Information Needed
 

Can any one tell me the percentage of horses that win with in 3 runs from resuming so we are talking about 1st up/2nd up/3rd up

Shaun

These fiqures are from a Roger Biggs book and at the time of publication the data was arrived from 1.3 million runs and 126 000 races.

Spell count of more than 12 weeks(>84days)
run 1 run%-11.86 win%-9.83 rf-0.828
run 2 run%-10.51 win%-9.29 rf-0.884
run 3 run%- 9.13 win%-9.38 rf-1.027

Hope that helps?

Just a little confused...but does that mean 30% of horses will win with in 3 runs

Just a little???

I'm confused too, but from what I can figure out, it means that first up runners make up 11.86% of all runners and 9.83% of all winners, second up runners make up 10.51% of all runners and 9.29% of all winners, and third up runners make up 9.13% of all runners and 9.38% of all winners.

One thing to note Shaun. You can't just add the figures together to see the % of horses that win in their first 3 runs from a spell. After all, a horse could win 2 or even all 3 of it's first 3 runs back from a spell, so that would skew the figures.

Hi Shaun,

Do you mean for all races throughout Australia? Also, if you are targeting horses that do well in sprint races, their strike rates will be much better than those horses that run over longer distances.

Perhaps a better question would be, what percentage of horses (which have a good record over 1600 metres and less) win in their first three runs from a spell?

Monkeyinjapan

That's right Shaun and your correct Sportz basically horse's having their 1st, 2nd and 3rd runs from a spell represent 31.5% of all horses running and win 28.5% of all races and horses having between 4-9 runs from a spell represent 30.77% of all runners and win 36.2% of all races. (That's an interesting fact-be wary of 1st and 2nd up horses!)

Is that any clearer?

yes that answers my question...basicly the idea is to create a stable of horses resuming of say 50 horses then backing them for 3 starts only....if i did this would i get enough winners at a decent price to make a profit......once a winner is struct say at the first run that horse is deleted from the stable

That could be a good idea but from a statistical point of view you would be better off selecting 50 horses who have had between 4-9 runs in as they represent less of the runners but more of the winners...36.2% as opposed to 1-3 which win 28.5% of all races.

i agree they have a higher percentage but you would have to cover them for 6 races.....this brings in to account the minimum price youn need to make a profit

Shaun, I just thought of an idea. Go through your form guides each week and check out all the horses that have had at least 3 previous 1st-up runs and preferably at least 3 2nd-up runs too. Ideally, they should be 4 or 5yos. I would look for a 51%+ winning strike rate for both 1st-up & 2nd-up or a 76%+ strike rate for either. Mark these horses down and be ready to back them next time they resume from a spell for 2 or 3 starts or until they have a win. You could build up a stable that way.

Here are some that I picked out from the last few Saturday's form guides for Bris, Syd, Melb:

Champion Star 4yo
1st up 3 3-0-0
2nd up 2 0-1-1

Tornado Alley 4yo
1st up 3 2-1-0
2nd up 3 2-0-0

Medium Swing 5yo
1st up 3 3-0-0
2nd up 3 1-1-0

Algorithm 5yo
1st up 5 4-0-0
2nd up 4 2-0-0

Fourofakind 4yo
1st up 4 1-0-2
2nd up 3 3-0-0

Zoe's Lad 5yo
1st up 5 4-0-0
2nd up 5 0-1-0

Not sure about Zoe's Lad. It has a brilliant first up record, but a poor second up record. Then again, that can lead to good dividends. For example, using this method, we would have backed Algorithm when it won 2nd-up recently at 14-1.

1st Up
 

forgive my ignorance. Does this mean 31.5% of horses 1-3 up win 28.5% of the races and 30.77% of horses 4-9 up win 36.2% of the races and thus the horses 10+ runs up from a spell represent 37.73% of runners and win 37.3% of the time. This would give respectively rf figures of 0.904, 1.176 and 0.988. But the first is over three measurements 1st up 2nd up and 3rd up, the second is over six measurements 4th up etc and the remainder over who knows.

The rf figures show an increase from one to two and again from two to three. obviously they must increase again at 4th up etc as the bulk of horses reach their peak and then decrease. Can someone please post the rf figures for 4up etc to highlight this peak.

We are told to avoid betting on horses back from a spell but thinking outside the circle couldn't more value be found here?

These are the fiqures:
Run Run% Win% Rf
1 11.86 9.83 0.828
2 10.51 9.29 0.884
3 9.13 9.38 1.027
4 7.82 8.90 1.139
5 6.58 7.66 1.165
6 5.44 6.59 1.211
7 4.46 5.33 1.196
8 3.60 4.26 1.182
9 2.87 3.46 1.203
10 2.28 2.72 1.192
11 1.81 2.13 1.178
12 1.42 1.65 1.164
13 1.14 1.28 1.127
14 0.90 0.98 1.090

1,321,029 runs 129,124 races
The balance of the horses missing are made up of a great number which never spelled (84 plus days) and first starters which didn't make it to a spell.
They reach a plateau at 6 which is maintained to run 9 when a slow decline starts. Sorry if the fiqures are to close but you still should be able to read them and I don't know anything about spacing or bold texting except for the smilies!

Thanks Nanook
This does put it in to perspective. Just went through todays results. there were some good paying third up winners, but it is a case of sorting the crap from the chaff and hoping like hell to get a glimmer of gold. there may be a case for including these 1-3 uppers at a discount rather than a blanket ommission