Last Start Winners

[Pauls123]

Hi again folks,

I guess this topic has been rehashed over and over in here, but lately I've noted a lot of my bets are last start winners. Do any of the data base owners in here have any sort of stats on last start winners.

Maybe some possible extensions to last start winners could be:

· The last-start win must be at the same track as today.
· The last-start win must have been by one length or more.
· The horse must have the best Average Prizemoney Per Start in today’s field.
· The horse’s winning percentage must be 20%+
· The distance of today’s race must be within 200m of the last-start win.
· Today’s jockey must be Top 5 in the premiership.

This might be either getting out of control or becoming very selective,........any thoughts.....!!!!

Regards, Paul

[Stix]

Hi again folks,

I guess this topic has been rehashed over and over in here, but lately I've noted a lot of my bets are last start winners. Do any of the data base owners in here have any sort of stats on last start winners.

Maybe some possible extensions to last start winners could be:

· The last-start win must be at the same track as today.
· The last-start win must have been by one length or more.
· The horse must have the best Average Prizemoney Per Start in today’s field.
· The horse’s winning percentage must be 20%+
· The distance of today’s race must be within 200m of the last-start win.
· Today’s jockey must be Top 5 in the premiership.

This might be either getting out of control or becoming very selective,........any thoughts.....!!!!

Regards, Paul· The last-start win must be at the same track as today. Sel 13049 Win 2560 S/R 19.62 POT -14% Av Div 4.37
· The last-start win must have been by one length or more. Sel 28,825 Win 4900 S/R 17.0% POT -13.32 Av Div 5.1
· The horse must have the best Average Prizemoney Per Start in today’s field. Sel 9102 Win 2383 S/R 26.18 POT -16.1% Av Div 3.2
· The horse’s winning percentage must be 20%+ Sel 39265 Win 6532 S/R 166% POT -15.9% Av Div 5.05
· The distance of today’s race must be within 200m (-200...200) of the last-start win. Sel 47793 Win 7155 S/R 14.9% POT -16.9% Av Div 5.55
· Today’s jockey must be Top 5 in the premiership (not App only). Sel 49820 Win 7013 S/R 14.1% POT -19.73% Av Div 5.7
· All criteria Sel 582 Win 206 S/R 35.4% POT -14.3 Av Div 2.42


I know it doesn't exist until posted and vetted on the propun forum for a minimum of 181 days, but I have a system for last start winners and if you exclude (for what ever reason) 1200m races, it does exceptionally well, may be well worth considering....
I'd also restrict the age to 5yo or less. :cool:

[Pauls123]

Thanks for that Stix. I'm a bit surprised that all of those filters come out with a negative POT. And I also do confess that those filters that I put up, were off another site talking along the lines of what I mentioned.

So you are saying that if you exclude races of 1200m for last start winners, it improves things. I am assuming you have other filters also.....?

I also note that there is a book recently put out on once again another site,
titled Last Start Winners. However after buying a couple of their earlier books, I am very reluctant to purchase more of their publications.

Regards, Paul

[Chrome Prince]

Paul,

The last-start win must be at the same track as today.
· The last-start win must have been by one length or more.
· The horse must have the best Average Prizemoney Per Start in today’s field.
· The horse’s winning percentage must be 20%+
· The distance of today’s race must be within 200m of the last-start win.
· Today’s jockey must be Top 5 in the premiership.

The problem I see with this is that the win strike rate is high, but is simply poor value.
Most punters have already looked at these as filters and are actually contained within the prices. Therefore if you filter again on the criteria that is popular, you are ensuring only poor value.

I think that is the most important point here, and with many selection methods.
For example, must have a 50% win record and 75% place record and won on the track. This has to be poor value, because this is already embedded in the price and you are filtering out any possible value.

To come up with a higher strike rate and value, I'd suggest doing some research on areas that aren't so obvious to every punter, this is the only way (in my opinion) to obtain value, even on very short priced horses. You need to have something extra (an edge) over everyone else. This advantage creates value.

You don't necessarily have to be getting 50/1 on a horse to be getting value, you can get even money on a horse and it can be value, if you know something that's not in the newspaper.

Some suggestions:
Days break
Gear changes
Trainer changes
Breeding
Trackwork
Trials
Stewards Reports

Note down horses that perform well when there's money for them, note down horses that are always well supported, but very rarely win.

You can seek out your own value.

There are horses running around that have started favourite 5 times and never come better than 3rd placing when favourite. Even if they win next start, they are longterm poor value.

[Chrome Prince]

Here are some examples of what I'm talking about...

Light Red 6 times favourite
2 wins 3 placings
As favourite, this horse should be at a minimum of 4 from 6 placings
This horse was also a $2.00 favourite and failed to win.
Everything points to it being a weak horse.
It has a 28% place loss on turnover and a 10% win loss on turnover.

I would not be taking short prices about this horse ever.

Purple Chocolate 8 times favourite
0 wins 4 placings
100% win loss on turnover 26.25% place loss on turnover
A weak horse.

They could both go on and record win after win, but not with my money at short prices.

Then we have a horse like Rightfully Yours
4 starts as favourite
3 wins 3 placings
65% win profit on turnover
2.5% place profit on turnover
75% win/place strike rate as favourite
The shortest price it started as was $1.60 in an Open class race and it won.
The longest price as favourite was $2.80 and it won an Open class Feehan.

I think you get the general gist.

Winners keep winning, losers keep losing - in general.

[stugots]

paul, in addition to chromes suggestions you might also consider the class of todays race compared with its last start,

often spot last start winners that get up again at juicy odds when rising sharply in class, but of course plenty of them also run nowhere

& regards 'best Average Prizemoney Per Start', i find this to be one filter that leads to plenty of losers in those horses rated highly (eg unitab 100) or short priced,

must be a lay method there somewhere...

[Stix]

To come up with a higher strike rate and value, I'd suggest doing some research on areas that aren't so obvious to every punter, this is the only way (in my opinion) to obtain value, even on very short priced horses. You need to have something extra (an edge) over everyone else. This advantage creates value.
Totally agree, and value is your friend.....

[Chrome Prince]

One way I use to sort the wheat from the chaff, is to line up the first four in the betting and give them a rating on price and strike rate.

E.G. a horse that starts @ $2.00 and wins receives 50 points out of 50

This is NOT a ratings method, as class distinctions cannot be made, it is a method to identify weak and strong favourites. Given that horses should win about the correct proportion to percentage chance given, as the market is staggeringly accurate if rounded to 100%, one can identify value favourites and poor value favourites.
It really isn't about whther the horse wins or loses on the day, it's the longterm value angle I'm interested in.

I'll give just two examples to demonstrate, one value favourite and one poor value favourite.

29/9/2008

Belmont Race 2 Open Class
Top three in betting in a small field

Magical Belle $2.80
Russian Playmate $3.60
Clare Castle $5.50

Magical Belle
Take all the wins she's had and divide the price of each win by 100 and add it up.
She gets a score of 85.83

Russian Playmate scores 5.62!!!

Clarecastle scores 55.55 (one win @ $1.80)

Magical Belle on top
Clarecastle behind
Russian Playmate a distant last pick

Magical Belle confirms herself by winning @ $2.80
Russian Playmate runs second
Clarecastle third

The important part here, is that Magical Belle was a confirmed strong favourite and duly saluted by 1 & 3/4 lengths.


If I switch across to race 1 at Belmont on the same day....

Axtel $2.80
Marine Drive $3.80
Sky Marshall $4.90

Another small field of 7 runners

Axtel rated 31
Marine Drive 31.28
Sky Marshall 12.82

This shows a vulnerable and low rated weak favourite.
Although Axtel went down by only half a head, surely it's ironic that the horse lost to Reverend Lovejoy which rated 59.86 and was about fourth pick in the betting in a small field.

They spaced the others by 2 & 1/4 lengths.

This is not a demonstration about picking winners, anyone can pluck two races and show winners and losers, it is a clear demonstration of value.
A horse fourth pick in the betting, rated well above three other well fancied runners, wins at a value price.

P.S. Reverend Lovejoy won his start after the at $4.40 as well.
Magical Belle ran 2nd next start beaten .30 of a length.

I haven't rated the subsequent races.

Cassandara Shadow was beaten @ $1.50 favourite and punters poured more money next start.
Beaten @ odds of even money.

Stewards report:

CASSANDARA SHADOW slow into stride. Raced wide from the 800m. When questioned regarding the disappointing performance, rider advised that after taking the filly wide from the 800m it had travelled strongly but was then under pressure shortly after straightening and failed to run on thereafter. Trainer advised that the filly's hard run at its previous start at Belmont on 27 September 2008 may have adversely affected its performance today and it was now his intention to send it for a spell. A post race Veterinary examination revealed the filly to have a slightly elevated heart rate.

Beaten into 5th placing in a 7 horse field.

All one really needs to do is pick horses that live up to their odds on a consistent basis, that seperates the one hit wonders from better horses.

[salty]

Chrome Prince

I like your idea of sorting out favorites, but I wonder if you could explain in more detail how you came up with these ratings. I have studied the Belmont races you used as examples and I can't work it out.

[Pauls123]

Am I missing something here...?

Hi there Chrome, what am I missing here, how can you divide $1.80 by 100 and get 55.55. Or say divide $2.00 by 100 and get 50.

Just curious,

Paul

[Chrome Prince]

The idea is you go back through the form and convert the odds to percentages.

So a horse starts at $1.80 previously, this equates to 55.55%
A horse that scores at this price receives 55.55 points.

So if we look at say the past five runs on horse A for example, the form might look like this

$1.80 - unplaced
$3.50 - 3rd
$8.00 - won
$1.60 - 2nd

In this example Horse A only won at odds of $8.00, so $8.00 converted to percentage is 12.50% - this horse scores 12.50 points

Horse B might look like this:
$1.80 - WON
$3.50 - 3rd
$8.00 - 2nd
$1.60 - WON

This horse won at odds of $1.80 and $1.60 previously.

Convert these odds to percentages in the same way as above.

55.55% plus 62.50% = 118.05 points.

If these two horses are in the same race this start, it shows that Horse A is a weak bet, Horse B is a strong bet.

Horse A only managed to win when not really fancied that well, and when it had the support of the public and very poor opposition by contrast, failed twice.
Horse B won as expected when well supported, lived up to opinion and ran as expected at longer prices.

It's just a guide to value...or lack of it.

Good horses keep winning, poor horses keep getting well supported and the money is always left with the bookie.

Hope this clears it up a little.

[Bhagwan]

For those who don't know how to convert price to percentage it's done like this...

Say $1.80 horse
1 divided by 1.80 (press % key) = 55.55%

Say $3.50 horse
1 divided by 3.50 (press % key) = 28.57%

This is an interesting idea Chrome, thanks for sharing it.

Cheers