• REGISTER NOW!! Why? Because you can't do much without having been registered!

    At the moment you have limited access to view all discussions - and most importantly, you haven't joined our community. What are you waiting for? Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join Join Talking Horses here!

The 2025 Longshot Thread

I'm puzzled about the way people arrive at possible long shot selections.
It seems to me that it must involve an awful lot of research and form study.
Where do you start, do you investigate all runners over a certain figure?

Tell me to mind my own business if you like, I'm only being nosy as the inevitable long losing runs would not appeal to me.
 
I think people usually explain their reasoning when mentioning the selection, walsworth.

Re Cruz Control, I reckon it is nicely handicapped, still improving, with a shrewd trainer and I think it is also second-top on RPRs (it was when I looked on Wednesday but sometimes they seem to get tweaked by the day if the race for some reason) and I marked it off then as a potential bet, just waiting to see if it drifted again or for the BOG, or both.
 
walsworth said:
I'm puzzled about the way people arrive at possible long shot selections.
It seems to me that it must involve an awful lot of research and form study.
Where do you start, do you investigate all runners over a certain figure?

Tell me to mind my own business if you like, I'm only being nosy as the inevitable long losing runs would not appeal to me.
Click to expand...

It doesn't take much more work Walsworth most of the time it's about being able to just see reason. As an example a couple of lads suggested Ga law for tomorrows December Gold cup. No more than a quick glance at his form would tell you why they give him a chance. He was 2nd in last years paddy power off a mark of 155, not the first time he's shown good form at the track as he'd won there off a mark of 150 the previous January. He had one bad run there since but the rest of his poor runs have either been away from the track or over 3 mile which is a trip he doesn't seem to stay over. Tomorrow he's off 154 and has a decent claimer taking 7lb off . So how does he represent value ? Does that profile represent a stronger profile of some of those shorter in the betting ? Probably so. At 25/1 he's an e/w price. Anything like a return of last years paddy power run or some of his other previous runs at the course over this distance 2 wins and 1 2nd out of 6 attempts would be enough to see him frame at least.

I can make a case for plenty in it but I wouldn't blame anyone for having a go at that. Most of the time Walsworth it's just about looking at things with an open mind and equating whether the differences in the form are reflective of the price. I did a simpler one earlier in the week where 2 horses priced 3/1 and 9/1 respectively and the 9/1 shot was 19lb better off for a beating of just over a length. Priced on surrounding hype and the shorter price one had shown impressive form since but for me 19lb for just over a length with every reason to improve for the run the horse didn't deserve to be 3 times the price. That's just common sense rather than intensive form study. There are more things I consider than that but that's the basic premise.
 
walsworth said:
I'm puzzled about the way people arrive at possible long shot selections.
It seems to me that it must involve an awful lot of research and form study.
Where do you start, do you investigate all runners over a certain figure?

Tell me to mind my own business if you like, I'm only being nosy as the inevitable long losing runs would not appeal to me.
Click to expand...

Another small tip from one of the best thinkers in the game I've ever come across and best person I'd ever seen for picking longshots. When most people start to assess a race and look through horses they tend to start with the favourite and work out and it's general human nature to stop at the first thing you come across that you like and get hung up on it. He suggested working from the largest outsider inwards that way you'd end up finding something at a bigger price that you wouldn't have taken much notice of if you'd found one you liked at the shorter end. Which when you think about how many times do we back a horse we like and not pay that much attention to every other runner only to look after somethings won and think ah I could've made a case for that or bloody hell that was obvious how did I miss it.
 
walsworth said:
I'm puzzled about the way people arrive at possible long shot selections.
It seems to me that it must involve an awful lot of research and form study.
Where do you start, do you investigate all runners over a certain figure?

Tell me to mind my own business if you like, I'm only being nosy as the inevitable long losing runs would not appeal to me.
Click to expand...
Re-long losing runs, I can only speak for myself, but I assume from reading Maurice's contributions, that this also applies to him, that longshots and just part of the wider portfolio, Wals.

Yes, I can lose on a few longshots but still turn in profit on other things, let's say on one of Ian's legendary tricasts!
 
DO and Danny gave perfectly good examples/rationale. And, as Danny says, it doesn't take hours of form study.

It does take some time, ofc, which we all know. But then, many (but not all) of us embrace the 'can I find the 50-1/33-1/7-2 etc winner of this' aspect of it. And enjoy it. Getting told is nice, for some essential, and I'd suggest for all of us exceptionally welcome, but landing on your own winner - that no one else might have spotted, and whatever the price - definitely gives a glow.

What I would say is - in addition to Danny's and DO's great feedback - is there are several other angles that result (or let's say can and do result) in big-priced winners. Keeping records (or a long memory), watching past races, watching races with an eye to what might improve, generally learning/understanding which types of horses win at big odds in specific circumstances, are all examples. There are more.
 
Last edited:
You can negate the long losing runs when taking a value approach as if your consistently just looking for value bets look no further than the people who do. Myself, outsider, Maurice,Ian, Robi and anyone else I've missed out would consistently back more than one in a race which you can afford to do when backing at larger double figure prices knowing that sometimes you can bet 3 and need 1 to hit the frame to make your money back. I'd say the losing runs would only equate to the same as backing sub 5/1 shots win only.
 
+

The bottom line. If you just look at it from a pure figures perspective, just for illustration purposes...

If you only back 33-1 or higher shots, and (icing on the cake) you're getting 55 upwards towards 240 on plenty of those on the exchange.
And you 'know' you'll get one of those winners in the next 30 runs (and hopefully a better strike rate than that)
Then you're in profit

Hit a nice run, and/or fine-tune your selection processes through many years experience, and you're in good profit.
 
I consider myself one of the leading See You Next Tuesdays in Western Europe and, as such, I really, REALLY, don't want to help.

But I've got a minute or two, so I will just say this.

Mark Coton was a pompous ass and I regularly felt myself lapsing into a coma as he marched up and down the editorial floor at the Racing Post, pontificating and holding forth to anyone who'd left their ear plugs at home, hence had to listen.

But Coton did once come out with a line I agreed with.

"Don't fall into the trap of trying to back the winner."

Look at a race, establish a pecking order in your mind of where you think they all might finish, and in what proximity to one another, given all the variables you use, then, and only then, look at the betting.

And cherry pick the discrepancies.

I had Twig, using my methods, a close-up fourth in for the Becher and yet he was 33/1 - "the wrong price" as I wrote here at the time (others aftertime 8/11 winners once they've weighed in and they're feeling brave, I have a preference for putting up double-carpet stonking bets well in advance).

I could tell a similar story about Rhoscolyn (40/1), Hung Jury (40/1) and christ knows how many others in the last six months alone.

If you actually know what you're doing, value betting doesn't have to involve hundreds upon hundreds of hours of work, but lazy boys idly dreaming up facile "systems," scribbled on the back of a fag packet will get nowhere fast.

There are data analysts doing a thousand times more sophisticated things with data models to grind out tiny profits in terms of ROI.

Understand what you're up against, get some perspective. adapt accordingly and, figuratively speaking, be prepared to actually get off your lazy backside and do a bit of graft.

You'll be glad to know I am bored now, so I will leave it there.
 
Last edited:
Target certain races too. The Schweppes and Champion Hurdle have a habit of throwing up improving outsiders or course specialists.

Breeding is the most important determinant on whether a horse might place in The Derby or The Oaks - there’s always value in the outsiders.

Often horses don’t reverse form, when the weights are reversed against another horse in a handicap; particularly if there is only one previous run where you make that assessment. I sometimes find value there at the longer odds.
 
Last edited:
Good responses from Danny + DO. Three biggies that worked for me in recent time.
Sire Du Berlais. Could've got 80s 48 hours before he won the stayers a couple of years ago. His festival record was there for all to see + 11 moths previously had beaten reigning champ Flooring Porter in a G1 at Aintree.
Klark Kent in this years Scottish National. 4th in it the previous year. Hadn't tried all season + was about 6lb lower this time around. Looked obvious to me that it was targeted at it this year. I was on at 66s + 40s ew. Just got collared on the run in.
Torquator Tasso in the Arc. Runner up in the previous years German Derby, narrowly beaten by In Swoop, who was just touched off in that years Arc. That told me he was G1 class. Key was the near untraceable ground, that I thought would level up the playing field somewhat. Me + a few others were on at 100s.
I could go on😉
 
Robicheaux said:
Good responses from Danny + DO. Three biggies that worked for me in recent time.
Sire Du Berlais. Could've got 80s 48 hours before he won the stayers a couple of years ago. His festival record was there for all to see + 11 moths previously had beaten reigning champ Flooring Porter in a G1 at Aintree.
Klark Kent in this years Scottish National. 4th in it the previous year. Hadn't tried all season + was about 6lb lower this time around. Looked obvious to me that it was targeted at it this year. I was on at 66s + 40s ew. Just got collared on the run in.
Torquator Tasso in the Arc. Runner up in the previous years German Derby, narrowly beaten by In Swoop, who was just touched off in that years Arc. That told me he was G1 class. Key was the near untraceable ground, that I thought would level up the playing field somewhat. Me + a few others were on at 100s.
I could go on😉
Click to expand...
Robicheaux = blinding value judge, "trust."

Enough said.
 
Ian_Davies said:
"Don't fall into the trap of trying to back the winner."
Click to expand...

It's sharp contrast in view from Slims rule 27) Try not to look for e/w bets you will be better if you concentrate on the finding winners mindset.

2 complete different mind sets from 2 people who do very well.

I suppose my own view is somewhere in the middle. One of the most important lessons I've learned is there is little value in backing something e/w if the best you think it can do is place. There is also no value in thinking you know what wins the race but he's too short for you to bet so you find an e/w alternative. In those sort of scenarios where you think the favourite will win but you think something at a big price will place. Rather than bet something like that e/w I'd always rather play the the exotic the rewards for being right are much greater. If you're first thought when picking an e/w is well he might run into a place then I certainly wouldn't be backing it e/w there are better alternate ways of betting it i.e place only, exotics or just back the ones you think it can't beat. At least when having an e/w bet you need some belief that it can actually win.
 
I have a friend who I sometimes go racing with who absolutely insists on only backing long shots - "to get the value!" So he nearly always loses and then doesn't understand why I'm happy backing three or four winners at shortish prices but for me it's about the buzz not the profit. He recently came to Badbury Rings point to point and for the first time followed me in backing my selections. He was seriously happy with the three winners and finally gets it!

But yes I do enjoy a "longy" especially if I have spotted it a while back (Rashabar for instance).
 
jinnyj said:
I have a friend who I sometimes go racing with who absolutely insists on only backing long shots - "to get the value!" So he nearly always loses and then doesn't understand why I'm happy backing three or four winners at shortish prices but for me it's about the buzz not the profit. He recently came to Badbury Rings point to point and for the first time followed me in backing my selections. He was seriously happy with the three winners and finally gets it!

But yes I do enjoy a "longy" especially if I have spotted it a while back (Rashabar for instance).
Click to expand...

There's something to be said for that in really there is no value in a loser. There is sometimes more value to be found at the sharp end of the market backing 9/2 shots going off at 9/4 or 2/1 shots going off at even money is equally if not more valuable than backing things at long prices which halve in price. Understanding what a price shift means in percentage terms is a must.
 
Danny said:
Try not to look for e/w bets
Click to expand...
But looking for horses who are "the wrong price" isn't necessarily looking for each-way bets.

A 1/4 favourite can be "the wrong price" - because it should be tens on - and a 33/1 shot can be a terrible price because it should be "a million."

A price isn't necessarily "value" just because it's big and a price isn't necessarily bad value just because it's short.

Slim has a price at which he considers a horse a bet - he often states one.

He just isn't looking to wait too long between drinks, generally speaking, from what I've read of him, that's all - not THAT dissimilar IMO.
 
I tend to let 'the figures' more or less decide for me, whether I 'do' the race for myself (much less often these days) or via the RPR sorting facility at the RP site.

Once I've sorted the figures in order highest to lowest I check the odds. That's why I backed Tommie Beau at 100/1 for the Welsh National but I now see that he has been taken out. This is a screenshot of the RPRs in order high to low and there seems to be plenty of potential longshots in there too:

1765546833958.png

You're trusting that RPRs are in the right ball park but most ratings are only one person's opinion anyway. Nobody has a monopoly on being right or wrong and the bookies will have their own criteria for pricing up races. They can't be right all the time either. Trying to figure out when they've made a mistake is a lot of the fun.
 
Desert Orchid said:
Chel 1.50, Cruz Control 20/1

Not my main bet in the race but I do think the price is too generous. It's weak in the betting which might tell its own story but if it's trying it should be in the first two on my figures.
Click to expand...

The market did indeed tell the story. Clearly either not ready yet or not off. The main bet was L'Homme Presse and I'm still writing through clenched teeth thinking about the ride it got. I don't believe a horse that was good enough to finish third in a King George should have struggled for pace in a handicap in which the opponents are rated 146 and less. Maybe this was just a prep for something down the line.
 

Recent Blog Posts

Back
Top