7/30/2019 72. Speed Rating Hurdle System

1/3

SPEED RATINGS HURDLE SYSTEM

The use of the clock in National Hunt racing is a far less popular methodfor searching for winners than it is in flat racing, simply because of the manydiscrepancies with which the jumping code is burdened with (unreliable race

distances, ultra-slow run races, unreliable standard times to name but a few).

That is, however, not to say that profits cannot be made by using time as aguide. In fact, it could be argued that if an edge in this sphere could be foundthen it would probably prove profitable to follow for a longer time span than asimilar system devised for flat racing would, due to the popularity of speed-ratings amongst punters on the latter code driving prices down taking away anyvalue to be had.

Well start by looking at all races over the last four NH seasons and theresults of those runners rated/not rated by Topspeed (the Racing Posts very own

speed rating figures)

TOPSPEED WINS RUNS STRIKE% LSP LSP%

Top-rated 2917 12701 22.97 -764.14 -6.02

Not top-rated 10101 115876 8.72 -35871.01 -30.96

Immediately this tells us that Topspeeds top-rated runners should begiven respect in National Hunt races. The LSP% loss of a little over 6% is highlycommendable considering over 12 thousand races were involved, and of coursethere will undoubtedly have been plenty of no-hopers making up a percentage

of the selections.

Concentrating on these Topspeed top-rated horses, well analyse themfurther by looking at their starting prices. Its logical to presume that thosetowards the head of the market are going to be the ones producing the higherstrike rates and higher profits, as many of the bigger priced selections willprobably have been running under unsuitable conditions, hence their inflatedprices

SP position WINS RUNS STRIKE% LSP LSP%1st fav 1635 4001 40.86 -217.67 -5.44

2nd fav 653 2566 25.45 195.33 7.61

3rd fav 281 1869 15.03 -195.12 -10.44

4th fav 154 1371 11.23 -157.67 -11.50

5th fav 85 934 9.10 -69.50 -7.44

6th fav 51 663 7.69 -3.50 -0.53

7/30/2019 72. Speed Rating Hurdle System

2/3

7th fav 25 419 5.97 -106.00 -25.30

8th fav 17 310 5.48 -17.00 -5.48

9th fav 4 182 2.20 -92.00 -50.55

10th fav 12 386 3.11 -101.00 -26.17

No surprise then to see a gradual fall in strike rate % as the SP positionrises. Its clear from the above stats that its the front two horses in the bettingwhich we need to be concentrating, with just a small loss of 22.34 level stakepoints from over six and a half thousand bets.

So have our first two rules; top-rated on Topspeed and either favourite or2nd favourite in the betting.

Next well analyse these qualifiers by examining the results from differentrace distances

DISTANCE WINS RUNS STRIKE% LSP LSP%

2m 2m 2f 834 2427 34.36 -66.81 -2.75

2m 2.5f 3m 1082 3079 35.14 -9.28 -0.30

> 3m 0.5f 372 1061 35.06 53.75 5.07

Theres no denying over which distances the profit comes from althoughthe strike rates are almost identical, clearly the shorter the trip, the more over betthe qualifiers are. Concentrating solely on those running in races over a distanceof further than three miles returns a healthy 5.07 LSP%.

Finally well look to see whether the race type has any bearing on results,as the pace of jumping hurdles differs somewhat to that of jumping fences

OBSTACLE WINS RUNS STRIKE% LSP LSP%

Chase 249 776 32.09 -30.21 -3.89

Hurdle 123 285 43.16 83.96 29.46

Pretty conclusive proof there that hurdle races are the ones to concentrate

on here. Not much of a surprise really as the pace in hurdle events is muchstronger than in chases, as the horses can jump the smaller obstacles far morequickly than the bigger fences, and therefore speed ratings have more of animpact in hurdle races.

So the final rules and results are as follows

7/30/2019 72. Speed Rating Hurdle System

3/3

a) Topspeed top-rated horses onlyb) Horse must be either first or second SP favouritec) Only consider races longer than 3 miles in distanced) Hurdle races only

YEAR WINS RUNS STRIKE% LSP LSP%

2001 28 77 36.36 18.99 24.66

2002 30 66 45.45 15.53 23.53

2003 40 76 52.63 37.32 49.11

2004 25 66 37.88 12.12 18.36

TOTAL 123 285 43.16 83.96 29.46