitted by those runners Hurricane Fly could well have been below par and won or been second but he was a mile from match-fitness and failed to respond in the way he previously could as far out as the second last. Here though lies a clue as to the overall weakness of the race.

The pace had been good without being breakneck which is eminently sensible. The entire field were still clustered quite closely together until three and two out at which point Overturn and Rock on Ruby engaged a battling stream of turbo grind leaving the aging Binocular and the ill-prepared Hurricane Fly staring down a physical brick wall. By the last hurdle however the also-ran, pumped along and off the bridle, had closed up once more to be challenging without any prospect of getting past the tearaway two. 

 

This "slipping" of the field by Overturn and Rock on Ruby had everything to do with the physical ability and preparedness of the front two compared to the declining forces of the third and fourth and the troubled preparation of the fifth (and third). Running evenly to the line was simply enough in this race and Rock on Ruby - having lost to Binocular at Kempton in the manner of a resolute galloper - did that best. It was in fact Overturn who emerged with the best performance, however, having been 8L behind Rock On Ruby on that occasion and only 3.5L at HQ, trumping Binocular in the process. 

The International on Saturday should help to enlarge the picture as three main rivals clash (depending on the ground) but whatever the outcome of that race the 2013 Champion Hurdle is open and available to be taken apart by a horse with a little star quality and, excitingly, some real speed.

Ground dries, Class Outs..

For the second big handicap in a row the ground changed dramatically towards the end of the week rendering mid-week thoughts fairly limp. That's racing sometimes. Whether really deep ground would have altered the result is hard to say because the winner was very, very good and dossed in.

A pleasing aspect was that the two handicappers ran their races even though the class horses at the top occupied the front three positions. Hold On Julio hit the frame with some firms by sticking on for 5th - deeper ground would certainly have aided his cause as he was always struggling to get traction with the pace of the race. And that pace was set for a very long way by Fruity O'Rooney who ran a screamer in 7th still right there at the 3m point before fading late. He is small in stature but lion-hearted. Both horses should pick up a decent handicap this season and The Package deserves special mention for reproducing his Badger Ales run after just a 3-week break.

In contrast to his pace-making rival, First Lieutenant is a really big strong horse (not in the Giant/Slow Police Horse mould of a Joncol or Soll mind). He headed the field when his class got him further into the race than Fruity O'R but was it his heart or his stamina that wilted? His seventh defeat in a row ceding second place to Tidal Bay in receipt of 7lbs again suggests he struggles to find a way to win and is happiest following others home. 

Tidal Bay looks set for his best season ever with top-class runs imminent as a 12yo and a threat to all. Really? Well, no. There's no doubting the amazing work done by Paul Nicholls to 'work out' the mental nuances of the horse and unlock more of his physical capabilities than his previous trainer. Nonetheless the enigma remains and Tidal Bay has not found a way to win any of his last 11 chases at G1 or G2 level - his run-style alone makes improving that statistic a daunting task as he nears retirement but what a fine, charismatic horse he continues to be.

Bobs Worth won impressively off 160. He was getting weight off Tidal Bay but consideration must be given to the style and deep impression of his win, moving well and picking up the leaders comfortably before going away. His HQ record speaks for itself and he rightly moves to the head of the Gold Cup betting. As is fast becoming the norm, as few runs as possible before the festival is the preferred route and only one more run is planned. It will be interesting to see, come March, how he responds to running with G1 elite level runners such as Long Run, Silviniaco Conti and....?