Top-weights have the best record in this type of race especially when supported by a leading course trainer as one is here in Scudamore's Gunslinger.
Post race analysis: 12/1 was a nice price for a third horse so not a bad each-way bet but I singled this horse
out to win and therefore I need to address the result. First off, this was a Novies Handicap Hurdle which I was treating as a
regular handicap hurdle. The key to the profiler is getting a profile as specific to the race-type as possible and I do have
a general profile for Novices Handicap Hurdles which should have been consulted.
The NHH general profile states that 80% of these races are won by in-form stables. It states also that 80% of these races
are won by strong in-form jockeys or jockeys with a high vilume of wins at the course. It also states that 60% of the races are won
by middle-weights in the range of 10-7 to 11-5.
The trainer and jockey advice would have focused me on Apache Chant which was the second horse home in the end at 9/2.
However it would probably not have pointed me to the winner even though the winner did come from that middle-weight range.
So what could have pointed me to the winner?
Three main factors should have pointed me to the winner: 1. Weight. 2. Form. 3. Jockey.
First to weight: Always the first consideration in handicap hurdles and as we see above, this applies to Novices Handicap Hurdles too.
In a normal weight distribution race and by that I mean a race where the lowest weight is 10-0 and the top-weight is close to 12-0,
the sweet spot weight range is considered to be top-weight and middle-weight, specifically 10-10 to 11-3.
Five horses fell into those weight brackets here including my pick of the third horse and, more importantly, the winner. So
it's not bad practice to simply short list all horses that fall into the sweet spot weight range.
Once you have your short-list, in a general Handicap Hurdle you would look at some other things like distance wins and lightly handicapped
horses except this is different. This is a Novices Handicap Hurdle so it's not unreasonable to expect some of the traits more normally
seen in a Novices Hurdle to kick in. What do we know about Novices Hurdles? We know that form is key closely followed by jockey.
So how do we evaluate form? I talked a lot about this yesterday when I explained the 9PFF method. Of four
horses from our short-list of five that were previously placed, one is marginally better than the others on this rating system
since his previous place was a second compared to the other three who have been previously placed third. That horse came third today.
However, and somewhat contrary to what I said yesterday, I believe there to have been some significance here to the form last time out.
The evidence of the result certainly suggests this. For if we recognize that only three horses out of fourteen runners came second last time out and this
in a field BEREFT of previous winners and where all the well-weighted horses have no more than a single place in their past three runs
and that amongst these three were the winning horse, the second horse and the game fifth horse home, then surely this must suggest some
value to the last time out placing. So, if we now take the well-weighted short-list of five, keep in the 9PFF leader but also keep
in the horses with the best performance last-time out, we are now down to only three horses.
Of those three horses we finally look at the jockeys. Focusing on both the strong in-form jockeys and the leading course jockeys on
volume. Of our three horses, two have jockeys in this list. The winner and third horse here both had a jockey with a 13% strike rate at the
course but the jockey of the third horse had a better winning volume (I knew there was a reason I selected it!!). However, at this point,
when the short list was down to two, we have completed our task of identifying two horses to follow.
We can hypothesize and say that if more emphasis was given to form last time out over the other two key factors, we may have
zoomed-in on the winner alone. Moreover, we can say that if any horse among the leaders on performance last time out had been added
to the well-weighted short list, our final list of horses to follow would have included first, second and third (and fifth) horses
home. However, they would have been hard to seperate at that point as they all had good jockeys too.
Ultimately, I would favour a method that first short-listed the well-weighted horses. Next it would eliminate horses without recent placings
and horses without a leading jockey. Finally it would order itself first according to performance last time out then according to 9PFF.
Such a final list would have produced the winner and the third horse and importantly in the right order.