Class/form horses

[Tufnel]

If you think about it, not that hard for an habitual liar like VDW, to make a back-fitted case for the horses mentioned after they had won.

With direct reference to the Zilzal/Braashee races, I wonder how many have actually gone to the trouble of evaluating the whole Ascot card for that day?

Given that VDW said it was about sorting the card out when talking about those 2 selections, I think it's worth doing, especially as it was a very valuable card and surely plenty would be out to try and win.

There were also only 2 handicaps on the card. The first race was a 496 handicap over 7f with no class droppers and only 2 last tine out winners who had won a class 62 and 52 race between them. The top 3 on last class were class 358 6f 28th, 248 5.5f BD and a 229 7f 4th who was the 7/2 fav in the race at Ascot. He finished 5th with 9-10.

Compared to the handicap Braashee was in, the class/form picture is very different. Far more positive.

 

[Chesham]

This is a fantastic example of a classic handicapping trap. If you look strictly at the official handicap and the math, Cossack Guard had every reason to reverse the form at Ascot. Instead, he was thoroughly beaten.

Here is exactly why Braashee was able to defeat Cossack Guard so comprehensively the second time around, despite the conditions appearing to favor the loser.

The Weight Swing Paradox​

At Newbury, these two 3-year-olds raced off level weights (9-5) and identical Official Ratings (95). Braashee barely edged it, winning by a neck.

Just seven days later at Ascot, the weights shifted dramatically:

Metric	Newbury (Sep 23)	Ascot (Sep 30)
Braashee Weight	9-5	9-4 (carried penalty)
Cossack Guard Weight	9-5	8-11
Net Advantage	Level	Cossack Guard (+7 lbs)
Braashee TS (Speed)	102	114
Cossack Guard TS (Speed)	102	98

Cossack Guard was handed a massive 7-pound pull in the weights. In handicapping theory, 7 pounds over 1m4f is more than enough to overturn a neck margin. However, the weight swing was entirely negated by race flow and physical recovery.

1. The 7-Day "Bounce" Factor​

Both horses wheeled back on exactly seven days' rest, but they ran very different races at Newbury.

At Newbury, Cossack Guard did the heavy lifting. He pressed prominently (3rd into the straight) and committed early, leading from 3 furlongs out before getting caught late. Pushing the pace over 1m 5½f takes a massive physical toll. Braashee, conversely, was held up and pounced late—a much smoother, less taxing trip.

When they met at Ascot seven days later, Cossack Guard clearly "bounced" (regressed due to fatigue). His Timeform Speed (TS) dropped from 102 to 98, while Braashee moved massively forward.

2. Pace Mapping and Race Flow​

The tactical setup at Ascot was a disaster for Cossack Guard.

• Newbury (1m 5½f): Cossack Guard was able to comfortably secure a prominent spot and dictate his own rhythm.
• Ascot (1m 4f): Dropping back a furlong and a half into a chaotic 17-runner field completely changed the pace dynamic. With fast early fractions set by Bay Bird and Roushayd, Cossack Guard was outpaced ("Never near to challenge").

When a prominent runner is denied their preferred tactical spot on the front end—especially when already fatigued from a race 7 days prior—they often throw in the towel. Braashee's closing style, on the other hand, was perfectly suited to sit back, let the front-runners collapse, and pick up the pieces.

3. Trajectory and Class​

Ultimately, Braashee was simply a much better horse rapidly climbing through the ranks. While Cossack Guard had likely hit his ceiling as a handicapper, Braashee was progressing into a Group-caliber stayer. His TS exploding from a 102 to a 114 at Ascot is the signature of a 3-year-old taking a massive developmental leap that no amount of weight advantage from a rival could stop.

 

[Tufnel]

A bad start to the day at Galway. Pivotal Attack wins there again and re-reverses form with Black Cavair Gold who never raised a leg from the off and finished well back. The only thing I got right was that the fav was not a good fav. Unfortunately picked the wrong one to beat it on the day. The only thing I could add is that perhaps I let the track factor go and put too much emphasis on allowing BCG the pass of it being her first ever run when PA beat her at the Galway meeting last year?

 

[Tufnel]

This is a fantastic example of a classic handicapping trap. If you look strictly at the official handicap and the math, Cossack Guard had every reason to reverse the form at Ascot. Instead, he was thoroughly beaten.

Here is exactly why Braashee was able to defeat Cossack Guard so comprehensively the second time around, despite the conditions appearing to favor the loser.

The Weight Swing Paradox​

At Newbury, these two 3-year-olds raced off level weights (9-5) and identical Official Ratings (95). Braashee barely edged it, winning by a neck.

Just seven days later at Ascot, the weights shifted dramatically:

Metric	Newbury (Sep 23)	Ascot (Sep 30)
Braashee Weight	9-5	9-4 (carried penalty)
Cossack Guard Weight	9-5	8-11
Net Advantage	Level	Cossack Guard (+7 lbs)
Braashee TS (Speed)	102	114
Cossack Guard TS (Speed)	102	98

Cossack Guard was handed a massive 7-pound pull in the weights. In handicapping theory, 7 pounds over 1m4f is more than enough to overturn a neck margin. However, the weight swing was entirely negated by race flow and physical recovery.

1. The 7-Day "Bounce" Factor​

Both horses wheeled back on exactly seven days' rest, but they ran very different races at Newbury.

At Newbury, Cossack Guard did the heavy lifting. He pressed prominently (3rd into the straight) and committed early, leading from 3 furlongs out before getting caught late. Pushing the pace over 1m 5½f takes a massive physical toll. Braashee, conversely, was held up and pounced late—a much smoother, less taxing trip.

When they met at Ascot seven days later, Cossack Guard clearly "bounced" (regressed due to fatigue). His Timeform Speed (TS) dropped from 102 to 98, while Braashee moved massively forward.

2. Pace Mapping and Race Flow​

The tactical setup at Ascot was a disaster for Cossack Guard.

• Newbury (1m 5½f): Cossack Guard was able to comfortably secure a prominent spot and dictate his own rhythm.
• Ascot (1m 4f): Dropping back a furlong and a half into a chaotic 17-runner field completely changed the pace dynamic. With fast early fractions set by Bay Bird and Roushayd, Cossack Guard was outpaced ("Never near to challenge").

When a prominent runner is denied their preferred tactical spot on the front end—especially when already fatigued from a race 7 days prior—they often throw in the towel. Braashee's closing style, on the other hand, was perfectly suited to sit back, let the front-runners collapse, and pick up the pieces.

3. Trajectory and Class​

Ultimately, Braashee was simply a much better horse rapidly climbing through the ranks. While Cossack Guard had likely hit his ceiling as a handicapper, Braashee was progressing into a Group-caliber stayer. His TS exploding from a 102 to a 114 at Ascot is the signature of a 3-year-old taking a massive developmental leap that no amount of weight advantage from a rival could stop.

Good points. Though I tend to think it was more a case of Braashee simply being on a huge upward curve of improvement. He was unraced at 2. Started out at 3 over 9f going up to 12f in decent track maidens to get handicapped. Odds on winner of a 10f maiden on 4th run then whacked up in class in his first handicap over 13.5f and sent off one of the 7/1 favs to beat Cossack Guard in the race before dropping back to Ascot at 12f.

He made headway to go past CG at Newbury and maintained that advantage for at least a furlong. CG was fairly exposed with just a maiden win at 3 having already had 6 races before including 3 at 2yo without success (typical Clive Brittain type).

After that maiden win he was 8/1 in the Ebor over 14f when 6th in the straight, making no headway in the last 2 furlongs and remaining 6th at the finish. The VDW comment "the horse did nothing from the distance" attributed to one of Shimshek's races springs to mind. CG was then dropped in class at Newbury while Braashee was going up, which seemed to be a positive trait VDW looked for.

There were actually 5 horses in the Ascot race coming from the Newbury one.

 

[JennyK]

Good to see you posting again, T Tufnel.

re number of bets, it is reasonable to expect that VDW, knowing his approach and having confidence in it, would find more bets than someone trying to get to grips with the approach.

This month so far, and of course just one day to go, I have analysed sixty races, and did about the same number in both May and June, so on average around two a day. Apart from the occasional dabble on something speculative (like Adrestia at Goodwood on Tuesday, mentioned on this thread) over the three months I have yet to find more than two bets in any week. Last week just the one for which I put up a pre-race assessment on this thread, and so far this week just one, so typical weeks. I expect both VDW and Lee would have found more bets from the races I've analysed, but they both knew more about applying the approach than I do.

 

[Tufnel]

Good to see you posting again, T Tufnel.

re number of bets, it is reasonable to expect that VDW, knowing his approach and having confidence in it, would find more bets than someone trying to get to grips with the approach.

This month so far, and of course just one day to go, I have analysed sixty races, and did about the same number in both May and June, so on average around two a day. Apart from the occasional dabble on something speculative (like Adrestia at Goodwood on Tuesday, mentioned on this thread) over the three months I have yet to find more than two bets in any week. Last week just the one for which I put up a pre-race assessment on this thread, and so far this week just one, so typical weeks. I expect both VDW and Lee would have found more bets from the races I've analysed, but they both knew more about applying the approach than I do.

Thanks JennyK

I'm presuming you are still concentrating on sprint handicaps? I wonder if you had Badri as the class/form horse at Pontefract on the same evening you had Strike Red as class/form at Hamilton?

 

[JennyK]

Yes, sprint handicaps and a few of the more prestigious longer Flat handicaps (I'll be having a go at the mile handicap at Goodwood tomorrow). And yes, Badri was the class/form horse in the race to which you refer.

 

[Sullybomb]

Yes, sprint handicaps and a few of the more prestigious longer Flat handicaps (I'll be having a go at the mile handicap at Goodwood tomorrow). And yes, Badri was the class/form horse in the race to which you refer.

Be interested to see what you come up with JennyK prior to the race tomorrow.

 

[JennyK]

The Golden Mile (3.00 Goodwood)

Assuming I haven't miscalculated, the VDW ability rating ranking is:

Bunyola Bay	496
Godwinson	307
Classic	299
Blue Brother	283
English Oak	276
Ebts Guard	251
Two Tempting	244
Indalo	204
Archivist	186
Ancient Rome	184
Mister Winston	178
Darkness	174
Ozat	100
Cerulean Bay	99
Beagle Bay	96
Tribal Chief	82
Hawksbill	65
Walsingham	57
Scoville	55

 

[JennyK]

I have to post this separately because I can't work out how to add text below the table in my previous one.

Process-wise, the next steps are:

1) To judge whether any of the ratings seem to be clearly too high (the four where this might be the case are the 3yo and the three oldest horses).

2) To apply VDW's form status rating method so that for each runner the designation is "form" horse or not, by focusing on last three runs and "exposed" form.

3) To look for "less obvious form" where a horse is not a "form" horse under (2). (Had Rhoscolyn been running he would not have been a "form" horse under (2) but a "form" horse by virtue of "less obvious form".)

4) To check the top ability-rated "form" horse, whether by virtue of (2) or (3) above, in respect of conditions (distance, going, course type and weight). If that horse is okay conditions-wise, he or she is the class/form horse. If not, check the second top ability-rated "form" horse similarly and, as necessary, so on down.

5) To assess whether the class/form horse is one that should be backed ie has what VDW described as "winner in the race" characteristics. (He said that for him that included less than 20% of class/form horses.)

Unless this evening my expert fixes a problem we are experiencing downloading cards from the Life site, I can't start until I receive the Excel file for tomorrow's cards from UK racing data, which normally arrives between 6.00am and 7.00am.

 

[Chesham]

 

[DuckandDive]

Just for fun, here's a comparison of an alternative AR using pawras data tables previously mentioned.

 

[Leodis]

That's it. Is 4 bets on a day such as today too many?

I don't know for certain. But I have to do my utmost to stick rigidly to these bets and not wander off in search of more in the face of the outcome. Good or especially otherwise.

Welcome back T Tufnel . I would recommend reading the main, Eric Bowers thread - a good lesson in temperament and limiting races to study.

Regards

 

[Leodis]

Leodis

You and Nellsman prefer alternatives but I'd be surprised if either of you were sufficiently confident to take them at face value with never any further consideration.

That's correct, JennyK . As you may have seen, one of my AI models does the heavy lifting for me in gauging how transferable tha ability rating is under 'today's' conditions.

Have you thought about doing an ability rating for place money, to see if the wins version stacks up?