Tweet
GEEGEEZ
3.10 HENNESSY GOLD CUP CHASE (HANDICAP) GRADE 3 (CLASS 1)
The big one. A proper race. A race won by some real star names down the years, and some real favourites too. Double Denman delight was added to by hugely popular triumphs from Diamond Harry and Carruthers in the last five years alone, and casting the eye further back through the archives, there’s the charge of the dashing greys: Teeton Mill, One Man. And that all many years after the formative renewals gave us such illustrious alumni as Mandarin, Mill House and Arkle himself.
Yep, this is a proper race won by proper horses. And this year, as with all years, it will be a proper test.
There are stats aplenty, and those which I consider to be pertinent I’ve alluded to below.
Twelve of the last fifteen winners finished in the top three last time out. Another two failed to complete. Horses who finished, but missed the podium, will find it hard to get onto my ticket.
Diamond Edge, in 1981, was the last horse older than nine to win this. Before him, only mighty Mandarin and Rondetto could match that feat. Three double-digit aged winners since its inauguration in 1957 is a measly return, and must count against Tidal Bay, Roberto Goldback and Lion Na Bearnai, irrespective of any hope the form book proffers.
Indeed, six- to eight-year-olds have won twenty of the last 23 runnings of the Hennessy, and that looks an eminently sensible range in which to focus.
Yes, weight stops trains, as the hackneyed (often by me) old cliché goes. But there has been a strange trend in this race in recent years for the better horses (identified by them lugging more lead) prevailing. Eight of the last eleven winners carried at least ten stone twelve pounds, notwithstanding that the last two Hennessy Gold Cups were snaffled by lower weighted horses.
Look more closely at that, mind, and you’ll see that when Diamond Harry carried ten stone to victory, it was because Denman – then rated 182 – was stopping all but four of the other seventeen runners from racing in the handicap proper. [Incidentally, that magnificent Denman finished third under his knee-knocking burden].
To put that into context, if Denman was in the race this year off 182, Tidal Bay would be next in off 10-08 and all bar the top quartet in the weights would be out of the handicap. Good old Denman.
So, I’m inclined to say that 10-12 is a reasonable cut-off from a class perspective, with no such hugely rated beast in the contest. Moreover, it’s seven years since a horse rated shy of 145 bagged this, and I’d imagine in a few days time, we’ll be saying it’s eight years since.
Six of the last fifteen winners were making their seasonal bow, and a further eight had raced within the last month. Only one winner fell within that no man’s land of summer jumping/early season debut; and none had triumphed after more than a year off the track.
Those then are the parameters within which my wagering cloth will be cut. And it sets the confines of punting options fairly specifically too. In essence, I’m looking for a young horse at the top of the handicap.
If I let Hold On Julio beat me, which I will if he’s good enough, I have just Bobs Worth and First Lieutenant on my side. Their form is joined at the hip through the RSA Chase, where Bobs wrested first from First by a couple of lengths around Cheltenham’s gruelling fields of glory.
A literal interpretation then leaves nothing between them, meaning that getting thrice the price on the Lieutenant stands out to a bargain hunter like your humble scribbler. Now it’s true that FL does have something of a frustrating habit of taking a minor medal. But he’s plenty of form on soft ground, whereas Bobs Worth has never raced on slower than good to soft.
That is not to say, of course, that Bobs won’t go on the ground: merely that you’d be taking a chance that he will. And 4/1 doesn’t allow for too much latitude on such a score, even before we’ve considered how match fit he is and how much of an appetite for a potential season-buggering scrap connections will have.
Some might argue that FL hasn’t won over this sort of trip, but that’s a redundant line of enquiry in my book, on the basis that he’s beaten all bar Bobs in the RSA over three and a bit miles of a tougher terrain than Newbury’s. Moreover, he’s ‘silvered’ twice more in Grade 1 company over three miles, at Down Royal last time out and at Leopardstown. Yes, this is a bit further, but I doubt it will be non-staying that does for him.
No, First Lieutenant looks like the value call to me, seconditis or not.
If we don’t take the First Left, then which direction might lead us to a stats-busting winner?
Well, I’d be siding with a horse with a touch of class, which maybe has hidden its formerly lustrous light under a bushel recently. Step forward, 2010 winner, Diamond Harry.
Harry loves, loves, loves it round here. A track record of 111311 says much and, when you consider the 3 was when trying to lower Big Buck’s’ colours (careless? Reckless? You decide), and only failing by six lengths, it’s easy to get excited by his chance.
Even more so when you look at Harry’s boggy ground form. On going soft or softer, his form figures read 1111131. We know all about the 3 from that last para, so why oh why is our ‘Arry a 25/1 poke?!
The answer is simple, and in two parts. Firstly, and crucially, his last three form figures are all letters, rather than numbers. Indeed, they’re all P’s, a form figure which is almost universally disliked amongst punters (and, normally, for good reason).
Secondly, I believe this price highlights the chronic almost omnipresent recency bias in bookmakers’ odds. Now, don’t get me wrong, bookies make markets and react to punter preferences. That’s how it must be.
But fielding against recency bias may be the last great bastion of generally available value in horse racing betting. Quite simply, Diamond Harry should be no bigger than 14/1 or thereabouts.
Yes, he’s been poor in his last three runs, two of them in Grade 1 chases (the feature chases at Cheltenham’s and Aintree’s spring Festivals no less), and the last after seven months off the track, and all on quicker than ideal ground. And yes, before that, he was ‘only’ fifth in a Grade 2 at Cheltenham.
But his Cheltenham record of 113P5P is not his Newbury record of 111311.
Let me put it another way. If you were looking at his past performances page, without recourse to that stupid misleading string of digits next to the horse’s name in the paper; if you were looking at his preferences instead of his price; could you possibly make him a 25/1 shot?
If you could, then you’ll not be backing him, and fair enough. Otherwise, shouldn’t you at least have a throwaway saver on Harry, ‘just in case’?
There’s no doubt that he might be ‘gone at the game’, and it’s something of a binary bet, inasmuch as he’ll probably either win or pull up. But at 25/1, we can afford to be speculative where we can’t at 4/1.
Enough of Harry, Diamond that he is. What of the rest?
Well, in my view, The Package had a hard enough race three weeks ago and might not want it too soft; Frisco Depot is a dodgy jumper with a League One (relatively) jockey; Harry The Viking surely wants it quicker; Soll is taking a massive step up in class, but could surprise; Alfie Spinner will do extremely well to repel all from the front here; and Saint Are wouldn’t want the mud.
One other worth a mention is Magnanimity, a horse which has cost me plenty down the years. He loves it soft, he stays and he has a feather weight. I won’t be backing him, but he has a slightly better chance than his odds imply, to my eye at least.
Selection: First Lieutenant e/w
Best Outsider: Diamond Harry
Dangers: Bobs Worth, Magnanimity
3.10 HENNESSY GOLD CUP CHASE (HANDICAP) GRADE 3 (CLASS 1)
The big one. A proper race. A race won by some real star names down the years, and some real favourites too. Double Denman delight was added to by hugely popular triumphs from Diamond Harry and Carruthers in the last five years alone, and casting the eye further back through the archives, there’s the charge of the dashing greys: Teeton Mill, One Man. And that all many years after the formative renewals gave us such illustrious alumni as Mandarin, Mill House and Arkle himself.
Yep, this is a proper race won by proper horses. And this year, as with all years, it will be a proper test.
There are stats aplenty, and those which I consider to be pertinent I’ve alluded to below.
Twelve of the last fifteen winners finished in the top three last time out. Another two failed to complete. Horses who finished, but missed the podium, will find it hard to get onto my ticket.
Diamond Edge, in 1981, was the last horse older than nine to win this. Before him, only mighty Mandarin and Rondetto could match that feat. Three double-digit aged winners since its inauguration in 1957 is a measly return, and must count against Tidal Bay, Roberto Goldback and Lion Na Bearnai, irrespective of any hope the form book proffers.
Indeed, six- to eight-year-olds have won twenty of the last 23 runnings of the Hennessy, and that looks an eminently sensible range in which to focus.
Yes, weight stops trains, as the hackneyed (often by me) old cliché goes. But there has been a strange trend in this race in recent years for the better horses (identified by them lugging more lead) prevailing. Eight of the last eleven winners carried at least ten stone twelve pounds, notwithstanding that the last two Hennessy Gold Cups were snaffled by lower weighted horses.
Look more closely at that, mind, and you’ll see that when Diamond Harry carried ten stone to victory, it was because Denman – then rated 182 – was stopping all but four of the other seventeen runners from racing in the handicap proper. [Incidentally, that magnificent Denman finished third under his knee-knocking burden].
To put that into context, if Denman was in the race this year off 182, Tidal Bay would be next in off 10-08 and all bar the top quartet in the weights would be out of the handicap. Good old Denman.
So, I’m inclined to say that 10-12 is a reasonable cut-off from a class perspective, with no such hugely rated beast in the contest. Moreover, it’s seven years since a horse rated shy of 145 bagged this, and I’d imagine in a few days time, we’ll be saying it’s eight years since.
Six of the last fifteen winners were making their seasonal bow, and a further eight had raced within the last month. Only one winner fell within that no man’s land of summer jumping/early season debut; and none had triumphed after more than a year off the track.
Those then are the parameters within which my wagering cloth will be cut. And it sets the confines of punting options fairly specifically too. In essence, I’m looking for a young horse at the top of the handicap.
If I let Hold On Julio beat me, which I will if he’s good enough, I have just Bobs Worth and First Lieutenant on my side. Their form is joined at the hip through the RSA Chase, where Bobs wrested first from First by a couple of lengths around Cheltenham’s gruelling fields of glory.
A literal interpretation then leaves nothing between them, meaning that getting thrice the price on the Lieutenant stands out to a bargain hunter like your humble scribbler. Now it’s true that FL does have something of a frustrating habit of taking a minor medal. But he’s plenty of form on soft ground, whereas Bobs Worth has never raced on slower than good to soft.
That is not to say, of course, that Bobs won’t go on the ground: merely that you’d be taking a chance that he will. And 4/1 doesn’t allow for too much latitude on such a score, even before we’ve considered how match fit he is and how much of an appetite for a potential season-buggering scrap connections will have.
Some might argue that FL hasn’t won over this sort of trip, but that’s a redundant line of enquiry in my book, on the basis that he’s beaten all bar Bobs in the RSA over three and a bit miles of a tougher terrain than Newbury’s. Moreover, he’s ‘silvered’ twice more in Grade 1 company over three miles, at Down Royal last time out and at Leopardstown. Yes, this is a bit further, but I doubt it will be non-staying that does for him.
No, First Lieutenant looks like the value call to me, seconditis or not.
If we don’t take the First Left, then which direction might lead us to a stats-busting winner?
Well, I’d be siding with a horse with a touch of class, which maybe has hidden its formerly lustrous light under a bushel recently. Step forward, 2010 winner, Diamond Harry.
Harry loves, loves, loves it round here. A track record of 111311 says much and, when you consider the 3 was when trying to lower Big Buck’s’ colours (careless? Reckless? You decide), and only failing by six lengths, it’s easy to get excited by his chance.
Even more so when you look at Harry’s boggy ground form. On going soft or softer, his form figures read 1111131. We know all about the 3 from that last para, so why oh why is our ‘Arry a 25/1 poke?!
The answer is simple, and in two parts. Firstly, and crucially, his last three form figures are all letters, rather than numbers. Indeed, they’re all P’s, a form figure which is almost universally disliked amongst punters (and, normally, for good reason).
Secondly, I believe this price highlights the chronic almost omnipresent recency bias in bookmakers’ odds. Now, don’t get me wrong, bookies make markets and react to punter preferences. That’s how it must be.
But fielding against recency bias may be the last great bastion of generally available value in horse racing betting. Quite simply, Diamond Harry should be no bigger than 14/1 or thereabouts.
Yes, he’s been poor in his last three runs, two of them in Grade 1 chases (the feature chases at Cheltenham’s and Aintree’s spring Festivals no less), and the last after seven months off the track, and all on quicker than ideal ground. And yes, before that, he was ‘only’ fifth in a Grade 2 at Cheltenham.
But his Cheltenham record of 113P5P is not his Newbury record of 111311.
Let me put it another way. If you were looking at his past performances page, without recourse to that stupid misleading string of digits next to the horse’s name in the paper; if you were looking at his preferences instead of his price; could you possibly make him a 25/1 shot?
If you could, then you’ll not be backing him, and fair enough. Otherwise, shouldn’t you at least have a throwaway saver on Harry, ‘just in case’?
There’s no doubt that he might be ‘gone at the game’, and it’s something of a binary bet, inasmuch as he’ll probably either win or pull up. But at 25/1, we can afford to be speculative where we can’t at 4/1.
Enough of Harry, Diamond that he is. What of the rest?
Well, in my view, The Package had a hard enough race three weeks ago and might not want it too soft; Frisco Depot is a dodgy jumper with a League One (relatively) jockey; Harry The Viking surely wants it quicker; Soll is taking a massive step up in class, but could surprise; Alfie Spinner will do extremely well to repel all from the front here; and Saint Are wouldn’t want the mud.
One other worth a mention is Magnanimity, a horse which has cost me plenty down the years. He loves it soft, he stays and he has a feather weight. I won’t be backing him, but he has a slightly better chance than his odds imply, to my eye at least.
Selection: First Lieutenant e/w
Best Outsider: Diamond Harry
Dangers: Bobs Worth, Magnanimity
everyone else in village is at least 4/1 and they are 7/2. 4/1 offer my hole.
Comment