“True Believers” of GN trend-following adhere to an article of faith so strong it was surely inscribed on Moses’ tablets, ………shortly after “Thou Shalt Not Kill” but, naturally, well ahead of “Thou Shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbour’s Wife”.
Yet, on 6 April 2019, the unthinkable could happen - yes, you better believe it …… for the first time in 79 years a 7 year-old could win The Grand National.
To explain this heresy, a few points about my brand new GN stat-model (feel free to skip or use as a sleep-aid):
a) Like its predecessor, it is NOT elimination-style, so doesn’t rule out a runner based solely on 1 offending stat – no matter how robust that stat appears. Rather, it uses a Formula (designed by the fruitcake that is yours truly) to evaluate each runner’s stats (+ and -) against a range of factors to establish an overall Rating for that runner.
b) Nowt unique about that but less conventional is that, as before, the Formula is derived from the career-to-date stats not only of GN winners but of the first 6 home and it makes no distinction between a winner and a “near-misser” (<5L). Referencing near-missers has been the key to it anticipating apparent “trend-breakers”, e.g. Mon Mome in 2009 (the first French-bred winner) and Don’t Push It in 2010 with 11.05 (the biggest winning weight for 28 years) and it’s why it rates Tiger Roll, despite +9lb OR, a strong contender to defy a 45 year-old trend and win back-to-back GNs.
c) My old model (given its first spin for the 2007 GN and using a database from 1988) had been re-tuned annually after each race to reconcile better- and worse-than expected performances. But until last year, there had never been a complete “outlier” near-missing (Pleasant Company, by just a Head). Time to bow to the inevitable - either my model was knackered or changes to the GN course and distance (after 2012), and to the complexion of a typical field, had materially altered the test that is the GN and, thus, the profile of potential GN winners. Either way, tune-ups no longer cutting it - time for a tearful adieu to Mark I and a rebuild from scratch.
d) Ideally, we’d now use a database just from 2013 but a sample of 6 races is too small. We’ll get there eventually but, for the time-being, the new model is based on the 14 GNs from 2005 – when compression of the weights produced the first entire field “in the handicap” for years and which saw the first winner with 11-00+ since 1988 (Hedgehunter). New factors have been unearthed, some jettisoned and the Formula completely rewritten and subjected to back-testing - all 36 winners and <10L since 2005, including Pleasant Company, are now fully reconciled.
So, with no little trepidation (and a loud wealth-warning) I’m giving Mark II its first spin, though the 2019 renewal could hardly make for a trickier debut.
The Big Question
…… is will Bristol De Mai line up or will the weights rise by 4+lbs?
If he runs, BDM will be off the (5lb compressed) handicap mark of OR168 – the highest of any GN runner since SunyBay, off (uncompressed) OR169, carried 11.13 in Bobbyjo’s1999 GN. That year, 17 of the 32 runners ran from “out of the handicap” and the first 2 home were 14 and 16lbs “wrong” at the weights. It’s a stark illustration of how markedly the complexion of a GN field has changed in 20 years that it’s unlikely that there will be any runners out of the handicap if BDM runs this year, despite the lower top-weight of 11.10.
5lbs well-in is a big incentive to run but it will depend on BDM’s Gold Cup run and recovery, 22 days prior to the GN. So, we still have at least a 2-week wait for a decision that's crucial to my model’s Ratings of several runners.
And, of course, there’s also the other usual moving parts: final preps and the going.
Current Top Rated Runners
However, there are a handful of (definite or probable) runners that have winning stat-profiles irrespective of a weight-rise, the going and (barring catastrophe) their final preps.
Abolitionist (backed) and Tiger Roll, both with definite intentions to run, already flagged but there's another that I've decided to add to my betting slip, despite being a probable, rather than 100% definite runner.
And so...... the proof, beyond all reasonable doubt, that I’ve finally lost my marbles. To my betting slip, I've added …………….
[To be continued ……]