RAMSES DE TEILLEE (ante-post 33/1, 5 places [40/1, 4 places], NRNB 25/1) – probable runner (subject to going)
This needs some explanation because, to put it in its unexpurgated context, not only has no 7 y-o won the GN since WWII but none has made the first 5 home and none has finished within 20L of any GN winner for at least 31 years.
In 14 GNs from 2005 onwards, a total of 31 runners were 7 y-o. Of these, only 1 made the first 6 home (Big Fella Thanks, 6th in 2009). In other words, 7 y-o representation has been 5.6% of total runners but just 1.2% of those filling the first 6 places. That’s stark under-performance.
So, how should we (or even can we) assess the chances of a 7 y-o in the GN? Surely we should just put a line through them all.
Well, this is why I believe we shouldn’t do that:
- Only 1 had a winning stat-profile - Double Honour (2005). Actually, he ran conspicuously well for a long way (prominent from the off and 2nd when unseating at the 21st fence).
- 4 others had stat-ratings consistent with minor place potential (10~30L behind the winner). Of these, 2 broadly ran to expectations: BFT 6th (23L) in 2009 and Cause of Causes 8th (27L) in 2015. The other 2 (Tricky Trickster 2010 and Baie Des Iles 2018) still seemingly had the chance to do so before being badly hampered and put out of the race (20th and 23rd fences respectively).
An age (immaturity) penalty is probably appropriate for a stat-model and, though it’s a ludicrously tiny sample, the fact that both BFT and Cause of Causes had unimpeded runs and were about 8~15L behind “par” for their (unpenalised) stat-ratings, gives me a crude steer to the degree of penalty to apply to a 7 y-o in my model.
So, to business: what’s so compelling about RAMSES DE TEILLEE?
Put simply, despite applying this age penalty, he has by far the strongest GN stat-profile of any 7 y-o runner for at least 14 years (my old model says at least 31 years) and a winning one on any surface to boot:
- Cappa Bleu (3rd at Chepstow with 11.03) = 2nd in 2013 GN with 10.11
- Teaforthree (2nd with 11.03) = 3rd in 2013 (same season) with 11.03
- Monbeg Dude (winner and 9L 4th with 11.09) = 3rd in 2015 (same season) with 10.07
Caveat emptor, of course.
This needs some explanation because, to put it in its unexpurgated context, not only has no 7 y-o won the GN since WWII but none has made the first 5 home and none has finished within 20L of any GN winner for at least 31 years.
In 14 GNs from 2005 onwards, a total of 31 runners were 7 y-o. Of these, only 1 made the first 6 home (Big Fella Thanks, 6th in 2009). In other words, 7 y-o representation has been 5.6% of total runners but just 1.2% of those filling the first 6 places. That’s stark under-performance.
So, how should we (or even can we) assess the chances of a 7 y-o in the GN? Surely we should just put a line through them all.
Well, this is why I believe we shouldn’t do that:
- There is logic to why a young horse might underperform in a GN, given the unique atmosphere of the prelims and ensuing test (even Aintree-stalwart and 2016 runner-up The Last Samuri was noticeably unsettled before running poorly in both subsequent GNs, as a 9 and 10 y-o). “Immaturity” probably makes for greater risk of being unsettled and so is a credible reason to apply a “penalty” in a GN algorithm specifically to a 7 y-o. But to eliminate every 7 y-o would imply that, but for their immaturity, this 31-strong phalanx of 7 y-o failures had lined up with stat-profiles proportionately representative of those of any other age group.
- Back-testing my model (with no “age penalty”) shows that’s patently not the case. Of these 31:
- Only 1 had a winning stat-profile - Double Honour (2005). Actually, he ran conspicuously well for a long way (prominent from the off and 2nd when unseating at the 21st fence).
- 4 others had stat-ratings consistent with minor place potential (10~30L behind the winner). Of these, 2 broadly ran to expectations: BFT 6th (23L) in 2009 and Cause of Causes 8th (27L) in 2015. The other 2 (Tricky Trickster 2010 and Baie Des Iles 2018) still seemingly had the chance to do so before being badly hampered and put out of the race (20th and 23rd fences respectively).
- So, 3% of 7 y-o runners from 2005 had a winning stat-profile (vs. typically c. 10% of a GN field), 0% had strong place potential (vs typically c. 10%) and 13% had a 10~30L stat-profile (typically 30~40% of a GN field). Put the other way around: 84% of 7 y-o runners from 2005, irrespective of their age, had zero chance of figuring, according to their stats (vs 40~50% of a typical field).
- While 7 y-os have certainly under-performed in terms of their representation it’s far from proven that they’ve materially underperformed in terms of their actual potential, stats-wise.
An age (immaturity) penalty is probably appropriate for a stat-model and, though it’s a ludicrously tiny sample, the fact that both BFT and Cause of Causes had unimpeded runs and were about 8~15L behind “par” for their (unpenalised) stat-ratings, gives me a crude steer to the degree of penalty to apply to a 7 y-o in my model.
So, to business: what’s so compelling about RAMSES DE TEILLEE?
Put simply, despite applying this age penalty, he has by far the strongest GN stat-profile of any 7 y-o runner for at least 14 years (my old model says at least 31 years) and a winning one on any surface to boot:
- Last run, close 2nd with 11.05 in the 29f GN Trial at Haydock on GS - significantly, just 10 secs slower than standard, dispelling fears that RDT needs a soft surface (or the undulations of Chepstow) to be effective. When last run on decent ground, the first 2 home in the 2017 GNT (Vieux Lion Rouge and Blaklion) came in 6th and 4th at Aintree. Neither stayed the GN trip but, unlike either of them, RDT ticks a stiffer stamina box.
- Close 2nd with 11.01 to Elegant Escape in December’s Welsh GN on Soft (5lbs pull at the weights vs EE for the GN). The correlation of strong runs in Welsh and Aintree GNs is long-established and (especially with those lumping 11.00+ at Chepstow) still evident post-2012 GN race and course changes:
- Cappa Bleu (3rd at Chepstow with 11.03) = 2nd in 2013 GN with 10.11
- Teaforthree (2nd with 11.03) = 3rd in 2013 (same season) with 11.03
- Monbeg Dude (winner and 9L 4th with 11.09) = 3rd in 2015 (same season) with 10.07
- Carries just 10.05 at Aintree if BDM runs (a 4lb weight-rise won’t materially damage his rating) off OR149 - 5lbs “well-in” after his fine Haydock run, which also notched a career-high RPR158.
- 56% win and near-miss record in 9 chases at 3m+ (including those at 23.5f)
- Yet to face the GN fences but 100% completion (1st or 2nd in 70%) in 10 chases.
- 4 runs in the season, the last 49 days prior - fine
- Will he line up? Now 41st in the list effectively guarantees the opportunity and, despite original plans to wait until 2020, David Pipe’s most recent comments (“it will be hard to not go there as long as there is enough cut in the ground”) and no other entries suggest he’s Aintree-bound, assuming weather or watering keeps it no quicker than GS.
Caveat emptor, of course.
