The Road To The 2013 Grand National

Bar the Bull said:
I find that very interesting that Phil Smith might take hurdle performances into account when pitching weights for the National.
Click to expand...

Does this rule just hold for Grand National ratings (presuming it does) ?
The benefit of running horses over hurdles far outweighs just the handicap factor. Horses think quicker, are faster on their feet and can gallop easier at the faster GN pace in the hurly burly of larger fields.
From MVOBriens time in 1950s through Bobbyjo, Papillon, Hedgehunter, Numbersixvalverde et al are enough examples of this.
 
Indeed they have, partly because there are few enough staying handicap chases through the winter. Also to qualify the Irish horses need to show their form the previous season to get into the handicap proper and then prep them to peak for Aintree in April.
Few enough of them have earned a GB rating prior to GN entry.
 
11 horses have been scratched Tidal Bay, Organisedconfusion, Call The Police, Pandorama, Little Josh, Lambro, Mister Hyde, Cross Appeal, Shakervilz, Outlaw Pete, Fabalu.
 
I started looking at the race today.

The handicapper appears to be hell-bent on getting the real class acts to run. I think the top weights will have serious chances this year.

And Bet365 appear to be going NRNB and 5 places.
 
Desert Orchid said:
I started looking at the race today.

The handicapper appears to be hell-bent on getting the real class acts to run. I think the top weights will have serious chances this year.

And Bet365 appear to be going NRNB and 5 places.
Click to expand...

Stan James have a number of spacial markets including who will be sent off fav. I know that this comes under a number of volatile influences on the day but I'd have thought On His Own is a slight odds on shot to be sent off fav. He's 5/2.

.
 
Last edited:
Other notable ricks:

Winning Weight - 11st or more 6/5 (Boylesports)
A Female Jockey To Ride The Winner Of The 2013 Grand National 16/1 (Ladbrokes) - If I need to explain why this is a rick please give up the game.
Will All Of The Runners Safely Negotiate The First Fence ? Yes 5/1 (William Hiill)

A fascinating market is the winning SP. Skybet are betting 14/1 and under at 6/4 but horses in that bracket took out 29% of the market last season. The year before, where the bookmakers came in for massive criticism for the over-round returned, it took out over 50%. I think the 16/1-33/1 bracket will be mathematically the best value this time around 13/8.

.

.
 
Last edited:
That 6/5 with Boyles looks a steel its as if they dont realise that with non runners the weights go up.
 
From this year onwards the Grand National course will be watered as a matter of routine to provide going that is never any quicker than 'good to soft

Jim Mcgrath in the Telegraph


In the most significant move yet to minimise the risk to horses and riders, the Aintree executive is effectively reshaping the race to fit modern requirements, at the same time trying to retain the character of jump racing’s ultimate challenge.
There will never be a repeat of Mr Frisk’s 1990 triumph when, on ground officially termed 'firm’, the Kim Bailey-trained gelding set a record time of 8min 47.8sec.

Lord Daresbury, the chairman of Aintree, said that a commissioned statistical report had supported the intuition that there was a direct link between injury to horses and the state of the ground. The quicker the ground, the faster the pace, which led to a greater risk of injury in the event of a fall.
“We looked closely at all the statistics, and in discussion with trainers, we came more and more to the conclusion that ensuring ground that was always on the soft side of 'good’ was the right thing to do,” he said.
Before Mr Frisk, the 'firm’ going winners over the previous five decades were Lucius (1978), Rag Trade (1976), Red Rum (1973) and Nicolaus Silver (1961).

Twelve of the 22 winners since Mr Frisk were successful on ground described as 'good’. In future, there will be no winners on that type of surface.
Lord Daresbury was aware of possible criticism, particularly from owners and trainers of horses with a preference for fast ground. “There have been contrary individual voices from that direction,” he confirmed.
“But when reality and logic starts sinking in, it should be different. Everybody is doing everything possible for the success of the Grand National, and I think most involved are taking more responsibility themselves for the race. There have been some critics who have said we are lowering the fences, but that is not the case.”
While they have not cut the size of the jumps, officials have introduced a softer core to the fences, with a view to lowering the risk of injury to horses who might plough through them.
The revelation regarding the future watering policy is the most significant piece of news regarding the future of the big race. Changes to the course, at Becher’s and elsewhere, the reduction in distance of the run to the first fence, and calls for fewer runners, all amount to cosmetic alterations.
However, a policy to ensure that the going is always on the soft side is a positive step that should be applauded. In the long term, it will subtly change the profile of a would-be Grand National horse. However, it might also ensure the casualty rate is lowered and the future of the race guaranteed.
 
Diamond Geezer said:
From this year onwards the Grand National course will be watered as a matter of routine to provide going that is never any quicker than 'good to soft

Jim Mcgrath in the Telegraph


In the most significant move yet to minimise the risk to horses and riders, the Aintree executive is effectively reshaping the race to fit modern requirements, at the same time trying to retain the character of jump racing’s ultimate challenge.
There will never be a repeat of Mr Frisk’s 1990 triumph when, on ground officially termed 'firm’, the Kim Bailey-trained gelding set a record time of 8min 47.8sec.

Lord Daresbury, the chairman of Aintree, said that a commissioned statistical report had supported the intuition that there was a direct link between injury to horses and the state of the ground. The quicker the ground, the faster the pace, which led to a greater risk of injury in the event of a fall.
“We looked closely at all the statistics, and in discussion with trainers, we came more and more to the conclusion that ensuring ground that was always on the soft side of 'good’ was the right thing to do,” he said.
Before Mr Frisk, the 'firm’ going winners over the previous five decades were Lucius (1978), Rag Trade (1976), Red Rum (1973) and Nicolaus Silver (1961).

Twelve of the 22 winners since Mr Frisk were successful on ground described as 'good’. In future, there will be no winners on that type of surface.
Lord Daresbury was aware of possible criticism, particularly from owners and trainers of horses with a preference for fast ground. “There have been contrary individual voices from that direction,” he confirmed.
“But when reality and logic starts sinking in, it should be different. Everybody is doing everything possible for the success of the Grand National, and I think most involved are taking more responsibility themselves for the race. There have been some critics who have said we are lowering the fences, but that is not the case.”
While they have not cut the size of the jumps, officials have introduced a softer core to the fences, with a view to lowering the risk of injury to horses who might plough through them.
The revelation regarding the future watering policy is the most significant piece of news regarding the future of the big race. Changes to the course, at Becher’s and elsewhere, the reduction in distance of the run to the first fence, and calls for fewer runners, all amount to cosmetic alterations.
However, a policy to ensure that the going is always on the soft side is a positive step that should be applauded. In the long term, it will subtly change the profile of a would-be Grand National horse. However, it might also ensure the casualty rate is lowered and the future of the race guaranteed.
Click to expand...
This kind of p1sh really annoys me.

They do not state how many falls or injuries there were in 'firm' Nationals. There tends to be greater numbers of finishers on good or better going. It takes less energy to jump off good ground than to jump out of softer, therefore the demands on the horse are lighter. If a horse doesn't act on fast ground it doesn't have to run. I would argue that the form holds up far better the better the going and that, all other things being equal, the 'right' horses fight out the finish.

We were probably on course for a soft-ground race this year anyway and the very fact that so few races in the last few decades - it must work out an average of one every 10 years - have been run on fast ground suggests it wasn't even a major issue. By all means water to avoid dangerous ground but there's no evidence of them wanting to get the hairdryers out to ensure we never get ground as heavy as in Red Marauder's year.

The bookies must be loving this announcement.
 
Even allowing for the reduced distance to the 1st fence etc. this year, there has only been one running this century (and possibly further back) where there have been no fallers at the 1st.

Time may show that it really was a balls up by Billys but I won't be playing at 5s.
 
Numbers, numbers :rolleyes:

In Mr Frisk's year 20 out of the 38 runners finished whereas the year before when the going was heavy only 14 finished out of 40 and four years later when it was heavy again only 6 finished out of 36. Making sure the going is good to soft could actually mean it turns out heavy if there is significant rain for two or three days reducing the number of finishers.

Incidemtally the last year the going was officially good to soft was 2006 when only 9 runners of the 40 strong field completed.
 
A soft ground National means more horses have a chance of completing the course, i.e. less jumping at speed, whereas in reality the opposite actually happens whereby a jockey will be much more likely to pull a horse up in testing ground when all chance has gone - and quiet rightly so.

If the people in charge want to see 40 runner races reduced to 6-10 tired finishers each year then they are going about it the right way.

Cheltenham, Aintree... when exactly did 'Good' going become a Bad thing ?
 
Aintree has a black soil that can get very heavy or quick quite rapidly.
1977 it was heavy on Friday yet a night of drying wind had it good by racing time.
Opposite was true the year of the false start and void GN.
 
wilsonl said:
Even allowing for the reduced distance to the 1st fence etc. this year, there has only been one running this century (and possibly further back) where there have been no fallers at the 1st.

Time may show that it really was a balls up by Billys but I won't be playing at 5s.
Click to expand...

Numer of first fence fallers in last 25 years (2012 first)

1-1-1-2-0-2-5-2-3-1-9-2-5-1-5-1-2-7-3-1-1-1-1-3-2
 
Back
Top