The 2025 Grand National

Around ten years ago I looked into the previous twenty runnings of the race, off memory the lowest rated runner averaged at an official rating of about 138. Due to further modifications and alterations to the race - including the reduction to 34 runners - the National has attracted a consistently more classier entry, thus resulting in a higher rating for the bottom weights. This year's renewal has a very solid look to it and my guesstimation at this stage is that the lowest rated starter will be from an official mark of 146 to 148, I would not consider even backing one rated at lower than 146 at this stage.

For what it's worth - my two spots of potential value at this stage are:

Broadway Boy ..... EW 66/1 ( 5 Places BetMGM )

Vanillier .... EW 33/1 ( 6 Places Sky )
 
Ian_Davies said:
I remember reading that - if he was still alive today you'd have thought Bird would have adapted his approach to mirror the changed nature of the race.

I still think many older punters struggle to do this and not only lament the old National (which isn't coming back) but cling to now irrelevant factors and consequently find themselves unable to back a winner of the modern one.

Being in denial can be expensive.
Click to expand...

At the risk of being accused of aftertiming, in the years since Neptune Collonges nutted my hope Sunnyhill Boy I have backed Corach Rambler, Minella Times, Tiger Roll (the second time), One For Arthur, Rule The World, Pineau De Re and Aurora's Encore. I reckon that's a pretty decent record and last year I sent my stuff to the family concluding:

Long list (card order):I Am Maximus, Minella Indo, Corach Rambler, Galvin, Run Wild Fred, Minella Crooner, Limerick Lace, The Goffer, Glengouly, Gala Des Liteaux, Panda Boy, Eklat De Rire, Kitty’s Light.

... and then forgot to back I Am Maximus :sick:
 
9
Ian_Davies said:
I remember reading that - if he was still alive today you'd have thought Bird would have adapted his approach to mirror the changed nature of the race.

I still think many older punters struggle to do this and not only lament the old National (which isn't coming back) but cling to now irrelevant factors and consequently find themselves unable to back a winner of the modern one.

Being in denial can be expensive.
Click to expand...

Oh, yes. He wouldn’t be betting in it!
 
Desert Orchid said:
At the risk of being accused of aftertiming, in the years since Neptune Collonges nutted my hope Sunnyhill Boy I have backed Corach Rambler, Minella Times, Tiger Roll (the second time), One For Arthur, Rule The World, Pineau De Re and Aurora's Encore. I reckon that's a pretty decent record and last year I sent my stuff to the family concluding:

Long list (card order):I Am Maximus, Minella Indo, Corach Rambler, Galvin, Run Wild Fred, Minella Crooner, Limerick Lace, The Goffer, Glengouly, Gala Des Liteaux, Panda Boy, Eklat De Rire, Kitty’s Light.

... and then forgot to back I Am Maximus :sick:
Click to expand...
Jeez DO, there are 13 horses on that list. I know your methods work for you, and you generously share your thoughts and ratings on here.

But isn’t betting supposed to be about trying to make a profit as well as backing the winner? Most of the time I will back just one horse in a race and almost always it will be a single bet. I’d rather keep it simple, even if it means I sometimes have to endure longish losing runs.
 
Seem to remember Neptune running a big race over a marathon trip prior aswell ran well at the Midlands nash in the mud and I'd of thought carried he'd of carried top weight without checking. Whatever his failings were stamina was never one of them more is the pity.
 
Grey said:
Jeez DO, there are 13 horses on that list. I know your methods work for you, and you generously share your thoughts and ratings on here.

But isn’t betting supposed to be about trying to make a profit as well as backing the winner? Most of the time I will back just one horse in a race and almost always it will be a single bet. I’d rather keep it simple, even if it means I sometimes have to endure longish losing runs.
Click to expand...

Cheers, Grey, but that was my LONG list. I didn't back them all but I probably did back 10 because I usually do but at the prices I tend to take/get I usually do make a profit when one wins. Sometimes, as in Tiger Roll's second win (at just 4/1), I have just enough on to cover all the bets. In a race like the National sometimes I'm happy to lay out a fair spread of money and settle for not losing much at all. That's part of the fun for me.

As you say, you've seen how I bet. On a Saturday big race I'll have a main bet, a saver and two or three longshots. Sometimes it's just one of the longshots that gets a place and saves me a loss but sometimes I lose completely. I've been doing it for many years and am happy with it.
 
Grey said:
Jeez DO, there are 13 horses on that list. I know your methods work for you, and you generously share your thoughts and ratings on here.

But isn’t betting supposed to be about trying to make a profit as well as backing the winner? Most of the time I will back just one horse in a race and almost always it will be a single bet. I’d rather keep it simple, even if it means I sometimes have to endure longish losing runs.
Click to expand...

Tbf I've tended to spray and pray on big handicaps a bit down the years nowhere near 13 selections but I've made it pay for a while especially when firms had a tendency to bet overbroke on place parts of the bets at the big meets back when it was 1/4 odds and more places. They've tightened up a lot since. But even last year I did some permutations of 8 on the trifecta and landed it to pennies and it only paid about 5/1 on the layout of the bet and in honesty on total layout on the race which was fairly substantial I only really returned double my overall outlay. You look at that you could say waste of time all that to just double your outlay but I'd hit a small permutation there were results if they'd of landed it would of been a game changing amount. I'll quite happily do the same this year knowing that I could get anyone one of the 3 results do my absolute spuds, cover costs plus a bit, or smash the granny out of them. The cover costs there or there abouts is always the likeliest outcome although prior to last year I'd suffered a few wipeouts of epic proportions, the ones that make you say with teary eyes " God, please make that didn't happen" 😟
 
With it being my favourite race I always studied the National very carefully and, over the years did very well, winner wise, because it often needed a bit of thinking outside of the box. I backed Mon Mome when the weights came out, only to not back him again when he went out to 100/1. My few weights day bets were usually the ones that threw up the winner even though I’ll be the first person to admit that I eventually have far too many bets on the race because of the very nature of it. Nothing worse than having only one bet and for that horse to come down at the first. With Auroras Encore I’d realised that previous winners had won a ( I think) grade one or three or something in the past and was surprised to find that he had done so. Also the easier fences that year enabled him to make a few mistakes. I also liked to back horses with course form even if it was in a hurdle race. I was the only person in my racing club to back Seagram, even though I was rooting for the Pitman horse over the last. But that was then and these days I haven’t got a clue. You don’t even necessarily even need a staying type who jumps well any more. All I know this year is that I don’t want Monbeg Genius to win because I think it would be bad publicity for the race, something it can well do without.
 
Danny said:
Tbf I've tended to spray and pray on big handicaps a bit down the years nowhere near 13 selections but I've made it pay for a while especially when firms had a tendency to bet overbroke on place parts of the bets at the big meets back when it was 1/4 odds and more places. They've tightened up a lot since. But even last year I did some permutations of 8 on the trifecta and landed it to pennies and it only paid about 5/1 on the layout of the bet and in honesty on total layout on the race which was fairly substantial I only really returned double my overall outlay. You look at that you could say waste of time all that to just double your outlay but I'd hit a small permutation there were results if they'd of landed it would of been a game changing amount. I'll quite happily do the same this year knowing that I could get anyone one of the 3 results do my absolute spuds, cover costs plus a bit, or smash the granny out of them. The cover costs there or there abouts is always the likeliest outcome although prior to last year I'd suffered a few wipeouts of epic proportions, the ones that make you say with teary eyes " God, please make that didn't happen" 😟
Click to expand...
1739371329963.jpeg
 
Danny said:
Tbf I've tended to spray and pray on big handicaps a bit down the years nowhere near 13 selections but I've made it pay for a while especially when firms had a tendency to bet overbroke on place parts of the bets at the big meets back when it was 1/4 odds and more places. They've tightened up a lot since. But even last year I did some permutations of 8 on the trifecta and landed it to pennies and it only paid about 5/1 on the layout of the bet and in honesty on total layout on the race which was fairly substantial I only really returned double my overall outlay. You look at that you could say waste of time all that to just double your outlay but I'd hit a small permutation there were results if they'd of landed it would of been a game changing amount. I'll quite happily do the same this year knowing that I could get anyone one of the 3 results do my absolute spuds, cover costs plus a bit, or smash the granny out of them. The cover costs there or there abouts is always the likeliest outcome although prior to last year I'd suffered a few wipeouts of epic proportions, the ones that make you say with teary eyes " God, please make that didn't happen" 😟
Click to expand...
I'm with you on that trifecta bet, Danny. If you catch the evening sprints at Newcastle just right, the consecutive high numbers can sometimes fall just right. I landed £85 for a 25p stake last week (included a 66/1 third).
 
moehat said:
You don’t even necessarily even need a staying type who jumps well any more. All I know this year is that I don’t want Monbeg Genius to win because I think it would be bad publicity for the race, something it can well do without.
Click to expand...

Yes and no, for me.

I've ignored general perceptions about horses' jumping since I ignored Maori Venture for that reason. There's been no shortage of dodgy jumpers, including Last Suspect, that have taken to the fences on the day.

But for me it is arguably more of a stayers' race than ever because the fences are easier and they go half a stride faster for that reason. For me that's why the class horses are developing a pattern of coming to the fore.

For many years I've focused on horses around the 150 mark or less that I have a rating of, or am pretty convinced have it in their locker, 160 or more. It won't work out that way every year but it has served me well.
 
I totally agree, Maurice - back in the day they often hunted round the first circuit, only raced the second, specialist 2m4f chaser Gay Trip once won it and any 3m park course chaser had bright prospects of getting home.

Nowadays it's run at an end-to-end gallop and, if you don't stay, you don't win.
 
I would actually argue that Crisp created a watershed in how the National is run. He proved that you can go a proper gallop in the race and if you stay you have a chance. Crisp's stamina deserted him after the elbow, possibly before, but he did almost enough by then to win.

After that they've generally gone faster throughout. Red Rum had beaten a track record that had stood for 38 years but then Mr Frisk smashed that by miles when the fences were still big. I can't trace - perhaps someone can put me right - any winner of the race since the distance was shortened by a furlong and a half to get close to breaking nine minutes for the race but Mr Frisk clocked 8m 47s for the full trip because he was a superbly efficient jumper and a grand galloper. I still think he is the most impressive ever winner of the race and the fact he followed it up in the Whitbread a couple of weeks later using the same front running tactics spoke volumes for his toughness and soundness.

Obviously the going is a big factor. It was fast the day Mr Frisk won but nowadays there's no chance of the ground being better than good to soft with clerks of courses kowtowing to the welfare nazis. I think it's very unfair that genuinely good ground horses aren't allowed to get their ground in the race. Mr Frisk would probably not have a chance in a modern national.
 
Desert Orchid said:
I would actually argue that Crisp created a watershed in how the National is run. He proved that you can go a proper gallop in the race and if you stay you have a chance. Crisp's stamina deserted him after the elbow, possibly before, but he did almost enough by then to win.

After that they've generally gone faster throughout. Red Rum had beaten a track record that had stood for 38 years but then Mr Frisk smashed that by miles when the fences were still big. I can't trace - perhaps someone can put me right - any winner of the race since the distance was shortened by a furlong and a half to get close to breaking nine minutes for the race but Mr Frisk clocked 8m 47s for the full trip because he was a superbly efficient jumper and a grand galloper. I still think he is the most impressive ever winner of the race and the fact he followed it up in the Whitbread a couple of weeks later using the same front running tactics spoke volumes for his toughness and soundness.

Obviously the going is a big factor. It was fast the day Mr Frisk won but nowadays there's no chance of the ground being better than good to soft with clerks of courses kowtowing to the welfare nazis. I think it's very unfair that genuinely good ground horses aren't allowed to get their ground in the race. Mr Frisk would probably not have a chance in a modern national.
Click to expand...
Many Clouds won the 2015 GN in 8m 56.8s when the race was run over 4 miles three and a half furlongs. Its current distance is over a furlong shorter so the winning times should be getting quicker which suggests that watering the course for safety reasons is slowing the field down to a large extent.
 
Desert Orchid said:
Cheers, Grey, but that was my LONG list. I didn't back them all but I probably did back 10 because I usually do but at the prices I tend to take/get I usually do make a profit when one wins. Sometimes, as in Tiger Roll's second win (at just 4/1), I have just enough on to cover all the bets. In a race like the National sometimes I'm happy to lay out a fair spread of money and settle for not losing much at all. That's part of the fun for me.

As you say, you've seen how I bet. On a Saturday big race I'll have a main bet, a saver and two or three longshots. Sometimes it's just one of the longshots that gets a place and saves me a loss but sometimes I lose completely. I've been doing it for many years and am happy with it.
Click to expand...
Fair enough, you know what you’re doing. If you took the same approach to your football betting I’d be worried 😉.
 
looking at the seconds per furlong of the winner in recent years vs that in the past on the same going is interesting in light of some comments
 
Back
Top