National Hunt Right-Handed Sire System

Premise

Certain sires produce offspring that have marked preferences for right or left handed tracks. Although this is known by many, it is not something that is immediately apparent on race cards and so may not be reflected in the market. A system that identifies horses that prefer right or left handed tracks therefore has the potential for selecting horses whose chances of winning (or losing) are not adequately reflected in the market.

Initial Aim

If the premise is correct, it ought to be possible to produce systems for backing and laying at right and left handed tracks. This particular system is aimed at identifying horses to back at right handed tracks.

STARTING POINT

The first task is to identify if particular sires do indeed produce horses with preferences for right handed tracks. I use the Horseracebase (HRB) system. Using HRB for all NH races since 2003 at RH Tracks at odds of 10/1 or under the following data is produced:

Stallion	Bets	Wins	W %	SP P/L	Places	P %
Midnight Legend	329	88	27%	148.28	192	58%
Alhaarth (IRE)	364	88	24%	69.17	189	52%
Mujadil (USA)	120	28	23%	60.33	58	48%
Karinga Bay	552	113	20%	59.45	249	45%
Rudimentary (USA)	393	76	19%	39.39	165	42%
Tiraaz (USA)	99	26	26%	39.34	50	51%
Lute Antique (FR)	105	27	26%	36.86	56	53%
Strong Gale	135	35	26%	34.68	62	46%
Victory Note (USA)	100	28	28%	30.65	55	55%
Passing Sale (FR)	112	25	22%	27.34	53	47%
Fruits Of Love (USA)	108	26	24%	26.94	60	56%
Kingmambo (USA)	103	25	24%	26.34	41	40%
Diesis	134	30	22%	24.1	70	52%
Rossini (USA)	84	18	21%	24.08	31	37%
Second Empire (IRE)	127	24	19%	23.37	55	43%
Deploy	194	49	25%	20.43	87	45%
In The Wings	392	82	21%	19.95	175	45%
Weld	94	22	23%	19.1	46	49%
Sakhee (USA)	89	26	29%	18.88	49	55%
Lahib (USA)	221	48	22%	18.34	102	46%
Mull Of Kintyre (USA)	104	19	18%	18.21	49	47%

I prefer to look at odds of 10/1 or below to ensure that long priced winners don’t skew the performance. I’ve also used a minimum sample size of 75 to try to ensure reliability. From the table it would seem that there is definitely something here. Midnight Legend stands out as a horse with a big sample (329) and a big level stakes profit (£148), but all of the horses listed seem to show a strong ROI. This looks like a strong starting point, and definitely worthy of further study.

Analysis

On the face of it, it would now seem simple to run a system that identifies runners, with the sires listed above, running at RH tracks. Indeed the historical performance data for this system is:

Bets	Wins	WinStrike	SP_PL	Places	PlaceStrike
3959	903	22.81%	785.23	1894	47.84%

However, the raw statistics require further examination. In any random sample there will be variations. A first check is to compare the performance of these sires on LH tracks to see if there is a definite difference in performance between RH and LH tracks. Looking at the comparative performance of these sires on RH and LH tracks reveals the following:

	Right Hand		Left Hand
Stallion	W %	SP P/L	W %	SP P/L	R/L Ratio
Midnight Legend	27%	£148	21	£60	1.29
Alhaarth (IRE)	24%	£69	18	-£71	1.33
Mujadil (USA)	23%	£60	14	-£38	1.64
Karinga Bay	20%	£59	18	-£23	1.11
Rudimentary (USA)	19%	£39	17	£15	1.12
Tiraaz (USA)	26%	£39	22	£16	1.18
Lute Antique (FR)	26%	£37	17	-£27	1.53
Strong Gale	26%	£35	18	-£13	1.44
Victory Note (USA)	28%	£31	13	-£22	2.15
Passing Sale (FR)	22%	£27	20	-£6	1.10
Fruits Of Love (USA)	24%	£27	13	-£47	1.85
Kingmambo (USA)	24%	£26	17	-£30	1.41
Diesis	22%	£24	17	-£51	1.29
Rossini (USA)	21%	£24	18	£1	1.17
Second Empire (IRE)	19%	£23	24	£29	0.79
Deploy	25%	£20	20	£12	1.25
In The Wings	21%	£20	25	£10	0.84
Weld	23%	£19	15	-£13	1.53
Sakhee (USA)	29%	£19	19	-£12	1.53
Lahib (USA)	22%	£18	19	-£32	1.16
Mull Of Kintyre (USA)	18%	£18	21	£9	0.86

The three sires in red actually perform better on RH tacks than LH tracks. Interestingly they show a level stakes profit in either direction and as such are worthy of further study. For the purposes of this system though they are eliminated. The other sires show a R/L win ratio of between 1.10 and 2.15 and it is clear that the majority of these exhibit a marked preference for RH tracks. However, a case could be made for the removal of some of the sires at the lower end of the R/L ratio. Rather than do that at this at this stage, I chose to examine their performance in more detail on a year-by-year basis to get a fuller picture (see Tables 1 & 2 on last page). The other standout statistic is Midnight Legend. Clearly this sire’s progeny favour RH tracks (27% winners vs 21%, and right/left ratio of 1.29) but there is still a healthy level stakes profit on LH tracks and this sire is definitely worth a detailed examination.

Looking at the sire’s year-by-year record it was quickly apparent that Mujadil, Strong Gale, Lute Antique, Victory Note and Passing Sale could be removed from the system as they no longer have enough horses (if any) running to justify inclusion. The data for these horses is not included in the tables. Table 1 shows those horses that I have selected for inclusion in the trial system. At the moment, this is a matter of judgment and not a precise science. The two most borderline cases are Lahib and Rossini. Lahib’s overall profile looks strong. It had two negative years but is strongly positive in the other years. The last two years have shown an increased number of runners with a very solid performance and so Lahib is included. Rossini has few runners but overall looks positive – probably it wouldn’t make much difference to the system either way.

I have excluded three sires at this stage: Karinga Bay, Rudimentary and Fruits of Love. Each of these decisions are borderline, but overall there is too much inconsistency in their profiles, combined with lower ROI, for inclusion in the system.

The System

The preceding analysis leads to the following system:

NH Racing. Right handed track. Odds 10/1 or less. Sired by: Midnight Legend; Alhaarth; Tiraaz, Kingmambo; Sakhee & Rossini.

Discussion

As Table 2 shows backing all such horses would have resulted in the following results since 2003:

Year	R	W	P/L	W%	ROI
2012	56	14	23.2	25	41
2011	238	57	61.7	24	26
2010	219	60	67.2	27	31
2009	207	52	60	25	29
2008	199	45	-1	23	-1
2007	138	27	32.5	20	24
2006	104	23	4.45	22	4
2005	67	22	48.8	33	73
2004	39	11	17.9	28	46
2003	26	10	31.9	38	123
Total	1293	321	347	25	27

As we all know, past performance is no guarantee of future success. Although the figures look good, the figures for 2008 worry me. If the system is sound, how do we account for this blip? It could be that the system actually depends on a small number of successful winners that happen to have a preference for RH tracks. I’d like to do further analysis on this angle.

On a more positive note, might the system be honed further still? One aspect that I would like to investigate is how different track characteristics affect the performance. For example, do these horses prefer say tight tracks or more undulating tracks?

Of course, the proof of the pudding is in the eating, and I will be trialing the system on the forum. I hope that by doing so I can stimulate discussion on this topic and in this way refine the system through our collective insight. If it is shown to have potential, then it will be worth looking into similar systems for laying, LH tracks and flat racing.

 

 

 

Table 1		Midnight Legend			Alhaarth			Tiraaz			Kingmambo			Rossini			Sakhee			Lahib				Total
Year	R	W	P/L	R	W	P/L	R	W	P/L	R	W	P/L	R	W	P/L	R	W	P/L	R	W	P/L	R	W	P/L	W%	ROI
2012	25	8	19	7	0	-7	4	1	7	3	0	-3	1	0	-1	11	4	4.19	5	1	4	56	14	23.2	25	41
2011	69	16	8.21	65	17	19.2	8	2	-0.64	14	3	3.13	11	3	11	29	8	5.23	42	8	15.6	238	57	61.7	24	26
2010	59	18	40.7	61	12	0.23	21	6	1.09	10	3	1.26	5	1	3	14	5	8	49	15	12.9	219	60	67.2	27	31
2009	53	17	39.8	54	11	-1.45	25	6	3.76	14	4	17.5	10	4	9	26	8	6.88	25	2	-15.5	207	52	60	25	29
2008	56	18	26.8	64	13	-8.29	21	5	4.38	13	4	1.32	14	2	-4.75	9	2	-2.17	22	1	-18.3	199	45	-1	23	-1
2007	23	4	4	34	6	10.3	16	3	3	17	4	6.83	24	4	4	1	0	-1	23	6	5.38	138	27	32.5	20	24
2006	21	1	-19.6	30	8	5.55	2	2	11.8	10	3	0.13	19	4	2.83	0	0	0	22	5	3.75	104	23	4.45	22	4
2005	14	4	14.3	33	13	21.2	2	1	9	10	1	0	0	0	0	0	0	0	8	3	4.34	67	22	48.8	33	73
2004	5	2	11	11	4	11.8	0	0	0	8	1	-6.33	0	0	0	0	0	0	15	4	1.5	39	11	17.9	28	46
2003	6	1	5	6	4	16.8	0	0	0	4	2	5.5	0	0	0	0	0	0	10	3	4.67	26	10	31.9	38	123
Total	331	89	149	365	88	68.2	99	26	39.3	103	25	26.3	84	18	24.1	90	27	21.1	221	48	18.3	1293	321	347	25	27

 

Table 2		Karinga Bay			Rudimentary			Fruits of Love				Total
Year	R	W	P/L	R	W	P/L	R	W	P/L	R	W	P/L	W%	ROI
2012	26	7	11.5	15	5	13.5	9	1	-2.5	50	13	22.5	26	45
2011	129	22	-14.8	45	7	-2.33	28	10	23.4	202	39	6.25	19	3
2010	66	11	-6.77	51	11	2.48	10	2	-5.95	127	24	-10	19	-8
2009	36	7	-0.5	73	15	10.1	16	1	-11.5	125	23	-2	18	-2
2008	36	4	-9.25	75	11	-12.3	14	3	4.5	125	18	-17	14	-14
2007	47	12	40.8	38	3	-11	20	3	-1.1	105	18	28.7	17	27
2006	54	13	7.44	24	3	-10.8	11	6	20.1	89	22	16.8	25	19
2005	58	14	11	25	10	29.6	0	0	0	83	24	40.6	29	49
2004	68	17	21.9	28	6	6.38	0	0	0	96	23	28.3	24	29
2003	34	6	-3.79	19	5	13.8	0	0	0	53	11	9.96	21	19
Total	554	113	57.5	393	76	39.4	108	26	26.9	1055	215	124	20	12