Thursday, 7 August 2008

Messy Race!

Not going to dwell too much on this but a few thoughts.

As the title states, it was a very messy race. They actually went a decent clip which suited Golden down to the ground but as he came through to make his challenge, he just didn’t seem to go anywhere fast!

Without moaning too much, not really sure why he came so near to the rail as subsequent events showed that the middle was the place to be.

However, the key was definitely the ground. The only time they ever go anywhere near that rail is when the ground is riding soft. Hence, it was soft ground.

As Andrew said to me after the race, I got most things right! It was backed from 10/1 to 13/2 before drifting to 8/1 late on. On Betfair, it was continually weak but it did reach lower than 9 pre-race which was nice for those of us trading it! I had a large bet at 10 and 10.5 and laid off at 9.

It traded at below 4 in running (small amounts were matched below 3), so it shows it travelled well.

Due to trading it, I ended up with a very large riskfree bet on it pre-race but I then topped up another £30 at the off and attempted to lay my £30 off at 2.08, so it was a £30 loss. However, I was getting near a 4 figure return, so I can’t complain too much.

The only good thing from the race was that it finished 2nd last after tiring in the ground. That will go down as its worst run this season and it was beaten a fair way at the end.

Why is this good?????

Hopefully, Mr Handicapper will be very kind and drop it another 2lbs or so. Next time, assuming it gets its ground, it will be a better bet than it was tonight as it will be factored into its price that it ran badly last time.

If we assume it’s maybe dropped 2lbs, runs in a 16 runner handicap in 3 weeks on firm ground and is priced at 16/1, I suggest we all lump on it!

Until then, consider any losses as money lent!

You can see why I never give out tips to anyone. Every man and his dog I knew backed that and when some see it finished 2nd last, they will think I’ve lost the plot! lol

As tonight showed, the one key factor in horse-racing is the ground. I hope the trainer is kicking himself for running it tonight as he did the horse a disservice as well as making me look a little bit silly on here!

Whatever happens, I don’t doubt that the horse is well handicapped and ready to win a race and for that reason, I’ll follow it next time without even looking at the race. I suggest you all do the same!

Incidentally, any horse that is being aimed at the Brighton mile must really love firm ground. They haven’t had soft ground in 2 years! Seems obvious now…….


Anonymous said...

thats all very well, but as you said it dosen't go on soft ground. the ground was clearly soft, so why still back it???

seems strange to me that such an expert will still back horses on completely inadequite ground? which is the most important factor in betting on horses??

would like to see your explanation of this.

Anonymous said...

your such a piece of shit.

you fooled everyone into thinking this was going to win. your nothing but a dodgy con artist

fucking arsehole

Anonymous said...

I suggest you ignore the previous two posts...
As anyone with half a brain knows, horse racing is not an exact science. There are an almost infinite number of variables that can affect the result of a particular race.
You offered a well reasoned case as to why Golden Prospect could win the race last night. It was well backed (suggesting you weren't the only one who thought it had a good chance) and traded at 2.66 IR...
The fact it didn't win could have been down to the ground; the jockey; the pace of the race; the tactics; even luck...!
I would defy anyone to 'guarentee' that a particular horse was going to win a particular race. I think you said as much in your initial post on it...
Personally, I'm just grateful that gambling retards like the above two operate on Betfair - it gives me a decent chance of making the game pay !

Anonymous said...


I've been keeping tabs on your blog and find it very interesting.

I was never planning on posting a comment but after the first 2 on here I thought I would.

I know nothing about horses and was considering putting a bet on the horse but never got round to it.

If others decided to do it on the strength of your opinion then that was their decision.

If they want to win at this then they should put the effort in themselves. Stop looking for the easy option and putting the blame on others.

Please don't let them put you off posting any other pre-race analysis because they are idiots. Even though I don't grasp much of what you are saying others clearly do and it is up to them to make their own minds up.

As for you being a dodgy con artist it is not like you made any money from them.

Keep up the blog and I look forward to reading more.


Alistair said...

Hi Graeme,

I think it was one of the Steve's who said that one shouldn't moderate comments as it puts people off commenting in the first place.

That second comment to this post is a clear example why you should. By allowing such comments, you only serve to give such idiots a forum. Moderating comments on blogger still allows comments from anonymous, non-blogger users.

Any user with something constructive and valuable to say, would not be put off by any moderation by the blog owner imo.


PJS said...

Working with Graeme I know how much time and effort he puts into his horse analysis

Graeme Dand said...

First anonymous,

I think you actually raise a very good point. I agree that ground is the most important factor in horse-racing. I said that in the post.

However, how did I know it wouldn’t go on soft ground? It was only my opinion. Yes, I highlighted the two previous times it ran on soft ground and it got stuffed both times, so IMO, it doesn’t like soft ground.

However, I still backed it for 3 main reasons:

 I have to believe that every trainer knows which conditions suit their horses. If the ground was soft, I thought they would have pulled it out if they knew it didn’t like it. Hence, they probably didn’t know if it liked soft ground or not. I bet they know now……
 I’m only a part-time form student at best. The chance of me finding a 10/1 chance that was in form and so well handicapped and I know was fit and well (The Stable Tour comment backed this up) is pretty slim. Hence, I would have been kicking myself if I had not backed it.
 Lastly, I was lucky enough to be able to generate a large riskfree bet before the off. Hence, I actually gambled £30 for a return of £900. My odds were around 30/1. Even taking into account the ground factor, I still thought this was a value bet for £30.

What’s your opinion? Should I have not backed it? Should I have been happy with my large riskfree bet? Should I have laid £200 at 3 and made £200 profit on the race guaranteed IR?

I await your anonymous response.


Graeme Dand said...

Second anonymous,

I should really delete your comment mate as it is just rubbish. As I said yesterday, I don’t want to moderate the blog though, so I don’t mind everyone seeing your view.

I didn’t fool anyone. I gave a very strong argument of why that horse represented value at 10/1 IMO. However, I made it clear my view was ground dependant.

As Andrew said above, I don’t know why it didn’t run to form. Was it really the ground? Maybe it didn’t feel like running well!

Con-artist? What did I get from telling everyone about my thoughts on a horse? I didn’t say to anyone to back that horse.

Surely, given my pre-race explanation of why the horse may not like soft ground, it would have been in everyone’s interests to lay the horse last night……

A colleague here wanted to back the horse last night but I said don’t back it if it’s soft. He laid it IR at 3.8 after seeing the previous race and how soft the ground was!

That’s why he’s got brains and you don’t mate!


P.S. Maybe a lesson for me here also. If a horse is well handicapped on the wrong ground,it may come there cruising but won’t see it out. Hence, lay in running……doh!

Graeme Dand said...

Cheers A.

lol @ retards. That’s 2 of my readers you are slagging off mate!

I didn’t want to dwell too much on the fact it traded below 3 IR as it’s not much use to anyone who backed it with a bookmaker but it proves it travelled well!

I think the one thing that no one has really mentioned is the fact that it was an 8/1 chance. This means that on average, it should win 1 in 9 races.

I can understand people getting annoyed if I fancied a 4/7 shot who finished last but it was 8/1 ffs. Surely no one has done their bollocks on an 8/1 chance due to me saying it was well handicapped!

Anyhow, I’ve enjoyed the banter over the last couple of days concerning this horse on here, so I’m sure it’s been a good read.

It’s also been a nice release away from learning to trade, so it will be back to boring trading now for me!


Graeme Dand said...

Hi Al.

Thanks for the comment. It’s good to get a nice comment from someone who hasn’t commented before.

Being honest, part of the reason I have a blog is to get a bit of banter with the readers and most of it is good natured. I’d not analysed a race on here for a few months and being honest, I didn’t even look at that race too much to be honest. It was all about that one horse.

As I said recently, I’m trying to learn to trade at the moment, so my blog was in danger of becoming boring! For example, I made 34p profit last night from my first real night of trying to scalp and I’m not going to do a post explaining that. I learned a few more things though, but it will be slow going for a while yet.

I think it’s cool that traders, gamblers and non-horseracing people read my blog and I don’t mind people asking questions about horse racing or trading.

Depending on how quickly I pick up the trading, I may look at a few other races on here to gamble on but I’d like to do some posts concerned with trading and how my learning is going.

Cheers for reading and feel free to comment on any posts if you have any questions or comments.


Graeme Dand said...

Hi Alistair.

I take your point. Being honest, maybe I’ve just been lucky up to now but I’ve never really had many negative or stupid comments on here.

I’ve had a few in the last couple of weeks I think and maybe it’s just someone winding me up. I know you said you’ve had a few and I read about Ticksize, so maybe there are just a few idiots out there.

I’m happy to allow everyone to post until it gets to the stage where the idiots take over but I can take a little bit of stick after last night’s race!

Enjoy your break by the way mate. Relax and forget about Betfair!!!!


Graeme Dand said...

lol PJS

This is basically a bit of an insider joke here but that’s the initials of our boss!

When I read the email from blogger (sent to my work’s email address), that PJS had posted that comment, you can imagine I nearly shit myself!!! LOL

Turns out it was one of my mates here winding me up!

You can tell it’s Friday!

Steve said...


Your blog is not half creating some interest!

As Andrew says above, ignore the first 2 comments. I’ve never read so much shit in my life.

I backed that horse yesterday and lost a small packet on it. However, I’ve never backed a horse in my life knowing that it was such a good value bet. Win or lose, I was happy with the bet I made.

I managed to get 11/1 from a bookmaker and I did think about leaving a lay at 4 IR to cover my stake but I decided against it. As you said above, it was backed before the race, traded low in running and ran well. The RP comment said it “weakened rapidly from 1f pole” which would have been down to the ground.

I’m not sure what people want. As you said above, it was an 8/1 chance. I’ve never been so sure of a bet on an 8/1 chance as I was last night.

Don’t let these fools put you off posting a horse up here again. Post up a few thoughts and if people follow it, they should back it. If not, they shouldn’t. What they can’t do is back it and then blame you when it loses.

Nice try.


Steve said...

Graeme , I'd imagine you're right about someone probably winding you up hoping to get a response. The only way to avoid the dumber anonymous posts is to ignore them or delete them. Replying to them only gives them more reason to post again.

It's not as if someone has stumbled across your blog for the first time and decided to back a horse @10's thinking it's going to win. Anyone reading the blog would know you're just putting up an opinion. And the other anonymous is just putting up a valid point of view.

The bigger the blog gets the more likely you're get opposing views which is only a good thing downside is the trolls come out to play.

FWIW I'd have at least laid off some of the £900 You'd obviously got a value bet at 30's and in the long run they'll pay off left as is but again you need to decide if you can take those losing runs. Laying some off at 3's would also have been a value bet after the event and you just need to decide where you perceive the value to be in both lays and backs.

Anonymous said...

Hi again, I was anonymous number1,
Really quite offended by the retard comment someone made about my gambling performance. I am not going to get into all that but will gladly email you screenshots of my betfair p+l.

I was hoping to make a valid point of that horse racing is all about the ground and the trainers are not whiter than white as i have joint owned a few decent horses and know exactly how it works!

Fair play greame, you have spotted a nicely handicapped horse there, but as i say, you wouldn't believe the amount of things that have to be in a mediocre horses favour to win a race!
I am sure however he will win a race, but with all the conditions firmly in his favour.

Greame yes you did get value at 30-1, excellent value as i had it in at around 18s/20s. and no 8-1 was not a value bet. i would certainly left your large riskfree and not laid a penny off, as you will definatley win longterm if you find horses like that and get such a large risk free on them!

i don't want to babble on so i will leave it there, but i would like to discuss any future views you have, as i am not a gambling retard and as the comment said you will not make easy money on betfair from me!!!

Wasn't having a go at all, merely raising an opinion.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous no.1,
Fair play to you for posting again and qualifying your comments - as I was the one who called you a 'retard', I am prepared to withdraw that comment (though it still sticks for anonymous no.2 unless he's willing to come back on and defend his comments - a little more difficult to do, I think !).
I admit that I did group you both together as you both left anonymous, negative/destructive comments - and I really don't feel Graeme deserves abuse...
All he was doing was explaining his rationale for backing a particular horse. I - and I suspect others - find his method very interesting and the last thing I want is for him to stop doing this because he receives abuse if his selection doesn't win...
As I said in my original post - and Graeme elaborated on - Horse racing is not an exact science. In reference to your particular comments, I agree that the ground is a very important factor - but it was impossible to be confident in advance, that the horse didn't go on the ground and it was also tricky to know exactly how soft the ground was riding...
Anyway, I apologise for any offence caused - but if you do post again, I would suggest adding your name to the end of your entry so that others feel you want to contribute constructively to discussion rather than just have a dig...

Anthony said...

What a hullabaloo! Particularly when there's only one dodgy comment - they got their 15 minutes, didn't they?
Seems to me that backing a horse at 8 for a small amount and laying off double at 4 when it goes well then fades on the soft ground is fantastic value. Especially when you've not had to do jot of form study because someone's been kind enough to share their thoughts. Don't know what the fuss is about.
Keep posting.

Graeme Dand said...

Steve 1,

Creating some interest is maybe an understatement mate!

Sorry to hear you lost on it but leaving a lay at 4 may have been the best option as it turned out.

I’m not going to stop posting my thoughts just because one fool backed it and called me a few names but as you said, I only put up a very strong case to back it.

I haven’t even read the RP comments on the race to be honest but as it states, the horse weakened rapidly from 1f out, which in my view probably means it didn’t enjoy the ground.

Cheers for the comment.


Graeme Dand said...

Hi Steve 2.

I see you two guys posted within 3 minutes of each other on Friday afternoon! lol

I think you actually make a great point mate. I’m a bit embarrassed I lost on that horse to be honest as I got too involved in the whole blog thing and why I put £30 on it I’ve no idea. I should have taken my riskfree bet and been happy with that.

I think I was actually too caught up in the whole blog interest and I felt that if I didn’t gamble some money on it and others did and lost, I’d feel a bit bad! Obviously, this is a bit silly looking back and I’m annoyed at myself for not taking at least £100 profit out at just over 3.

By my reckoning, that’s the 5th time this season I’ve had £500+ riskfree on a horse and 3 of them have traded below 3 IR. Unfortunately, none of them have won yet which is slightly annoying.

I wasn’t thinking clearly at the time but a well handicapped horse who doesn’t like the ground is still likely to travel well until it’s asked to quicken on the ground, so I should have laid it all off IMO at just over 3. Easy with hindsight though.

The interest in the blog has been great recently and I’m amazed at how much interest is being generated. The comments section is more like a forum at the moment which is really cool IMO.

Keep reading and commenting mate.


Graeme Dand said...

Anonymous 1,

I’m really glad you have commented again. As Andrew said below, his ‘retard’ comment was obviously aimed at the idiot who was anonymous 2 but apologies if you felt offended. I’ve had a few silly comments recently from anonymous people and it was easy to group everyone into the same group as Andrew did. I hope you accept Andrew’s apology and I hope you keep commenting in future. Don’t be afraid to initial your comments though so I know who it is and I’ll reply to you.

As I commented on subsequently and as have a few people, you made a great comment. I responded to your comment above so I won’t repeat what I said.

It’s interesting that you had the horse down as a 20/1 chance as I priced up the market also beforehand and couldn’t price this up above 10/1 no matter which way I looked at it. It would have been good to hear your opinion on one of the earlier posts.

I really do take on board your ground comment. I agree that it is fundamental to a horse’s chance and this was evident in every race I watched this afternoon at Haydock.

I’d really like to hear views of others out there who have an interest in horse-racing. At the moment, my blog is basically a trading/horseracing blog and I don’t mind using it for horseracing a bit more if there is sufficient interest from readers. Clearly, even though I’m learning to trade, my passion is horseracing.

Cheers for the comment and keep commenting in future. If you want to discuss anything specifically with me, drop me an email mate and I’ll get back in touch with you.


Anonymous said...

Of course i accept the apology, this game is all about opinions and everyone is entitled to their own.

I had priced him up purely on what sort of form he had been in, conditions of the race ie ground, trip, opposition etc.. and i did think 20-1 was about right. The fact he went off at around 8-1 would suggest i was pretty wrong, but i just couldn't back it at single figures.

Anyway he is well handicapped and does need a quicker surface, but just because he is well handicapped and gets good ground will not mean he is going to win. plenty of horses are very well handicapped and it is just so hard to find the right race and for everything to go right.

Anyway mate, do keep up the excellent work on the blog you are very commited and i do enjoy your write ups and opinions. There is money to be made at this game, but it is just so hard to make it pay. you are on the right lines and seem to have a good methodical approach! believe me you need that.

all the best


Graeme Dand said...


I think it’s interesting to get a real trader’s point of view.

In your eyes, that horse was successful as you could have laid it off very easily to make a green profit. I think that’s the way most traders would have seen that horse.

Interestingly, I lost on it as did a few others on here, so you can probably say that we are all gamblers.

I’m a gambler who is trying to learn to trade and I get the impression I’m not the only gambler who is trying to trade to make some money….

Cheers for the comment mate.


Graeme Dand said...


It's clear to me you know what you are talking about!

If you want to discuss any races or want any opinions on a horse etc. drop me a note.

Andrew and I used to post regularly on the Handicap Forum we set up but we scared everyone away due to our knowledge and in depth analysis of races and people thought they couldn't comment or have a differing opinion since we appeared to know everything! lol

As you say, this game is all about opinions....


Matt said...

"Anonymous Anonymous said...

your such a piece of shit.

you fooled everyone into thinking this was going to win. your nothing but a dodgy con artist

fucking arsehole"

LOL perhaps a reason why I don't give tips, or take them. Someone with an inability to think for themselves offering their analysis of the run... classic comment!

Funnily enough I read the chapter in 'Reminiscences' on tips the other day, I agree with everything written there.