• 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!

Reply to thread

The Value v Winners argument has always fascinated me.


For me it's all about circumstances.


On the Cheltenham threads I've been talking about backing the likes of Sceau Royal, Brain Power and Bristol De Mai etc as value bets. I've never really convinced myself they were likely to win [yet!] but felt the prices had to be taken. In the back of my mind is the possibility that I can lay off the bet(s) at much shorter (as I have already done with BP - took 25s, laid off at 10s) and have one or more of them running for me to no risk.


Last year I started backing Altior quite early (if not before the Christmas meeting then definitely at that stage). Regardless of whatever was being said about Min, my figures were telling me Altior would only have to reproduce his form to win something like 9 out of the previous 10 Supreme Hurdles. And he was 8/1.


On Saturday there I thought Beyond Conceit should have been odds-on yet it was 7/4 on the Friday evening and went off at 5/2. He may only have scraped home but he ran with the choke out most of the way and was value for far more than the neck margin. But I wouldn't back him singly at 7/4 because I just don't like backing singles to normal stakes at that price. He was the anchor leg of multiples but the others got beat. I was happy for him to boost the prices I had about the others and the 5/2 was a very pleasant surprise. Had I known he'd be 5/2 I might have got involved as 9/4 is usually my cut-off point for singles.


I know I should have backed him regardless and even mentioned in my synopsis that he'd be a bet for professionals.


I can't remember whether LH was talking about Yanworth or Native River when when the discussion arose but he was wrong, wrong and wrong again in his argument. He thought the horse was a cert. It wasn't. Yanworth looked like being second or third at best for long enough and Native River only beat the 160-rated Le Mercurey by a few lengths. The money was saying BDM was going to beat it but it failed to run its race.


So the two short shots won and LH can crow all he wants but he won't win in the long term with that approach.


5 + 3 = ?
Back
Top