Betting Strategy: When does course and distance form matter?

Betting Strategy / Wayne Bailey / 16 September 2008 / 6 Comments

Most punters are pleased to see the letters C and D beside their selection on the race card. But how much faith should we place in those two little letters? Wayne Bailey has more...

It's always an interesting exercise to climb up into the attic now and then, and it's amazing what you can find. I went up to try and dig out an old book about football that I promised to a friend, but ended up finding and old notebook of mine from 1998, containing my notes on a weekend meeting at Clonmel. My understanding of the sport was a little basic ten years ago, but I had allocated points for each horse and come up with a likely winner. I suppose it was a very basic ratings system, where the horse earned points for certain achievements. Interestingly, I had placed a lot of emphasis on C&D form and gave treble points for any horse proven at Clonmel, and also over the distance. Unfortunately, Clonmel has one of the worst records in Ireland for course and distance winners but with the internet in its infancy, I had no real way of knowing this!

Today, punters should have no excuses, but I'm still amazed at the amount of people who don't realise that course and distance form is meaningful at certain courses, and pretty much useless at others. Indeed, it also matters hugely if the race is flat-turf, all-weather, or national hunt.
To find out when C&D form is relevant, I've had a look through the records of horses that are proven at the course, and also the distance - noting the tracks where it proves significant. I've only looked at non-handicaps as I've found that the whole weights issue can deem C&D form irrelevant on occasion. All data is from 2003 to the present:

All Weather

Let's start with the worst out of the three codes. I must admit, I was surprised to find that all-weather C&D form was not as important as flat-turf or national hunt as it's something a lot of people look for when betting on the artificial surfaces. Anyway, for the record, here are the results of backing C&D winners on the all-weather:

Track ... Bets ... Wins ... SP Points ... Strike Rate

Kempton ... 189 ... 39 ... -8.85 ... 20.63%
Dundalk ... 29 ... 5 ... +8.83 ... 17.24%
Lingfield ... 1634 ... 232 ... -319.56 ... 14.20%
Wolverhampton ... 2063 ... 280 ... -512.94 ... 13.57%
Southwell ... 2136 ... 270 ... -418.91 ... 12.64%

It's interesting to see that Southwell is bottom of the pile, and I wonder if the Fibresand surface (the others use Polytrack) has anything to do with that? Great Leighs did not have enough data to be included.

Flat Turf

Below are the top courses where C&D form stands up:

Track ... Bets ... Wins ... SP Points ... Strike Rate

Carlisle ... 32 ... 9 ... +22.93 ... 28.13%
Ayr ... 59 ... 15 ... +28.6 ... 25.42%
Navan ... 28 ... 7 ... +1.92 ... 25%
Chester ... 89 ... 20 ... -5.34 ... 22.47%
Naas ... 47 ... 10 ... +4.9 ... 21.28%
As you can see, Carlisle and Ayr actually show a decent profit. I'm not advocating this as a system, but had you blindly backed each C&D horse there you would show a profit of over 51 points since 2003.

National Hunt

Ah, finally the juicy stuff! C&D form is more reliable over the jumps than any other code, and following such horses at certain tracks can prove a great starting point when analysing a race.

Here are the top courses:

Track ... Bets ... Wins ... SP Points ... Strike Rate

Newbury ... 63 ... 22 ... +3.84 ... 34.92%
Chepstow ... 46 ... 16 ... -3.61 ... 34.78%
Bangor ... 38 ... 13 ... +2.58 ... 34.21%
Warwick ... 39 ... 13 ... +0.46 ... 33.33%
Perth ... 76 ... 24 ... +1.91 ... 31.58%
Aintree ... 50 ... 15 ... +21.97 ... 30.00%

A number of courses show a high strike rate and a profit to go along with it. Again, I must emphasise that this is not a system, but had you blindly backed C&D winners at the courses above that show a plus, you would have had 87 winners from 266 bets, and made a profit of over 30 points.

Of course, trends adjust over time, so it's important to keep up-to-date with any changes at each course. Will this article prove correct as the years go by? Who knows - but it would certainly prove interesting for me to stumble upon it in ten years time!

***

If you require a more detailed stats breakdown, simply make a post below and I'd be happy to retrieve the data.

Comments (6)

1. Richard Noy | 16 September 2008

   Thanks for the facts, Wayne. I've been looking at CD horses when there's some value for money, starting at ods greater than the number of runners. Full details of your data (to the above e-mail address)would be interesting.

   Many thanks, once again and best wishes

   Richard

2. Wayne Bailey | 16 September 2008

   Thanks for the comments Richard. I'm not so sure that there is data mining software available that can ask such a question (an 'if' question as such). I could break it down if the rules were specified - for example:

   Horse is a C&D winner
   Number of runners is six
   Horse is priced 7/1 or more

   That's just one single query.

   However, because of the amount of possible runners, and also the many many price variations, I'm not sure that a general query of that nature can be done.

   
   On the issue of odds, it's not surprising to see that C&D horses perform best at the lower end of the scale. Indeed, those priced 1/2 or less show a tiny profit if blindly backed. Of course, the below figures are very crude an are not broken down by code or even race type, but are interesting all the same...

   Results of backing C&D winners by price since 2003:

   Odds ... Bets ... Wins ... Points ... Strike Rate

   Less than 1/2 ... 247 ... 188 ... 2.57 ... 76.11%
   Btw 1/2 & 10/11 ... 771 ... 417 ... -51.12 ... 54.09%
   Btw Evens & 6/4 ... 1295 ... 542 ... -64.62 ... 41.85%
   Btw 13/8 & 9/4 ... 2831 ... 869 ... -241.32 ... 30.70%
   Btw 5/2 & 4/1 ... 9347 ... 1991 ... -841.22 ... 21.30%
   Btw 9/2 & 6/1 ... 9334 ... 1337 ... -1066 ... 14.32%
   Btw 13/2 & 8/1 ... 9222 ... 866 ... -2036 ... 9.39%
   Btw 17/2 & 12/1 ... 10559 ... 709 ... -2447.5 ... 6.71%
   Btw 14/1 & 20/1 ... 10232 ... 380 ... -3710 ... 3.71%
   Btw 22/1 & 40/1 ... 5105 ... 111 ... -1899 ... 2.17%
   50-1 or above ... 1328 ... 11 ... -703 ... 0.83%

   
   Thanks again for the feedback, always welcome. There are also a number of courses where C&D form does not seem to matter at all. If anyone is interested in those stats, just shout.
   

3. Stu | 18 September 2008

   Hi Wayne,

   Good work as usual. I'm a fan of C&D form - especially when I bet on NH. I'm surprised that Cheltenham doesn't feature in the top courses list. It's a unique course and, anecdotally, it seems that horses proven there win big races (Katchit is just one example that springs to mind).

   The other course that I'd be interested in is Sandown - just because it's the one I attend the most often.

   Cheers,

   Stu
   

4. Wayne Bailey | 18 September 2008

   Hi Stu, thanks for the comments. At over 18% going on to win, Sandown is just below mid table for C&D horses.

   One course I though would feature prominently was Punchestown as it's a really unusual place - however, the stats just don't bear that out which surprised me a lot. It's good to know these things for betting purposes.

   Below is the full results by track of backing C&D winners in NH non handicaps. Of course the data is still somewhat raw and could be broken down further by distance/race type etc (bumpers would still be included here for example). However, it gives a good indication of where C&D form stands up and is a starting point for further research:

   All data is from 2003 to the present

   Track ... Bets ... Wins ... SP Points ... Strike Rate

   Newbury ... 63 ... 22 ... 3.84 ... 34.92%
   Chepstow ... 46 ... 16 ... -3.61 ... 34.78%
   Bangor ... 38 ... 13 ... 2.58 ... 34.21%
   Warwick ... 39 ... 13 ... 0.46 ... 33.33%
   Perth ... 76 ... 24 ... 1.91 ... 31.58%
   Aintree ... 50 ... 15 ... 21.97 ... 30%
   Sedgefield ... 115 ... 34 ... -11.62 ... 29.57%
   Carlisle ... 52 ... 15 ... -11.52 ... 28.85%
   Galway ... 42 ... 12 ... 9.68 ... 28.57%
   Taunton ... 42 ... 12 ... -11.91 ... 28.57%
   Wincanton ... 83 ... 23 ... -28.73 ... 27.71%
   Newcastle ... 58 ... 16 ... -0.16 ... 27.59%
   Huntingdon ... 91 ... 25 ... -19.54 ... 27.47%
   Ayr ... 73 ... 20 ... -24.04 ... 27.40%
   Ascot ... 32 ... 8 ... -4.6 ... 25%
   Folkestone ... 28 ... 7 ... 11.31 ... 25%
   Newton Abbot ... 100 ... 25 ... -23.51 ... 25%
   Kelso ... 113 ... 28 ... -7.13 ... 24.78%
   Worcester ... 93 ... 23 ... 7.94 ... 24.73%
   Stratford ... 73 ... 18 ... -2.56 ... 24.66%
   Plumpton ... 69 ... 17 ... 1.34 ... 24.64%
   Musselburgh ... 50 ... 12 ... -11.79 ... 24%
   Uttoxeter ... 93 ... 22 ... 12.81 ... 23.66%
   Fontwell ... 94 ... 22 ... -7.11 ... 23.40%
   Naas ... 92 ... 21 ... 34.67 ... 22.83%
   Tramore ... 49 ... 11 ... 8.46 ... 22.45%
   Cork ... 85 ... 19 ... -17.76 ... 22.35%
   Navan ... 147 ... 32 ... 4.99 ... 21.77%
   Hexham ... 84 ... 18 ... -31.9 ... 21.43%
   Wetherby ... 103 ... 22 ... -40.77 ... 21.36%
   Tipperary ... 52 ... 11 ... -17.05 ... 21.15%
   Haydock ... 86 ... 18 ... 14.67 ... 20.93%
   Kempton ... 66 ... 13 ... -25.29 ... 19.70%
   Market Rasen ... 92 ... 18 ... -46.43 ... 19.57%
   Ludlow ... 155 ... 30 ... 12.66 ... 19.35%
   Gowran Park ... 54 ... 10 ... 14.33 ... 18.52%
   Sandown ... 104 ... 19 ... -49.13 ... 18.27%
   Leopardstown ... 182 ... 33 ... -6.4 ... 18.13%
   Hereford ... 56 ... 10 ... -14.13 ... 17.86%
   Southwell ... 28 ... 5 ... -14.21 ... 17.86%
   Cheltenham ... 334 ... 58 ... -48.98 ... 17.37%
   Thurles ... 105 ... 18 ... -56.82 ... 17.14%
   Leicester ... 47 ... 8 ... -20.09 ... 17.02%
   Punchestown ... 406 ... 68 ... -133.47 ... 16.75%
   Exeter ... 54 ... 9 ... -26.87 ... 16.67%
   Limerick ... 87 ... 14 ... -19.15 ... 16.09%
   Towcester ... 70 ... 11 ... -39.52 ... 15.71%
   Fairyhouse ... 183 ... 28 ... -62.39 ... 15.30%
   Down Royal ... 61 ... 9 ... -27.81 ... 14.75%
   Clonmel ... 49 ... 7 ... -23.62 ... 14.29%
   Kilbeggan ... 29 ... 4 ... -13.25 ... 13.79%
   Catterick ... 37 ... 5 ... -26.85 ... 13.51%
   Fakenham ... 39 ... 5 ... 1.4 ... 12.82%
   Wexford ... 33 ... 3 ... -22.5 ... 9.09%

5. Peter | 15 December 2008

   Personally I do not pay any attention to course and distance form - in its basic statute - the horse could have won its first outing priced 20/1 DISTANCE 5 furlongs and won only once again in its lifetime (at a totally different course at 1 mile 6 furlongs)

   Say it had a strike rate of 8 % in 52 runnings

   It goes back to its original course at 1 mile 6

   thats a good bet - wrong its lost 92% of all its starts - its a poor horse - it won at odds on in the 1 mile 6 fgs event with three non-runners and only 4 ran.

   There are bigger and better pictures in horseracing than the basic c d form - you can spend hours on the study - but what are you left with?

   Follow animals bang on the mark BOTH course and distance winners in non-handicap chases is strident and bountiful - you can win easy on that.

   Theres a wining thread out, lower those prices and change the stats the futures coming Margaret! Margaret wheres those horses Margaret - Its BLACK THE WORLDS GONE BLACK! Paint it again the seascapes the revines the entities - why must we suffer the endless quest the on going drain on our minds, the collapsed hunger for winners - BUT win we must we have it now CARRIED and purposeful we march.

6. Graham Ludlow | 07 December 2010

   Hi,

   I've been intersted in C/D winners since reading the Patrick Killgallon books a few years ago. It seems a greatstarting point.

   I'm particularly interested in how they perform in handicaps. Do you have any data on those?

   Talk soon

   Graham