Grand National Preview 2008

[ONEDUNME]

L'ami is French Bred

[jbgb007uk]

The question was more of a why!!!

Contraband????

[traeth]

Originally Posted by jbgb007uk

The question was more of a why!!!

Contraband????

Other stats of importance...

No French bred horse has won this race since 1909 due to their style of breeding (horses in France don't race over extreme distances so they breed them to have more speed infuence than stamina) and with the physical demands of this race they always seem to be stretched past their limit - plenty have gone close (CLAN ROYAL a good example) without quite getting home, and although the other 'Nationals' have been won by these types, the demands of this race just seems too much for them.

the last three years national thread has had discussion regarding french horses inability to win this race
I was under the imppression that Vodka Bleu and L'Ami were French bred

Contraband????

was initially a copy and paste error being above Mckelvey in the list ... can I leave him out now?

[jbgb007uk]

I remember last years thread well Traeth, good luck with the frenchies, I am really going single handed with Bewleys Berry!!!

[Seen]

Originally Posted by crowie

Seen,

Would never disagree with your analysis about weights as its practically the first thing I look at in the National field, usually draw a line at 11st and rule out anything above that and you have knocked out a fair percentage of the field.

You can see the last few winners

1984 Hallo Dandy 10 10-02
1985 Last Suspect 11 10-05
1986 West Tip 9 10-11
1987 Maori Venture 11 10-13
1988 Rhyme 'n' Reason 9 11-00
1989 Little Polveir 12 10-03
1990 Mr Frisk 11 10-06
1991 Seagram 11 10-06
1992 Party Politics 8 10-07
1994 Miinnehoma 11 10-08
1995 Royal Athlete 12 10-06
1996 Rough Quest 10 10-07
1997 Lord Gyllene 9 10-00
1998 Earth Summit 10 10-05
1999 Bobbyjo 9 10-00
2000 Papillon 9 10-12
2001 Red Marauder 11 10-11
2002 Bindaree 8 10-04
2003 Monty's Pass 10 10-07
2004 Amberleigh House 12 10-10
2005 Hedgehunter 9 11-01
2006 Numbersixvalverde 10 10-08
2007 Silver Birch 10 10-06

And its only been the pretty exceptional Hedgehunter that has carried over the 11st mark and then it was only 1lb over.



However have you any thoughts on this year maybe being a little bit different in terms of weight carrying?


Reason I am thinking this is that in most years the National is 40 runners and in most years bottom weight is 10st. Sure there maybe a couple running out of the handicap but there is usually a fair few who are running of their proper weights but who are running with much lighter weights than those carrying 11st and above.

But looking at this years field and now that Ollie Magern is out it looks like the 40th horse, at the moment, is going to be Philson Run but its going to be carrying 10-8.

While its still a big ask to carry more than 11st to win there is also not as many lighter weighted horses in the race this year. 14 of the above winners all carried less than 10-8 to win and you can understand them being at an advantage running over such a distance in previous years over those carrying 11st+.

This year the biggest advantage over the 11st+ horses is only going to be 6lbs, not the upto 1st it has been in previous years.


I know you said that everyone says each year that this will be the year a heavier weighted one wins and I have to admit I usually dismiss this out of hand but this year it would be a bit more likely IMO due to the compression of the weights/handicap.

Hi Crowie,

yes, it's definitely something to look at - stats are useful as a guide but they need logic behind them....and you need to be flexible if circumstances change.

I'm halfway through doing a spreadsheet where I give ratings to each runner for several variables which I believe have an impact on the race, I'm probably going to consider those carrying up to 11-4, as long as they pass the other tests - it would be daft to say a horse can win under 11-1 but not under 11-2 for example.

[selectabet]

Does any one know what time the final declarations will be made today?

[crowie]

Originally Posted by ONEDUNME

I think you have something there Crowie. As I've said before, I certainly wouldn't rule out any of my fancies due to previous stats and with the gap narrowing, and the going not looking like it's going to be too testing (which would make the weight even more significant) I'm looking at things up to 11st 3 at the moment.

Originally Posted by Seen

Hi Crowie,

yes, it's definitely something to look at - stats are useful as a guide but they need logic behind them....and you need to be flexible if circumstances change.

I'm halfway through doing a spreadsheet where I give ratings to each runner for several variables which I believe have an impact on the race, I'm probably going to consider those carrying up to 11-4, as long as they pass the other tests - it would be daft to say a horse can win under 11-1 but not under 11-2 for example.

Cheers ODM/Seen.

Am on 3 at present from a good few weeks ago, McKelvey, Point Barrow and Slim Pickings. Got Slim Pickings at about 22/1 and with it now much shorter was happy til I noticed its weight. However the more I looked at the weights this year the more I thought its not as bad as previous years as the most its going to be giving away is 9lb.

[mrmuzeman]

So who do I back then

I backed Mckelvey, Point Barrow and Dun Doire last year. Looks like Mckelvey and Naunton Brook are goers this year then?

You got your picks done yet Seen?

[ONEDUNME]

Originally Posted by Seen

- it would be daft to say a horse can win under 11-1 but not under 11-2 for example.

A bit like saying a French horse can finish second but that one cannot win then, would you say?

[Seen]

I've never said a french horse cannot win, but the stats suggest their breeding makes them vunerable at the business end of the race, much in the same way weight tells dramatically on the run-in.

[Seen]

Still on with my analysis now, will post it tonight hopefully.

[ONEDUNME]

Are you going to be much longer? My eyelids are getting heavy

[Seen]

Okay, here we are...

I've gone through every runner, allocating them marks for each variable I feel is important. I've colour coded the marks to make it easy to see the positives and negatives.

dark peach is +2pts
light peach is +1pt
light blue is -1pt
dark blue is -2pts

An explanation of each variable...

AGE - 9 and 10 is the best age, with 8, 11 and 12 doing next best. Anything older or younger are up against it.
WEIGHT - a big advantage carrying a low weight, so full marks to those carrying 11st or less with gradually decreasing marks for every 4lbs over.
LAST RUN - this is the number of days since the horses last run, between 16 and 49 days is the best timespan.
STAY? - I've used my own opinion here as to whether I think the horse will stay or not.
JUMP? - A horse ideally needs to have shown it can jump in a big field.
EXP? - Experience. This is based on how many years the horse has been chasing and how many chase runs they've had.
CLASS? - This is based on the value of their chase wins, or sometimes a narrow defeat.
FRENCH? - As explained previously in this thread, the French don't race over extreme trips so breed their horses for speed rather than stamina. Several have gone close and even won other long distance chases, but it seems this 4m4f trip under such extreme circumstances proves a step too far. Still, I've only used the +1 and -1 marks for this as it's not one of the stronger stats.
DWNGRD? - I've looked at the last winners of this race and the last 8 have all won this off a mark very close to the highest they have ever been rated. So those runners who contest this race off a mark considerable lower than they once were don't win as they are on the downgrade and you need a horse at or near its peak to win this. The rating for CLOUDY LANE is flawed as his OR has been readjusted after the weights for this race were framed, so I've ignored it.
BL/V? - horses weraing headgear (blinkers and visors, not tongue-ties or cheekpieces) have a terrible record in the Grand National (last 7 years, 0 wins from 37, with 78% (29/37) failing to complete) as their view is impeded which will obviously lead to problems in the jumping department. I've used +2 and -2 here as it's a strong negative.

The first graph is in racecard order, the 2nd one is in rating order...





So there we are - 4 top-rated and 5 narrowly behind. Do with them what you will

If anyone spots a mistake the PLEASE TELL ME - last year I didn't do this as thoroughly and left out the 33/1 winner by mistake, like the plum I am Of course, Sods Law means that this year after I've spent several hours on it all my bets will hit the floor by the 6th fence

[Seen]

Fuck off ODM, that took me ages.......then after I'd uploaded the image to imageshack I noticed a mistake, had to alter it all then upload again....then imageshack wasn't working....had to use another host, picoodle or something.....gah, the fucking winner had better one of the top rated or I'M NEVER BETTING AGAIN that's a lie, I can't stop, ever, I'm a compulsive gambler - sometimes the kids don't eat for a week

[ONEDUNME]

Lot of work gone into that mate. Don't think we don't appreciate it.