2024 Champion Hurdle (Previously Constitution Hill thread)

[Lobos]

Paddy’s gone 5/1 for Con Hill to win the next 3 Champ Hurdles. I did call it in post 365 Lobos Sir.

I hate (genuinely) self aggrandising, but I really did feel that was absolutely the spot on price they’d offer. You really do need to have a feel for the bookmakers thoughts (to beat them) before they actually engage those thoughts. I felt strongly about my views on exactly how Con Hill would be priced up specifically.

Should be 10/1 to get to the next 3. it's that difficult to keep them sound, especially the top ones. It's a terrible price.

[Eggs]

Paddy’s gone 5/1 for Con Hill to win the next 3 Champ Hurdles. I did call it in post 365 Lobos Sir.

I hate (genuinely) self aggrandising, but I really did feel that was absolutely the spot on price they’d offer. You really do need to have a feel for the bookmakers thoughts (to beat them) before they actually engage those thoughts. I felt strongly about my views on exactly how Con Hill would be priced up specifically.

….fancy sitting on a paltry 5-1 for over 3 years, dependent on a fragile animal staying sound, maintaining the performance level and staying over hurdles for that long.

Wouldn’t be for me.

[Istabraq]

Was it a great Supreme?

MN 158 RPR for it, is decent, but not 5/2 Arkle Fav, maybe.

The only time he’s put up above 147, when he won a photo finish for the Royal Bond.

Im not against Marine Nationale, but I’m not bowled over with him, even if he were a bit bigger price for the Arkle.

I know someone very close to the game who has that exact same view, convinced that Mullins had overhyped Facile Vega all season.
Someone backed FV for the Turners the other day and said they didn't expect him to run there, personally think it's more likely he heads there than the Arkle especially if Mullins main Arkle weapon shows his hand early.

Back to Constitution Hill, I saw there was a boosted 5/4 he remains unbeaten all season, for those of who who can take advantage of this (and I suggest you do) it's with Sky but even their standard price of 4/5 has plenty of appeal.
I can't imagine you'll get much on but from memory a few in here played the market a regularly on the likes of Altior so you might get half decent stakes on................ before they close you down !

[Bollinger]

….fancy sitting on a paltry 5-1 for over 3 years, dependent on a fragile animal staying sound, maintaining the performance level and staying over hurdles for that long.

Wouldn’t be for me.

absolutely Eggs, and you’re spot on. You are.

The thing is, and the truth is, the 5/1 is just about spot on as a price too. 500 per cent interest back on your money if a single horse can stay fit (a very large majority of horses probably run over 5 successive festivals/ Grand Nationals anyway, despite us thinking otherwise) and not bump into another generational superstar.

I actually think here, you’re correct, and the bookies are just about right too.

[Quevega]

Was it a great Supreme?

MN 158 RPR for it, is decent, but not 5/2 Arkle Fav, maybe.

The only time he’s put up above 147, when he won a photo finish for the Royal Bond.

Im not against Marine Nationale, but I’m not bowled over with him, even if he were a bit bigger price for the Arkle.

Time will tell.
But the supreme was faster than the champion hurdle and on slower ground. 3lb weight difference
I think the racing post underestimated.
They certainly did on his Royal Bond effort.
A blind man could see he was miles better than the subsequent graded winners he beat that day.

edit- should add that champion hurdle actually 0.3 secs faster, officially. Point still stands though.

[Quevega]

Worth mentioning that Racing post have Constitution it’s highest ever RPR for a champion hurdle and vauban who was around 15lengths back in fourth got 160+
Go figure.
Cant access the times but I’d imagine under 4 minutes on Soft ground in the supreme is one of, if not the fastest on that ground. And he was only just starting.

Probably jump fences like a twat now !!

[Istabraq]

Worth mentioning that Racing post have Constitution it’s highest ever RPR for a champion hurdle and vauban who was around 15lengths back in fourth got 160+
Go figure.
Cant access the times but I’d imagine under 4 minutes on Soft ground in the supreme is one of, if not the fastest on that ground. And he was only just starting.

Probably jump fences like a twat now !!

There was plenty of discussion about the ground on Tuesday last year Q, many were saying it wasn't anywhere near as deep as was stated, and when Chemical Energy ran so well in the lucky last that suggestion could well have been proved right...

[Quevega]

There was plenty of discussion about the ground on Tuesday last year Q, many were saying it wasn't anywhere near as deep as was stated, and when Chemical Energy ran so well in the lucky last that suggestion could well have been proved right...

Yep
can only go on official readings as people will always have their own thoughts !!
going stick was 5.1 on hurdle course which is definitely soft. Chase course was definitely slightly better ground.

Using one horses performance like chemical energy as evidence to the contrary is “with respect” daft. He ran on different course and 4 hours later anyhoo

Theres no scientific gravitas behind how fast chemical energy runs in different ground conditions.

some look at times and work backwards but even this is guesswork to a point.

He ran around the same time as the best ever according to racing post. Which IMO means they are Guessing as much as the next man.

[Istabraq]

Using one horses performance like chemical energy as evidence to the contrary is “with respect” daft. He ran on different course and 4 hours later anyhoo

Theres no scientific gravitas behind how fast chemical energy runs in different ground conditions.

Yeah, I use that example as there was talk of Chemical Energy being pulled because of the ground leading up to the week, connections were obviously happy he could run well, similarly I'm sure they are plenty of deep ground horses who also ran well on what was believed to be preferred ground...

[Outlaw]

Was it a great Supreme?

MN 158 RPR for it, is decent, but not 5/2 Arkle Fav, maybe.

The only time he’s put up above 147, when he won a photo finish for the Royal Bond.

Im not against Marine Nationale, but I’m not bowled over with him, even if he were a bit bigger price for the Arkle.

I was vocal last year about the “average crop” of novice hurdlers especially at 2M. It created a decent debate/argument(opinions always welcome), I still stand by that & id argue the price of MN is because he was the best of an average bunch and what will come out chasing that wasn’t on the hurdle scene etc.

Facile Vega as he was constantly hyped so much(unusually so) by his master trainer created this illusion he was already a 160+ hurdler in waiting & thus some they rated things around him higher than they should & many bought into it. He’s not a bad horse, not at all but far from what Superstar he was”destined” to be.

[Bollinger]

….fancy sitting on a paltry 5-1 for over 3 years, dependent on a fragile animal staying sound, maintaining the performance level and staying over hurdles for that long.

Wouldn’t be for me.

I would agree mostly in the fact that it doesn’t hold much appeal, 30 months out, as a value investment. And not one that would necessarily interest me (he was 11/2 on the 18th Jan earlier this year to win just the ‘23 & ‘24 versions).

However, if, like me, you see betting as actually investing money for ‘potential’ profits, and as a mark up on your initial investment then consider this opinion from me.

A bank manager sits you down and suggests you investing some of your capital into an ISA. It’s awarding five per cent interest on the proviso that you can’t touch your capital for a year to earn the tax free benefits.

or

You can take that exact same amount of ‘monetary capital’ and ‘invest’ it on a horse to win 3 successive races. The interest on your capital is ONE HUNDRED times that of your first option, and over an extra 18 months duration. There will be small risks attached, and a touch of luck attached with it. But, the interest on your investment is at five hundred per cent.

Option A - No risk, 12 month outlay for five percent interest return (given the current ISA market products)

Option B - Small risks attached, 30 month outlay, for 100x the profits on investment of option A, using a once in a generation horse as the chess piece.

So whilst I agree that 5/1, on initial glance looks unappetising and potentially wasteful …….as an actual investment on ‘interest on your capital’, dependant on your sense of judging value, then 5/1 with risks attached might actually be very fair value.


I always look at ante post markets, especially investing 6-18 months out, in this specific way.

[jono]

Personally I'm not too concerned about the level of last years Supreme.
In relation to either past renewals or say the Champion Hurdle, and how good the winner is from that.
It would be a bigger consideration were the Ballymore horses to come into the Arkle recognition, or going from novice to open company.

The Arkle prices are relative to the horses that contested the Supreme.
With what looks like very few new formlines to come into the race.

Taking out the State Man and Impaire et Passe from the market and the top 3 in the market has the 1st, 2nd and 4th from the Supreme.
How good the Supreme was may not particularly matter if the same horses contest the Arkle 12 months later.
No Ballymore horses will line up in the race.

There are of course a few horses who do bring different form lines into the market, at bigger prices.
The much discussed Mister Policeman, Hercule du Seuil, Hunters Yarn etc.
And if you do consider the Supreme to not quite be as good as some suggest, that's when it may be best to look completely elsewhere, like those mentioned above.

[Quevega]

I would agree mostly in the fact that it doesn’t hold much appeal, 30 months out, as a value investment. And not one that would necessarily interest me (he was 11/2 on the 18th Jan earlier this year to win just the ‘23 & ‘24 versions).

However, if, like me, you see betting as actually investing money for ‘potential’ profits, and as a mark up on your initial investment then consider this opinion from me.

A bank manager sits you down and suggests you investing some of your capital into an ISA. It’s awarding five per cent interest on the proviso that you can’t touch your capital for a year to earn the tax free benefits.

or

You can take that exact same amount of ‘monetary capital’ and ‘invest’ it on a horse to win 3 successive races. The interest on your capital is ONE HUNDRED times that of your first option, and over an extra 18 months duration. There will be small risks attached, and a touch of luck attached with it. But, the interest on your investment is at five hundred per cent.

Option A - No risk, 12 month outlay for five percent interest return (given the current ISA market products)

Option B - Small risks attached, 30 month outlay, for 100x the profits on investment of option A, using a once in a generation horse as the chess piece.

So whilst I agree that 5/1, on initial glance looks unappetising and potentially wasteful …….as an actual investment on ‘interest on your capital’, dependant on your sense of judging value, then 5/1 with risks attached might actually be very fair value.


I always look at ante post markets, especially investing 6-18 months out, in this specific way.

Option B is an 83% chance you lose all your money
not really small risks as you describe in your example.

Comparing banking with betting is foolhardy as value in betting is getting better odds than the probability.

In this case 5-1 is poor value. IMO

[Istabraq]

Personally I'm not too concerned about the level of last years Supreme.
In relation to either past renewals or say the Champion Hurdle, and how good the winner is from that.
It would be a bigger consideration were the Ballymore horses to come into the Arkle recognition, or going from novice to open company.

The Arkle prices are relative to the horses that contested the Supreme.
With what looks like very few new formlines to come into the race.

Taking out the State Man and Impaire et Passe from the market and the top 3 in the market has the 1st, 2nd and 4th from the Supreme.
How good the Supreme was may not particularly matter if the same horses contest the Arkle 12 months later.
No Ballymore horses will line up in the race.

There are of course a few horses who do bring different form lines into the market, at bigger prices.
The much discussed Mister Policeman, Hercule du Seuil, Hunters Yarn etc.
And if you do consider the Supreme to not quite be as good as some suggest, that's when it may be best to look completely elsewhere, like those mentioned above.

Not alot that can be argued there...

[Bollinger]

Option B is an 83% chance you lose all your money
not really small risks as you describe in your example.

Comparing banking with betting is foolhardy as value in betting is getting better odds than the probability.

In this case 5-1 is poor value. IMO

Yep, it’s an interesting one isn’t it Q?

What I’d like to ask you, and your opinion, is if you were a bookmaker and a punter walked in with a very serious wedge of money and asked you to take half hour out to price up (sensibly) the odds of Constitution Hill winning the next 3 Champ Hurdles over the next 30 months period of time, what price would you like to lay that as a liability ??

The 3 key components which will contribute to your decision making for the price -

1) Constitution Hill is unbeaten. As both a ‘juvenile’ in his races, and in open company in his races, he hasn’t received as much a flick of the reigns from his jockey, and has appeared to just strongly canter over his 2 mile distance. He is unbeaten on the course. His grade 1’ wins at the festival were over a combined 30+ lengths over Jonbon & State Man - two very good horses. Both horses still finished 2nd. The trainer has confirmed that this will be the horses ‘route’ going forwards.

2) The horse might get injured (presenty & historically, his injury record over 24 months is blemish free).The horse may encounter another ‘once in a generation’ horse during those 3 Champion Hurdies, and be inferior, and lose to that horse.

3) As a bookmaker, you currently have him priced at 1/2 for ‘part 1 of 3 of the event’i in six months time.


What price would you offer as a bookmaker as a liability towards yourself Q? Not as what you think you should be getting as a punter, but you as a bookmaker would offer?

I called it on here a week ago as 5/1, because I genuinely felt that was Con Hill’s liability for the next 30 months.

Yours as a bookmaker, of course, might be a touch different. Fully appreciated.