Draw Bias Stats

Draw Bias Stats

The draw can play a very important role in flat racing.

There are proven biases to certain stall positions over certain course and distances.

Dave Renham is renouned as on of the uk’s leading experts on Draw Bias.

One small element of his daily messages to clients at his Racing Trends service is a section detailing any significant draw bias for that day’s racing.

I have copied today’s Draw Bias section for you below.

If you are the sort who likes to think about their racing and who prefers to make your own mind up as to what to back or lay instead of just following a tipster you may find the RacingTrends service are great daily resource.

Packed full of well researched stats and info it can only help your decission making.

Contact me here at sports betting blog and I should be able to arrange a short free test period trial for you.

————————————————————-

 

DRAW SECTION – the stats are collated from studying 10+ runner handicaps. Each race is split into three – a top third of the draw, a middle third of the draw and a bottom third of the draw.

Course & distance (time) Bottom third win % Middle third win% Top third win%
Bath 5f (1.45) 10 0 90
Bath 5f161yds (5.40) 65 4 30
Chester 5f (1.40) 82 9 9
Chester 7f122yds (2.10, 5.35) 21 63 16
Doncaster 1m (1.50, 4.50) 27 36 36
Kempton aw 5f (5.50) 44 41 15
Kempton aw 1m (7.20) 37 33 29
Kempton aw 7f (9.20) 41 34 25
Newcastle 1m (2.00, 2.35) 38 31 31
Newcastle 6f (3.10) 19 30 52
Newcastle 5f (5.25) 37 21 42

Bath 5f (1.45) higher draws do best here as low draws tend to go off too quickly. There are only 10 races in this sample so the bias is not as strong as it looks!

Bath 5f161yds (5.40) high draws used to dominate, but it seems lower drawn runners go off at a more steady pace these days hence being more able to take advantage of the bend.

Chester 5f (1.40) low draws have a very significant edge over this C&D. The lower the draw the better.

Chester 7f122yds (2.10, 5.35) low draws are perceived to have an edge over this extended 7f, but the figures suggest this is not the case. The value lies with middle drawn horses.

Kempton aw 5f (5.50) low draws have the edge here with higher draws struggling.

Kempton aw 7f (9.20) high draws struggle a little over this distance. Low draws tend to have an advantage when the field size hits 13 runners or more.

Newcastle 6f (3.10) high draws do best and occasionally completely dominate races.

Newcastle 5f (5.25) low draws tend to have the edge, especially in bigger fields, or when the stalls are placed far side (low). However, in fields of 10-12 with the stalls placed stands side, high draws can have an edge.

 

 

 

 

Horse Running Style In National Hunt Racing

Most horses tend to exhibit a preference for a certain style of running.

You may for example have heard of horses being referred to as front runners or hold up horses.

Traditionally such thinking is applied more so to flat racing than National Hunt Racing. A classic good bet for example might be a front runner or a horse with proven early pace in a good draw at a highly biased sprint track where the bias is due to a tight bend. ie the horse has the early pace ability to maximise its draw advantage.

Such thinking of pace or running style is not often considered on National Hunt horses however.

Horse Racing Researcher Dave Renham from Racing Trends has put his nose to the grindstone and carried out some research.

Findings may surprise many.

——————————————————-

Pace / Running Styles in National Hunt Racing

Over the past year or two I have explored pace and running styles in much greater depth than I used to. The reason for this is simple – I believe this is an area where hard work and research can still gain you a betting edge over the majority of punters. Let me explain this in more detail:

For this piece I am going to split all the winners of the races studied into three distinct categories – horses that ran from the front early on in the race (front runners); horses that ran close to the pace early in the race (prominent runners); and horses that raced in midfield or at the back early in the race (hold up horses). Essentially, the position a horse takes up early in the race, tends to remain virtually the same for a good proportion of that race. For example, if a horse takes up a prominent position just behind the pace in the first two furlongs of say a 1m2f race, there is a strong chance that the horse will still be in a very similar position after 6-7f. In contrast, you don’t often see a horse lead for 2 furlongs, then drop back to the middle of the pack for 2 furlongs, then race just off the pace for 2 furlongs, then drop back to the middle again, etc, etc. Hence from a research point of view, the fact that a horses’ running style tends to stay consistent for around 75% of the race makes life much easier.

Taking the year 2008 as an example there were just over 6000 races on the flat in this country – the winning splits for the three pace categories were as follows:

Front runners won 20.2% of all races;

Prominent runners won 45% of all races;

Hold up horses won 34.8% of all races.

At first glance, one might be thinking therefore that prominent runners have an advantage. Well they have won more races than every other group right? However, to give more meaning to these figures we need to know what percentage of all the runners were a) front runners; b) prominent runners and c) hold up horses. Here are the percentages:

Front runners accounted for 11% of all runners;

Prominent runners accounted for 39.4% of all runners;

Hold up horses accounted for 49.6% of all runners.

These figures now reveal a powerful statistic – that front runners win nearly twice as many races as they statistically should do. In this particular year, they won 20.2% of all races having provided just 11% of all the total runners. Being more precise, they have won 1.84 times more often than their expected probability – their expected probability being 11%. Hence, taking a very general view, the best value in flat racing in terms of running styles/pace clearly lies with front runners. I could have chosen any year in the last 10 and you would have seen similar results.

Conversely, although hold up horses win nearly 35% of all races, they provide roughly 50% of the total runners. Hence, once again taking a very general view, hold up horses are clearly poor value from a pace/running styles perspective.

When looking in much greater depth at these ideas, one will find that an even greater edge can be found when looking at certain distances, and also at certain courses. All of my research, and hence all of my articles for that matter, have looked at this in flat racing only. However, the main focus for this article is pace/running styles in National hunt racing so let me move onto National Hunt racing.

Let us take the year 2008 again as my example, and as before, let me split all the winners of the races studied into the three distinct categories – front runners; prominent runners; hold up horses. In 2008 there were 3368 National hunt races in this country – the winning splits for the three pace categories were as follows:

Front runners won 17% of all races;

Prominent runners won 45.7% of all races;

Hold up horses won 37.3% of all races.

As before, we need to know what percentage of all the runners were a) front runners; b) prominent runners and c) hold up horses. Here are the percentages:

Front runners accounted for 10.2% of all runners;

Prominent runners accounted for 38% of all runners;

Hold up horses accounted for 51.8% of all runners.

Once again we can see that front runners seem to be the best value – there advantage may not be a strong as it is on the flat but essentially front runners in National hunt racing win 1.67 times more often than they statistically should. In addition, as with their flat counterparts, hold up horses perform relatively poorly when judged from this pace perspective.

For me, these figures open up a new world of possibilities in terms of my National hunt betting. Up to now, as I have already intimated, 99.9% of my pace research has been on the flat. However, although the ‘edge’ looks less strong in National hunt racing, it still looks a strong enough edge to research in considerable depth. Indeed, for the record, if you had managed to predict the front runner in every National hunt race of 2008, you would have made a profit of £35,000 to £100 level stakes to SP. Of course, this would have been impossible, unless you are Mystic Meg … lol, but what if you had bet ‘in running’ on every front runner, placing your bet within the first 10 seconds of each race? My educated guess is that you probably would still have made a profit and my reasoning is thus: although front runners often shorten in price at the beginning of a race, this contraction is offset by the fact that the Betfair price at the off is likely to be 10 to 25% bigger than the eventual SP. Hence even if the price contracts 10 to 25% in the first ten seconds, then you are still effectively getting SP, or near as damn it, on the horse in question. I appreciate that there is commission to be taken into account, and that the contraction in price for each horse will vary in percentage terms, but hopefully you see my point.

Dave Renham

————————————–

Dave Renham is a leading researcher into uk horse racing.

His RacingTrends service attracts thinking punters who can see the benefit of knowing more about horse racing cold hard facts and figures than the general crowds populating the betting Exchanges.

Draw Bias Explained

In flat racing the horses start the race from metal starting stalls.
The draw refers to a horse’s placing / position in the starting stalls.
Draw 1 is on the left, while the highest number is on the right.
On left handed round courses the lowest draw is drawn next to the inside rail;
on right handed courses the highest draw is drawn next to the inside rail.

The draw can be very important at certain courses over certain distances.

This is due to a number of factors – it could be that some horses have an
advantage because they are drawn on the inside and are hence able to
take the shortest route round the bend.
Picture I guess the 400m in athletics and the advantage you would
have on the inside track if starting positions were not staggered.

Another factor that can induce draw bias is the ground.
It could be that the ground close to one of the rails is quicker than the
rest of the course and hence those horse drawn in the right position can
take best advantage of the better ground.

To give you an idea of how strong draw biases can be ponder Chester over
5 furlongs. 5f at Chester is a classic case of a draw bias resulting from track configuration.

Since 1997 horses drawn 1 (on the inside) have won 43 of 205
races which is better than winning 1 race in every five.

You would have made a profit backing all horses drawn 1 over that period.
Compare this to horses drawn 10 or higher who have combined to win just 1 race from 276 runners!

Knowledge of where Draw Bias is likely to occur is very important to have.

Draw Bias stats can be used in a variety of ways.

Well drawn horses should be given much more consideration when analyzing a race for example.
Conversely poorly drawn horses have a severe negative to overcome and
you should be wary if you wish to back them. You may use the draw to
eliminate all the weaker drawn horses in order to make the race easier.

Clearly occasionally these poorer drawn horses will win but overall the stats
will be in your favour. At some courses backing the best drawn horse or best
two drawn horses has made a long term profit – this is a rather simplistic way
of using the draw but it can be profitable.

Indeed you may want to consider backing the best drawn horses in forecasts and tricasts.
For example, looking at Thirsk over 5 furlongs – from 2005 to 2008 in 10+ runner handicaps
(the best races to use draw bias) if you had permed the highest four draws in twenty four
£1 straight tricasts in every race would have yielded a profit of £1265.24 (ROI +175.7%).
If you had permed the highest four draws in twelve £1 straight forecasts in every race would
have yielded a profit of £206.90 (ROI +57.5%).
This bet would have been landed in 12 of the 30 races (40% of races).
These types of forecast / tricast bet offer big returns for a relatively small outlay.

A further way to use Draw Bias information is to look for horses that run well
despite being hampered by a very serious draw bias against it.

A horse that comes 4th for example when very badly drawn could do much better
in a future race if on an equal draw or favourorable draw footing.

Dave Renham

Author Bio:

Dave Renham is a uk horse racing researcher who specialises
in cold hard facts and figures that can be used to open your eyes
to more informed betting propositions.

Draw Bias relative to each days racing is one area he covers in his excellent daily racing stats service.  For more info on this click here ==> Draw Bias