2023 Arkle Novices Chase

[Deleted member 4957]

Hollow Games was mentioned in the GE stable tour as targeting this.

It looks like it's going to be less than 8 runners, and the chances are it's 5 or 6 max.

A warning for the each way thieves, if you play this now or anytime between now and final decs to snare the 3 places you can expect your account to suffer, the time to play this market each way was a few weeks back when it would be impossible for anyone to know how many were likely to turn up.
Bookies literally hate thieves/shrewdies who take advantage of a situation like this...

 

[Benjy23]

A warning for the each way thieves, if you play this now or anytime between now and final decs to snare the 3 places you can expect your account to suffer, the time to play this market each way was a few weeks back when it would be impossible for anyone to know how many were likely to turn up.
Bookies literally hate thieves/shrewdies who take advantage of a situation like this...

​​​​​​Not convinced this is particularly 'shrewd' here still to be honest. And is very different to the situation with the Turners last year that a lot of us took advantage of.

Let's run with Final Orders as has been mentioned and is essentially favourite of those outside the front 3. 20/1 1/5 odds a place. In the best case of the small field theory you get no other runners and you're essentially getting 6/4 on him to beat one of El Fabiola, Jonbon and Dysart Dynamo. That already doesn't scream huge value and in reality you're going to get at least one of two more runners chucked into the equation.

Think DD is probably the only shrewd each way bet if you want to go down that route of 3 places in a smaller field. At least you're not completely throwing away the win stake!

​​​​
​​​​​​

 

[Kautostar]

A warning for the each way thieves, if you play this now or anytime between now and final decs to snare the 3 places you can expect your account to suffer, the time to play this market each way was a few weeks back when it would be impossible for anyone to know how many were likely to turn up.
Bookies literally hate thieves/shrewdies who take advantage of a situation like this...

Use the shops instead for these

 

[Faugheen_Machine]

Hollow Games was not declared at the weekend and he won't qualify for a handicap without another run, so it looks like the Arkle or Turners for him. GE already has MP for the Turners so it looks like he'll be a runner in this.

I'd love Davy to drop him right out the back and try to run on through beaten horses to grab a place. It's effectively 9/2 to place if backing each way, which i don't think is too bad, and I've put him in a couple of ew multiples.

 

[ComplyOrDie]

Hollow Games was not declared at the weekend and he won't qualify for a handicap without another run, so it looks like the Arkle or Turners for him. GE already has MP for the Turners so it looks like he'll be a runner in this.

I'd love Davy to drop him right out the back and try to run on through beaten horses to grab a place. It's effectively 9/2 to place if backing each way, which i don't think is too bad, and I've put him in a couple of ew multiples.

I'd much prefer to back Hollow Games over Final Orders for the race, and the price difference is fairly staggering, for a race Gordon has name checked for this race :encouragement:

 

[Kevloaf]

Saint Roi could skip it and wait for Aintree. Similar to GDM last year? Especially with Mullins having so many options, and the new JP Aintree love.

I kind of get that one could run below form / fall or whatever but I don't really see a great angle in each way bets even with three places when there's three runners who look well ahead of the rest... Are you actually getting that much value there? Maybe you are, I've not overly thought about this :excitement:

You kind of get one could run below form / fall ....

Yeah, that's definitel;y part of it ... as is the fact that horses don't finish in betting order the majority of the time.

There are enough examples of horses missing targets, like when Politilogue won the QMCC, where he was 20/1 NRNB ante post and book builders expecting the race to cut up. The two shorties came out late, leaving Defi Du Seuil odds on, and he flopped.

There are so many examples of it working, which is why it's a strategy I've used for so long (publically on this forum as well).

Depending on how the final field actually looks you can trade out of some of the positions if you do feel particularly strongly that the race is going to finish how you predict, but hedging and locking in profit is a genuine strategy that some like, and some don't :highly_amused:


My Arkle bits are all in my diary again this year, and agree with the later comment that Hollow Games is a better bet than Final Orders at 20/1 ..... really I should have posted in my diary rather than in here, as talking about peoples own positions isn't meant for these threads particularly.:triumphant:

 

[Kevloaf]

​​​​​​Not convinced this is particularly 'shrewd' here still to be honest. And is very different to the situation with the Turners last year that a lot of us took advantage of.

Maths makes it shrewd. It's as simple as that :adoration:

The rest of your post misses the point in my opinion...... can't be bothered doing it myself but looking at this list..... how many were the 1-2-3 in the market? 2018 I think, and that year funnily enough it was 5 runners and I have Saint Calvados 100/1 (tipped on here) and the rag was 100/1 .... so even then I still think it was worth it.

So many horses in this list below you'd have collected on.

2022
Edwardstone	Gabynako	Blue Lord

2021
Shishkin	Eldorado Allen	Captain Guinness

2020
Put The Kettle On	Fakir D'Oudairies	Rouge Vif
2019
Duc Des Genievres	Us And Them	Articulum
2018
Footpad	Brain Power	Petit Mouchoir

​

2017
Altior	Cloudy Dream	Ordinary World
2016
Douvan	Sizing John	Fox Norton
2015
Un De Sceaux	God's Own	Josses Hill
2014
Western Warhorse	Champagne Fever	Trifolium
2013
Simonsig	Baily Green	His Excellency

​

 

[Benjy23]

You kind of get one could run below form / fall ....

Yeah, that's definitel;y part of it ... as is the fact that horses don't finish in betting order the majority of the time.

There are enough examples of horses missing targets, like when Politilogue won the QMCC, where he was 20/1 NRNB ante post and book builders expecting the race to cut up. The two shorties came out late, leaving Defi Du Seuil odds on, and he flopped.

There are so many examples of it working, which is why it's a strategy I've used for so long (publically on this forum as well).

Depending on how the final field actually looks you can trade out of some of the positions if you do feel particularly strongly that the race is going to finish how you predict, but hedging and locking in profit is a genuine strategy that some like, and some don't :highly_amused:


My Arkle bits are all in my diary again this year, and agree with the later comment that Hollow Games is a better bet than Final Orders at 20/1 ..... really I should have posted in my diary rather than in here, as talking about peoples own positions isn't meant for these threads particularly.:triumphant:

Relying on non runner to try to gain an edge is an interesting if limited strategy surely...

The 6/4 on him to beat one of the top 3 is a bet for you then, in a 4 horse race. Interestingly (or possibly not) I'd probably have the 4/6 on him to come last in that 4 runner race as better value.

Just trying to have a discussion on 'value', wasn't trying to offend. No need to refer back to your book(s) / profit to be honest :bi_polo:

 

[Kevloaf]

Relying on non runner to try to gain an edge is an interesting if limited strategy surely...

The 6/4 on him to beat one of the top 3 is a bet for you then, in a 4 horse race. Interestingly (or possibly not) I'd probably have the 4/6 on him to come last in that 4 runner race as better value.

Just trying to have a discussion on 'value', wasn't trying to offend. No need to refer back to your book(s) / profit to be honest :bi_polo:

The books and record I have on here is actual evidence though that I'm putting forward as to why it makes sense as a book-builder, where you already remarked you aren't sure and then went on to say you disagree it'd work as a strategy.

Was just trying to help offer the answer... I'll take note of your posts from now on and see where we can chat about 'value' though.

Do you not see in my list above any similar scenarios where a horse that people wouldn't fancy, placed or even won a small field Arkle?

Also, it's not about 'relying' on a horse to be a non-runner to profit, however it's an ante post forum we're on looking for angles... injuries are part of the ante post game.... and with respect, I know I've proven it works, whereas I don't know you or how you go about things at the moment, so I'm justified to defend it when you've put your case forward for why you think it doesn't make sense.

What your not willing to look at, is why Final Orders for me makes sense, but again, it's all in my diary. Happy to debate specifics about value with you in there :encouragement:

 

[Benjy23]

The books and record I have on here is actual evidence though that I'm putting forward as to why it makes sense as a book-builder, where you already remarked you aren't sure and then went on to say you disagree it'd work as a strategy.

Was just trying to help offer the answer... I'll take note of your posts from now on and see where we can chat about 'value' though.

Do you not see in my list above any similar scenarios where a horse that people wouldn't fancy, placed or even won a small field Arkle?

Also, it's not about 'relying' on a horse to be a non-runner to profit, however it's an ante post forum we're on looking for angles... injuries are part of the ante post game.... and with respect, I know I've proven it works, whereas I don't know you or how you go about things at the moment, so I'm justified to defend it when you've put your case forward for why you think it doesn't make sense.

What your not willing to look at, is why Final Orders for me makes sense, but again, it's all in my diary. Happy to debate specifics about value with you in there :encouragement:

I'll be honest I also can't be bothered to look through the previous renewals at the moment. Although the fact you've highlighted the race that had a small field being the one that finished in market order doesn't do your point any favours imo.

I'm not doubting your history of profit pal, I'm pleased for you. And as I said earlier there's definitely scenarios where a race cutting up makes an each way antepost bet a steal, I've no doubt of that and gave a real example from last year. I'd be interested in more similar scenarios to this current Arkle market to be honest, but I don't expect you to do the work. I'll just not get involved in the bet myself and wish you all the best.
​​​​​​
I'll read your case for Final Orders though, as I'm genuinely interested in that sort of stuff. Maybe you aren't considering throwing away the win part, as per my scenario.

We're a sensitive bunch on a horse racing forum aren't we :biggrin-new:

 

[Deleted member 4957]

You kind of get one could run below form / fall ....

Yeah, that's definitel;y part of it ... as is the fact that horses don't finish in betting order the majority of the time.

There are enough examples of horses missing targets, like when Politilogue won the QMCC, where he was 20/1 NRNB ante post and book builders expecting the race to cut up. The two shorties came out late, leaving Defi Du Seuil odds on, and he flopped.

There are so many examples of it working, which is why it's a strategy I've used for so long (publically on this forum as well).

Depending on how the final field actually looks you can trade out of some of the positions if you do feel particularly strongly that the race is going to finish how you predict, but hedging and locking in profit is a genuine strategy that some like, and some don't :highly_amused:


My Arkle bits are all in my diary again this year, and agree with the later comment that Hollow Games is a better bet than Final Orders at 20/1 ..... really I should have posted in my diary rather than in here, as talking about peoples own positions isn't meant for these threads particularly.:triumphant:

Further reminder that 2014 never happened, it's all in your mind...

 

[Kevloaf]

I'll be honest I also can't be bothered to look through the previous renewals at the moment. Although the fact you've highlighted the race that had a small field being the one that finished in market order doesn't do your point any favours imo.

I'm not doubting your history of profit pal, I'm pleased for you. And as I said earlier there's definitely scenarios where a race cutting up makes an each way antepost bet a steal, I've no doubt of that and gave a real example from last year. I'd be interested in more similar scenarios to this current Arkle market to be honest, but I don't expect you to do the work. I'll just not get involved in the bet myself and wish you all the best.
​​​​​​
I'll read your case for Final Orders though, as I'm genuinely interested in that sort of stuff. Maybe you aren't considering throwing away the win part, as per my scenario.

We're a sensitive bunch on a horse racing forum aren't we :biggrin-new:

Well if you can't be arsed to take a look at my diary then I am not getting in to it with you.

Also, as I own 'a' forum, I'm allowed to be more sensitive than most :highly_amused: .... I'm glad you've joined and know it all already though without needing to respect anything that's happened before, pal


The 1-2-3 in betting order would be the best result for me by a mile too nthego:

 

[Benjy23]

Well if you can't be arsed to take a look at my diary then I am not getting in to it with you.

Also, as I own 'a' forum, I'm allowed to be more sensitive than most :highly_amused: .... I'm glad you've joined and know it all already though without needing to respect anything that's happened before, pal


The 1-2-3 in betting order would be the best result my a mile for me by the way....

I just said I would read your diary :welcoming: Think you might want to read it again?

 

[Faugheen_Machine]

Eldorado Allen is the best recent example. He was never put in the race. They didn't try and win it, instead they exaggerated the hold up tactics and he ran past the two (Allmankind and Captain Guinness) that tried to beat Shishkin.

I really like this type of bet, when an extra place is almost certainty at this stage.

 

[Benjy23]

Eldorado Allen is the best recent example. He was never put in the race. They didn't try and win it, instead they exaggerated the hold up tactics and he ran past the two (Allmankind and Captain Guinness) that tried to beat Shishkin.

I really like this type of bet, when an extra place is almost certainty at this stage.

It was a bit more of a one horse race that year but a good example that. Especially as he came 2nd. :encouragement:

 

[DenmanSacre]

For the book builders, has anyone done a comparison after the event on what they'd have won by moving their place stakes to the win only bet and having a pseudo win only ante post book as a comparison?

​​​​​​I can see in some years (Shishkins Arkle year for example where I imagine he was always plenty short) that the place winnings would likely be better but Shishkins Supreme would maybe be the opposite where he was available at 33s before his first run and 40s after his fall and place winnings would be unlikely to bridge the gap.

Never done book building really and mainly do win only so just interested if any one has looked at it.

I'm guessing the answer will be that it depends on the race and probably not actually much in it?

 

[Kevloaf]

For the book builders, has anyone done a comparison after the event on what they'd have won by moving their place stakes to the win only bet and having a pseudo win only ante post book as a comparison?

​​​​​​I can see in some years (Shishkins Arkle year for example where I imagine he was always plenty short) that the place winnings would likely be better but Shishkins Supreme would maybe be the opposite where he was available at 33s before his first run and 40s after his fall and place winnings would be unlikely to bridge the gap.

Never done book building really and mainly do win only so just interested if any one has looked at it.

I'm guessing the answer will be that it depends on the race and probably not actually much in it?

Yeah I do it after each year, usually compare against what I had backed on 1st Jan every year too which is usually in my favour but the odd race slips through where you'd be better off doing nothing.:highly_amused:

I've had enough winners from plugging gaps (Put The Kettle On / Duc des Genivres both immediately spring to mind) in this race alone 'on the day' that make me pretty confident in it. Especially with NRNB coming in so early nowadays too.


Overall, I find I give away some profit overall each race, in what I like to describe as 'faffing' but every so often I have a double figured winner that if I hadn't 'faffed' it'd have been a losing race. One that sticks out was the epic RSA when we had Topofthegame winning SAntini and Delta Work, I had just those 3 for good returns and ending up covering the field and just essentially gave away profit... itwas that result in particular that made me do the analysis myself...

As a book builder, profit from every race is the first objective. Maximising the profit and being more selective is the opposite end of the scale. Someone backing 1 horse per race and winning every race would obviosuly be way ahead... but I've not come across anyone even near that level yet....

I didn't post my analysis last year but not feeling burnt out this year so may well do and I'll make sure I put it all up as it's good to drive a bit of convo

 

[DenmanSacre]

Yeah I do it after each year, usually compare against what I had backed on 1st Jan every year too which is usually in my favour but the odd race slips through where you'd be better off doing nothing.:highly_amused:

I've had enough winners from plugging gaps (Put The Kettle On / Duc des Genivres both immediately spring to mind) in this race alone 'on the day' that make me pretty confident in it. Especially with NRNB coming in so early nowadays too.


Overall, I find I give away some profit overall each race, in what I like to describe as 'faffing' but every so often I have a double figured winner that if I hadn't 'faffed' it'd have been a losing race. One that sticks out was the epic RSA when we had Topofthegame winning SAntini and Delta Work, I had just those 3 for good returns and ending up covering the field and just essentially gave away profit... itwas that result in particular that made me do the analysis myself...

As a book builder, profit from every race is the first objective. Maximising the profit and being more selective is the opposite end of the scale. Someone backing 1 horse per race and winning every race would obviosuly be way ahead... but I've not come across anyone even near that level yet....

I didn't post my analysis last year but not feeling burnt out this year so may well do and I'll make sure I put it all up as it's good to drive a bit of convo

Thanks for answering.

 

[Lobos]

Why the collapse in odds for Banbridge?? Into a general 10's. Was 25's a few days ago. Tipped up ?? Or have you had a lump on as cover Kev?

 

[Saxon Warrior]

Why the collapse in odds for Banbridge?? Into a general 10's. Was 25's a few days ago. Tipped up ?? Or have you had a lump on as cover Kev?

Probably nothing more than firms going from antepost to NRNB Lobos

Betfair and Coral, leaving Unibet as the lone Antepost firm, getting scared and cutting him, which isn’t unusual for them when they’re the biggest price.

He is 40s for the Arkle on BFX if you want a true antepost price for the race without NRNB,