Stat of the Day, 9th July 2015

Stat of the Day

Stat of the Day

Stat of the Day, 9th July 2015

As many of you thought might be the case, Stoneham wasn't good enough at Wolverhampton on Wednesday. He never really got involved in the race, languishing at the rear of the field and making little impact.

And as quite a few suggested to me, both publicly and privately, Noguchi was the eventual winner and he finished the race impressively it has to be said, with our boy a good 9.5 lengths back in 5th place after a drift out to 7/1.

I hold my hands up in so much that I got the race wrong, but those of you who may have only joined us recently will need to get used to this happening. We've been doing SotD for 4 yrs in November and we're still getting it wrong 5 times out of 7! 😀

Hopefully that won't be the case on Thursday with a more simplistic approach in the finale at HQ, the...

6.00 Newmarket:

And a 10/3 BOG bet on Richard Fahey's 4yr old gelding, the Dutch-sounding Irish horse, Jan Van Hoof. In fact I'm sure Bolton had a centre half called that when Big Sam was in charge, but that's another story!

Anyway, to the job in hand. The July course at Newmarket has, like all courses, its own quirks and idiosyncracies and not all trainers fare well here, but since 2009, Richard Fahey has excelled with his Northern raiders in handciaps here when they've been priced as though they at least had half a chance.

In numbers, I'm talking about trhose priced at 12/1 and shorter, fo which Richard has tasted success 16 times from 58 runners. It's not the largest of sample sizes we've used on SotD, but there aren't as many races on this track as many others.

This 16/58 record equates to a strike rate of 27.6% for profits of 57.8pts at an ROI of 99.7%, which is very impressive indeed and from this starting point, closer examination reveals...

...over trips of 5f to 7f, his runners are 13/41 (31.7% SR) for 56.5pts (+137.7% ROI) and...
...in the month of July, they are 7/22 (31.8% SR) for 37.3pts (+169.4% ROI), whilst...
...his record at the July Festival is 6/14 (42.9% SR) for 42.6pts (+304.6% ROI) and...
...when David Nolan has taken the ride, the team has won 3 of 7 (42.9% SR) for a mere 14.4pts (+205.7% ROI)

Jan Van Hoof was a recent winner last time out in a 5f handicap at Pontefract and although he's up 6lb for that win, he still receives weight from his rivals here.

He's very lightly raced for his age and should still have plenty of further improvement to offer and in four runs to date, hasn't finished out of the first two home (2211) with a previous win at this trip and also on good to firm ground. He's 211 in races of 8 to 10 runners and it's worth a quick look back at that Pontefract win.

It was actually his handicap debut that day and despite not having raced for 7 months, he beat Sleeping Apache by a length and a quarter with the latter only getting beaten by a head on the line in a tougher contest last week. The third placed horse from that Pontefract win, Stonefield Flyer has had a win and two very narrow defeats in three starts since and the 5th placed horse had improved to also finish as a runner-up twice.

Conditions are ideal for Jan Van Hoof here and he's currently priced up at 100/30 BOG to reclaim a race won by his trainer three years ago. That price is quite widely available, so take your pick of the bookies by...

...clicking here for the betting on the 6.00 Newmarket

Don't forget, we offer a full interactive racecard service every day,

just click here for more details.

REMINDER: THERE IS NO STAT OF THE DAY ON SUNDAYS

Here is today's racecard.

23 thoughts on “Stat of the Day, 9th July 2015

  1. FGR

    Has anyone else ever backed the wrong horse in a race? Having read SOTD, for some reason I put my money on Newton’s Law instead – probably because he was also trading, like Jan Van Hoof, at 100-30 at the time.
    Here come the men in white coats! Lol!

  2. buskin

    Haha! Thought it was just me. One day I had forgotten to back SOTD in the morning but remembered it had been favourite at the time. When it came to race time, I backed the favourite, unaware that the SOTD had drifted out to 2nd fav. Needless to say, SOTD won and I was left rather embarrassed!

  3. FGR

    Well done again, Chris.
    Ironic that the horse I backed by mistake, Newton’s Law, was taken out (and safely too, hopefully), therefore not damaging my returns.
    A welcome change of luck!

  4. jethro

    Many thanks Chris. I took my bet at 10/3 with Paddy Power and they are taking a 25p Rule 4 from me!!! I’m not sure why I am staying with them at the moment as they are brassing me off no end!
    I have just written them an email asking them to explain how they have come to that deduction; but not holding my breath on their response! Inxile (16/1) should have been no Rule 4 deduction; and Newton’s Law (7/2) should be a 20p Rule 4 deduction as you state above. Accordiing to Paddypower however, 20 + 0 = 25!!! Hmmmmmm….

  5. b8nd8r

    Cheers again Chris. And congrats to Matt for ten years. I’m a relative newbie but have discovered you guys after a losing start as a follower elsewhere, after kicking myself I knew there was a way to make this game work, but not by myself. With your help, and I do use recommended tipsters you have reviewed here too, I have recouped those early losses and now tick along with small profits. I can only play small stakes, tenners here and there due to a downturn and pay cut at work, this is my alternative. As I also said to another reviewer by email recently, this isn’t get rich quick, or even get rich at all, but an alternative to the drudgery and extra hours of the day job, with staking plans and discipline it can work, so I thank you for adding a little sunshine into me and the Mrs rainy days, I shake my head at some negative and Ill informed comments, the stats speak for themselves, I’ve read and read about the averages, strike rates, winning sps, and where to aim to seek consistent returns, there are more losers than winners but it’s finding those winners that pay a slow steady consistent profit that matters, your analysis is clearly based in this area, doing what you do you must have the ‘Patience of Job’ and it’s a good job, cheers!

  6. jamesfeeney

    When a horse is declared a non runner, some bookies lower the price of the remaining horses before they re do their book, then they claim that the horse was a shorter price when the non runner was declared, and so claim a larger rule 4 deduction for themselves. In this case the horse was withdrawn late without a new book and PP were 7/2 so it should only be 20% but as anyone betting long enough will know, they just do what they like and you can’t do anything about it. If you choose not to use them you are only doing it to spite yourself and eventually every bookie will annoy you anyway so I just suck it up and move on !

    1. Blokeshead

      “…eventually every bookie will annoy you anyway…”

      A truer word was probably never written. There are certainly none that haven’t annoyed me at some point. Most of them have managed several direct hits on my temper trigger by now! 🙂

    2. Matt Bisogno Post author

      You’re right, James. This is unacceptable, and I will be doing a spot of research ahead of a blog post on the matter. Paddy are awful for it. Disgusting abuse of their positions, in my opinion.

      Matt

  7. alpha2

    I split my stake between PP and 365 and as the commentators above say 20p R4 from 365 and 25p from PP.

    Extra-ordinary comment that with only 2/7 you should not waste your time! I have tried a few other services over the years and this is the only one I have ever been happy and stuck with.

    Great call today, I went to Newmarket and had 5 2nds! Left before the last!

    Hugh

  8. jethro

    Further to my post at 8.02 pm above and the comments that followed, here is Paddypower’s response to my email enquiry, which I have also added to the Bookies Ricks, Tricks and Offers section of the Geegeez forum:
    “Thank you for contacting Paddy Power Customer Support.
    It would appear that the Rule 4 applied to your bet was correct. As you placed the bet at the earlier price, the price of the withdrawn horse at that particular time would have applied for the reduction.
    When you placed your bet at 2015-07-08 20:50:14, Newtons Law was priced at 3/1. As a result the reduction was applied based on 3/1 = 25%.
    I hope that clarifies things for you and my apologies for any confusion.”

    So the big question therefore: is a Rule 4 deduction decided at the price of the non-runner when the bet was made; or the price of the non-runner at the time the non-runner is withdrawn? Or is it just the best situation to suit the bookies pocket?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.