Having invested time and money in a race, it’s worth looking again after the event to see what can be learnt.  Could Serabad’s win have been predicted?  I don’t see that I would have backed him even with hindsight.  I had him marked down on recent form, overall form and trainer/jockey, with a resulting value price of 9/1.  It would have taken considerable changes in the scoring to bring him nearer the 2/1 of Lough Derg.  There was a factor which I didn’t account for though, the weight differential.  Lough had beaten Serabad twice in recent runs at this course, resulting in a 10lb change in relative weights in Serabad’s favour.  That is something I didn’t calculate, partly because it apparently takes a lot to reverse the positions of horses who have previously met.  I think I might have been more attentive to this weight differential but still not to the extent that it would make a difference to any bet.  The fact that Serabad only managed to win by a head suggests I was right, though only just!

Serabad was 16s at the early prices against 9s value price and I followed the principle of the shorter value price which is a value offer being the bet.  16s is not so much greater than 9s to be standout value – if anything it confirms my doubts.  It sometimes helps to respect the general outline of bookie’s prices as a reality check, though not too much or we’d get nothing done!  As prices get longer there is less leeway for error.  I have also adopted Mark Cramer’s principle of only considering true priced runners of 6/1 or shorter, whatever the apparent value.  This ensures a reasonable strike rate.

Chief Yeoman was about 3 lengths back to finish 5th, “held up towards rear, headway approaching 2 out, ridden to chase leaders before last, no extra flat touched 10/1 “.

Anyway, four days before the next race – like crossing a barren desert after all the excitement, hope I don’t die of boredom before Thursday.

Advertisements