Probability Equals Horse Racing Betting Profit or Loss and a Way to Find Good Bets

What is the secret of making money betting on horse races? Like any other investment, it is the probability of a positive outcome. The probability of a horse winning a race and making a profit can be described as risk versus rewards. With any financial investment, the amount of risk should be weighed against the reward.

In plain English, if a horse will win often enough at the current odds to regain all money wagered along with a profit, then it is a positive bet. So as a handicapper you are really shopping for a good deal. That is the secret of making money at the horse races. It really is no secret, though how you can actually manage to reliably place a fair odds figure on each runner may seem incredibly difficult or even obscure.

It starts with realizing that all races are not the same. The age of the hroses, investment of the owner, quality of the stock, all play a part in determining how difficult it is to figure out what they're worth. The horse racing pools are an open market. Anyone can place a bet. You could say that a horse race is an example of democracy in action. It is therefore no wonder that political races are often described as, "A real Horse Race."

Once you determine which races are the easiest to figure out, the next step is to weigh each factor. In other words, let's say you have decided that claiming races for older horses are the easiest to handicap because all the runners have been tested at the distance and surface and have shown their recent form and ability. Your next step is to find out how important their average speed is compared to other factors.

How often does the horse with the highest average speed win the race? How often does the second fastest horse win, etc.? Once you've figured that out by keeping score over a hundred races or more, the next step is to check on class, jockey trainer teams, etc. Find the most important factor(s) and weight them. Then look at the runners in today's race and give each one a score.

Subtract the take out from 100%. For instance, if the takeout is 18%, round it up to 20% to cover the breakage and that leaves 80%. Now divide that 80% (the actual amount of the win pool that will be returned to the bettors) by the number of runners. Let's say there are 8 runners. That means that if all conditions and runners were the same and won an equal number of times, they would each have a chance to win 10% of the pool. That is the actual amount that would be returned to the winners.

Obviously, not all runners have equal ability. Look at the weighted factors and make adjustments to the 10% that each horse is assigned. You now have a morning line you can use to determine the fair odds of each horse. With practice you'll refine it even more and learn to make a profit from spotting good bets.


Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/horse-racing-articles/probability-equals-horse-racing-betting-profit-or-loss-and-a-way-to-find-good-bets-4302150.html


About the Author


If you want to learn how a horse owner and insider handicaps just go to http://williewins.homestead.com/truecb.html and get the truth. Bill Peterson is a former horse race owner and professional handicapper. To see all Bill's horse racing material go to Horse Racing Handicapping, Bill's handicapping store.


Author: Bill Peterson

Make a Living Betting the Games - Not Just Selling His Picks

It was surely the most successful financial portfolio that never graced the covers of those glossy money magazines touting "the year's hottest funds."

It achieved a phenomenal rate of growth, awarding its admittedly select clientele a return of 10 times the original investment in a year.

It ended without fanfare this month, officially dissolved during a meeting "at a tawdry, nondescript restaurant on West Sahara," according to its de facto junior partner.

Farewell, "Fezzdaq."

A year ago the one-name Las Vegas professional gambler Fezzik teamed up with Jeff Jones of Henderson, a part-time bettor and full-time skeptic, to form a small sports betting fund seeded with an initial bankroll of $1,000.

Loosely based on Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban's proposal for a "gambling hedge fund," the Fezzdaq would be devoted to sports wagers made at the most advantageous point spreads - often called "rogue," or off-market, betting lines.

(Rogue lines are available at regular sports books to the public, but you have to be diligent enough to snap them up before they are adjusted.)

The goal, Fezzik said, was to demonstrate that it's possible to win money consistently betting sports - not necessarily by using some mystical, magical (and often fictional) handicapping wizardry, but by using footwork and betting savvy to grab the best numbers on the board.

Mission accomplished: After opening at $1,000 in early 2006, the Fezzdaq closed (with one wager pending) with a balance of $10,730 - in real money, not theoretical "terwilligers" or something. It was generated by a series of individual bets made daily ranging from $60 or so to the low three figures.

"There are still some people in the world who believe that gamblers don't or can't win every year," Fezzik said this weekend, sounding incredulous. "The truth is that the people who are the best at this do win, year after year. I think the Fezzdaq helped illustrate that nicely."

The danger in following the picks of a sports handicapper, even a successful one, is that any value in betting their selections disappears once the betting line moves a couple of points, Fezzik said.

"We ran around town playing soft numbers and incorporated some handicapping in our selections," Fezzik said. "The reason the best people win is not because they hit 55 percent of their picks against widely available lines, it's because they're hitting 52 1/2 to 53 percent of their own bets."

The primary reason for closing the Fezzdaq was that it was becoming more unwieldy as it grew, Fezzik said.

For example, if he was making a $1,000 bet from his own bankroll, Fezzik might devote $100 of it to the Fezzdaq. But with the index above $10,000, it began to demand wagers that were too large to justify, Fezzik said, especially considering sports books with off-market betting lines also offer relatively low betting limits.

This is also the major weakness of Cuban's original idea. It might work well on a small scale, but it rapidly turns cumbersome.

Even so, the Fezzdaq experience does offer a lesson to sports bettors, whether their average bet is less than $100 or 10 times higher: Always insist on the best point spread, and never take the worst of the number.

It seems obvious, but how many bettors went to the window last week and took the Colts minus 7 or the Bears plus 6 1/2? Even in a business where there are no locks, it's a sure thing that some did.

Fezzik tracked the index's plays on his Web site (fezziksplace.com) and credited a small group of handicappers he meets each week for their assistance. And if nothing else, Fezzik said, he made a believer of Jeff Jones.

Jones, who did the accounting for the Fezzdaq, is known for his cynical views of the sports touting business. He was impressed that Fezzik's performance came without any "games of the year," "20-star plays," or similar hyperbole.

"Fez turned 1 into 10.73 in a year," Jones said. "And he wasn't selling anything. None of the crap that passes for Las Vegas sports gambling 'wisdom.' "

Saturday Tipping Competition - Long Week

It feels like a long week and I'm tired. So much for going to Huntington races on Thursday - been rushing around ever since. Permanent bad hair day. If I was a bear I'd go into hibernation. Never mind. Back to the Saturday Tipping Competition. Alan Winter found a couple of points to remain at the head of the pro ranks on 20.8pts. Betmanmike made an appearance with a nice winner and a fraction behind with 18pts. Gareth (11pts) and Racing Mama (7.25pts) are in third and fourth, respectively. Two weeks to go - so get your tipping caps on, phone a trainer for some juicy gossip or attempt a rain dance. Whatever, I suggest all those would-be winners do just that - WIN. 1PM Deadline. 

Cheltenham 2015 Top Race Previews

Of all of the fixtures featuring in 2015's racing calendar, there are few as well-anticipated or more enjoyed than the Cheltenham Festival, taking place between March the 10th and 13th at Cheltenham Racecourse. As with any big meeting, wagering will be top of the agenda for many excited attendees; last year some £600,000,000 of bets were taken in by bookmakers. The Festival certainly has a great number of top class races under it's belt, so what are they? Which horses have previous revelled in the events' previous glories?

Tuesday 10th

The race kicking off the festival is the Supreme Novices' Hurdle, a frantic two mile run featuring a truly big field, all engaging in a satisfying mix of hurdling and chasing that spectators find irresistible! Last year, five year-old Vautour, trained by W Mullins and jockeyed by R Walsh, came out on top of the Grade 1 race, although Irish banker Douvan could assume the title this March.

Fans wanting to bet on the biggest race of Tuesday will be looking forward to the Champion Hurdle, however. Deciding the champion of the hurdling division over a two mile slog, Jezki (trained by J Harrington and ridden by B Geraghty) was 2014's winner, and may yet rise back up to first place this year.

Wednesday 11th

Wednesday kicks off with the National Hunt Steeple Chase, a demanding novice horse and amateur jockey race that can truly put the strain on the contenders. With the prospect of injury an ever-present fear, punters should make sure they keep track of all the latest news via Coral's sports app; any slip-ups and one's picks could be in need for drastic last-minute alterations! Last year 9 year-old Midnight Prayer beat the odds and came out on top.

The Queen Mother Champion Chase is the top fixture of Wednesday though, a top class race that dictates who is the best chaser in the two mile division. Last year Sire De Grugy won a tense race, ridden excellently by J Moore.

Thursday 12th

Fans of chases will enjoy Thursday's Ryanair Chase, a two mile, five furlong race for five year old horses and older that are always the more lofty equines in the competition! Last year Dynaste, jockeyed by J Tizzard and traned by D Pipe, came first in the Grade 1 race, although this year's winner may well be a newcomer.

Feature event for Thursday is the Ladbrokes World Hurdle; three miles long, last year's winner was More Of That, ridden by B Geraghty, in what was an electrifying race! This year's picks include Zarkandar and Saphir Du Rheu, but it's likely to be a close one!

Friday 13th

Finally, the ultimate day of the festival sees the County Hurdle, one of the most difficult handicaps to solve at the festival. Quick, exciting and nail-biting in equal measure, last year's race saw Tiger Roll come first place.

Then it's the big one; the Cheltenham Gold Cup. Last year saw Lord Windermere (D Russel and J Culloty) come first at this most important event, although this year Holywell, Bobs Worth and Many Clouds are all strong contenders- this is going to be an excellent watch!

Saturday Tipping Competition

The second week of the tipster competition. Something terrible happened last Saturday - Alan Winter found a juicy, money-enhanced 14/1 winner. So while he's smooching down the highway of love listening to the dulcet tones of Barry White on this Valentine's Day I've informed the moths in my wallet that their comfy £50 note bed may have to be vacated by the end of the month. Winter holds the lead with 18.8pts, while free entrant Gareth has 11pts, Rawnsley 7pts, Shukman 6.5pts, Capt Heathcliffe 5pts & Glueythepig 4pts. All the above are pro players apart from Gareth. 1PM Deadline.

Pro Gambler Series: Alan Woods

Alan Woods, was universally recognised as among the top three punters in the world. Woods, born and raised in New South Wales Australia was the pioneer of computer betting syndicates in Hong Kong and a key man in the development of computer analysis for betting. His fortune at the time of his death was estimated at $670 million. The Woods betting syndicate became a legend in the world of Hong Kong racing, where huge amounts of money are invested into the tote pools. For the 2006-07 racing season, the Hong Kong Jockey Club recorded a betting turnover of $US64billion ($71.46bn). It has been estimated the input to annual turnover by Woods and his syndicate was about 2% of that figure.

"I would not think that estimate is an exaggeration," said John Schreck, former chief steward for the Australian Jockey Club in Sydney and later for the HKJC in the late 1990s and into the early years of the new millennium when Woods' syndicate was operating at full steam.

"To my knowledge, he never ever came racing while I was there. But he employed dozens of Filipinos running around carrying mobiles and hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash waiting for instructions on how and what to bet.

"There was a time the Jockey Club closed his account but this was through a silly policy adopted from a misjudgment in management. In the main, the Jockey Club was and is sensitive about these people (betting syndicates) being the big customers that they are. I saw these people as professional gamblers and not a problem at all to the integrity of racing."

Indeed, the syndicates relied on Schreck, and his fellow stewards to keep racing clean. Their profits, after all, were based on statistics for corrupt-free racing.

Woods turned an early passion for playing bridge and a fascination for mathematics into lifestyle at blackjack tables in casinos.

He cut his punting teeth on horse racing when he went to New Zealand in the early 1980s but turned his attention from there to the greater betting pools of punting-mad Hong Kong.

Woods teamed up with Benter in Hong Kong in the mid 1980s and together they formed the first betting syndicate whose success depended not on insider tips but on what the computer would spit out after being fed a range of information on the horse, current form, race times, sectional splits, weather, state of the track and jockey form.

Think Like An Odds Compiler

Another fascinating article from the Horseracing Pro. Last week we addressed horses in general. This week I thought we would look at odds and races. With the fixture-list reaching saturation point, it is becoming increasingly difficult to keep pace with all the racing. My advice is not to try. If you insist on keeping up it is my contention you will end up either burnt out or a jack-of-all-trades and master of none.

You will be unable to spend the necessary time on races you can solve and you will be dizzy with a mish-mash of half-ideas, which have not been thought through to a satisfactory conclusion.

Target your meetings, then your races and use your time wisely. There used to be an advertisement on television, one of the few to make sense; its slogan was, ‘Don’t Work Harder – Work Smarter.’ That is excellent advice. Take it and apply it to racing!


Decide where your strengths lie. If you are a Flat man, then do not try to turn yourself into some sort of National Hunt aficionado. There is enough all-weather racing during the winter and you may always have the odd opinion over the jumps that you can utilise. If your expertise rests in the jumping code, that means no winter holidays for you and you will have to concentrate your efforts on the nine or ten-month period that suits best. I know some (a handful admittedly) that actually bet solely in hunter chases. Personally, I would rather try my luck in a casino, but those that major in such a discipline make it pay. The problem is they are dealing with a very small window of opportunity, but the bottom-line in this business is that if you can make a profit, then your approach cannot be argued with.

Whatever your strength, it is important you understand certain principles that apply to all forms of gambling. Before I move on to the specialised area of dissected races, it is worth spending some time on basic gambling rules.


There are two forms of odds: Absolute Odds and Indefinite Odds. I will make the distinction. Absolute Odds reflect the exact chances of any eventuality. The most obvious example is the spin of the coin. There are only two possibilities – heads or tails. Therefore, the odds are evens you do or do not name the spin correctly. There is a 50% chance of being right and the same about being wrong. Similarly, if you take ten boxes, randomly place white balls in nine of them and one black in the remaining box, the odds against you correctly identifying the box containing the black ball is 9/1. There are ten possibilities. By picking one, nine are against you and only one is in your favour. This is incontrovertible. I have cited Absolute Odds in both cases. So would you be tempted if I were to offer you odds of 12/1 against correctly nominating the black ball?

Now I have changed the scenario. You are still unlikely to pick the black ball with the odds stacked so heavily against you but I am offering you a greater price than the proposition warrants. There is no strict answer to this poser. A mathematician would encourage you to take the bet. A gambler, despite the epithet, would probably conclude that, unless these odds are to be extended beyond one pick, the black ball is likely to remain elusive so the price should not influence a decision. This presents an interesting crossover between thought-processes of the mathematician (who merely pontificates) and the man who has to put his judgement into practice.

We are now in the realms of value. At this point, some of you may wish to refer back to an earlier article concerning a mythical game of Russian roulette that covers the weakness a pure, and blinkered mathematical approach in my view, contains. Value is the trap the bookmaker and punter use to ensnare each other. The bookmaker, confident you are unlikely to call correctly, is often prepared to offer over the odds on a proposition. In Godfather parlance, he will make you an offer you cannot refuse. Always beware of such generosity. Some punters are vulnerable to these offers, meaning they become duped into backing on an event or horse they would otherwise by-pass. Value is a complex issue. I will return to it.


So we have established what Absolute Odds are. They reflect an indisputable set of propositions. The problem is that by offering Absolute Odds on a regular basis, the layer cannot make a profit. A roulette wheel only makes the house a profit because it contains one, or two Zeros. One Zero and 36 numbers on a wheel offering odds of 35/1 against any particular number coming up, means a 2.5 percent profit to the house. Two Zeros gives it a five percent advantage. When you consider how many times a wheel is spun in any given session, that is enough to tilt the overall odds away from the player. So on a roulette wheel, the Zeros represent the margin of profit to the house. On one-armed bandits – the worst possible form of gambling there can be – the profit is even greater. In fact, it can be as great as the operator wishes. In some cases, these infernal machines keep 60% of turnover. Anyone playing such an item wants to have a brain scan. The object for serious punters is to obtain 5/4 about heads on a regular basis. Being offered it once is still a gamble.


Indefinite Odds are just that. They are someone’s interpretation of the possibilities that exist. Therefore, in any sporting event you are pitching yourself against the odds setter. It therefore follows that the odds offered on a horserace are not necessarily correct. Put bluntly they are largely a guess. This is especially true when the odds compilers are in the midst of a busy day. Maybe it is Friday afternoon and they have to produce odds for six races run on Saturday. The races are hard handicaps, full of runners. Despite various fail-safe techniques employed by bookmakers, they are vulnerable. They are working against the clock and unless they have a large contingent of compilers, they run the risk of overlooking a vital component or of events, such as a going change, conspiring against them.


As a punter, if you allow yourself to be under the same amount of pressure you are also likely to make mistakes. This is where you should be able to raise your nose to the wind and see if you can smell a hint of blood. You can afford to spend much more time on chosen races than the over-worked and stressed odds compilers. Use it wisely to see if you can unearth a mistake or two. But do not just back a horse because it is too big. Only back it if you fancy it. Remember the white ball/black ball example. If you are unlikely to be right, the price is incidental as it is more than likely you will strike a losing bet. By the same token, do not be tempted to strike a bet because you consider it is bombproof – the each-way double that cannot fail to produce a yield. You reason they may not win but they will both place. If that is your starting point then it is a poor bet to strike. Much better to strike an each-way bet as insurance when you think both horses will win. That way the place part of the bet will save you losing in the event of you having one winner and a short-head loser.


Do not allow the odds makers to dictate your betting patterns. They may influence them and there are undoubtedly times when a horse is too short for you to wish to back, even though you consider it will win. Well, we all have to live with that. But if you spend your time waiting for the perfect bet, you will spend a long time on the sidelines. There have to be occasions when, although the odds may not be ideal, you are so sure the horse in question will win that you bet. Let the odds on offer be the last thing you consider. If you take them as your first point of reference, the bookmaker is dictating your betting patterns. That is a situation that suits the bookmaking fraternity. You are on the receiving end of an offer of the bookmaker’s choosing. You are being made an offer you think you cannot refuse. But you can refuse it and you should unless it was in you mind to back the horse in the first place. There is one person that should decide when you bet. That person is you!

If you wish to identify value in betting there are a couple of ways you can do this. Firstly, remember that we are not dealing with an absolute proposition but one that contains a variety of factors. That means there is no blueprint price but you can get close to such a thing. When evaluating a race, discard as many of the runners as you can. Don’t worry if you discard a horse, often as a result of perfectly sound reasoning only for it to win. That can always happen, 33/1 winners appear in the formbook, particularly early and late in the season. It does not mean your judgement is faulty. There is a random factor to be considered and it will kick in from time to time. That is the drawback with the Indefinite Proposition.

Competent odds compilers know how to break down a race. They start from the outside and work in. They price up the outsiders first, putting them as big as they dare. That way the percentage they are left with dictates the prices of the participants that really count. An odds-compiler that takes a stab at the price at the favourite and then builds the rest of the runners round that guess is likely to price races incorrectly on a regular basis. Assume the same method when you assess any race. Take out the horses you think won’t win, see how many you are left with, juggle with a few prices and that, roughly, will indicate what the winning chances of the leading protagonists are. But, and this is important, remember you are not dealing with the stony absolute of the flick of a coin or the balls in their boxes. The unforeseen can occur. Such issues as jockey error, horses breaking down, getting a poor run, being hampered, losing lengths at the start, can and do influence results. That has to be built in; horseracing is not decided by a computer. In case it has escaped your notice, horses are comprised of flesh and blood.

Value Betting: Gaining an Edge over the Bookie

If the bookmaker's odds are unfair, how can a punter ever win? Given the disadvantage the overround imposes, it is no surprise that as many as 95% of gamblers fail to win at fixed odds sports betting over the long term. There is no denying that most bookmakers, particularly the well-established firms, are very good at setting prices, estimating the true chance of sporting results and locking in a profit margin.


Nevertheless, sports are not statistically quantifiable, in the sense that cards or other forms of casino gambling are, where simple laws of probability govern the outcome of games like blackjack, roulette and craps. I know that I have a 1/37 chance of landing a number 36 on a European roulette wheel (1/38 chance on an American wheel). But how can I know what the true probability is of Ronnie O'Sullivan winning the world snooker championship again? And if I think I know what his chances are, how can I be sure that my estimate is more accurate than the bookmaker's?

Unfortunately, the answers to these questions only come with time and experience, by acquiring a "knowledge" of a sport and its betting market, and a familiarity with the way bookmakers set their odds. The good news, however, is that whilst bookmakers are very good at setting odds for sporting events, they, like punters, can make mistakes, sometimes very glaring ones, which knowledgeable bettors will snap up without a moment's hesitation. William Hill, for example, astonishingly offered 200/1 on Primoz Peterka, the back-in-form Slovenian ski jumper, to win the opening ski jumping World Cup competition of the 2002/03 season at Kuusamo, Finland, despite the fact that he had won the qualifying competition the night before, and had been double world champion in previous seasons. The true odds, by contrast, were likely to be nearer to 10/1, and most other bookmakers had priced accordingly. Peterka won, and William Hill ceased offering odds for the ski jumping World Cup thereafter. Of course, such large mistakes are relatively rare, but smaller pricing errors do and must exist to account for the few per cent of gamblers who are profiting regularly from fixed odds sports betting.

Punters differ in the methods they use to acquire a sports betting "knowledge". Some like to adopt a more mathematical approach by using rating systems based on past performance to predict future outcomes. Others spend hours each week poring over sports journals and Internet sites to glean as much information as they can about a particular event, including news about the weather, and team or player injuries and morale. Still others base their judgement on a subjective feel for the forthcoming event, relying on an inkling or a hunch about what may happen. And finally there are punters who simply pay others to do the thinking for them, by subscribing to one or more sports advisory services.

There is no right or wrong approach to seeking a betting edge. Ultimately, the best one is the one that works for you, one that returns a profit. However, what each approach has in common is a shared aim of finding "value" in the odds, where the true chance of a win is greater than that estimated by the bookmaker. Many punters fail to appreciate the importance of value betting, preferring to subscribe to the "back winners, not losers" school of gambling. Betting on Liverpool at Anfield to beat Sunderland at 4/11, it might be argued, is surely preferable to betting on Sunderland to beat Liverpool at 13/2, even if the bookie has restricted Liverpool's odds but been generous with Sunderland's. Liverpool, simply, are too good, however poor the price.

This analysis is confused because the punter has failed to assess Liverpool's chance of a win in probabilistic terms, but instead rather simply by whether he thinks they will or won't be victorious. "Winners" cannot win all the time, no matter how much a punter is convinced that they can. The important question a punter should instead be asking is whether the true chance of a winner is greater than that which the bookmaker has unfairly (in his mind), but potentially mistakenly (in the punter's mind), estimated it to be. In other words, is the bookmaker's price greater than that which the punter considers to be the fair price? If it is, then he has found betting value, provided he can estimate prices better than the bookmaker, of course.

A value bettor will be generally unconcerned about backing the underdog, or perhaps more relevantly backing a team which he thinks will not win (underdog or not), provided there is value in the bookmaker's odds. A value bettor estimating the likelihood for the Liverpool win to be 70%, with a 15% chance of a Sunderland win would back the away team, despite believing that Liverpool should win. According to these estimations, the fair odds for the two teams are 1.43 and 6.67 respectively. If the punter is right, and the game could be played 100 times, a 13/2 bet on Sunderland each time would, on average, return £12.50 profit from 100 £1 stakes. By contrast, backing Liverpool at 4/11 would, on average, lose him £4.55. He might believe that Liverpool should win each time, but in this case so does the bookmaker, who has cut his odds. Equally, however, the bookmaker has underestimated the chance of a Sunderland win, offering odds that the value bettor considers, in this case, to represent value.

Since odds are just probabilities, value betting offers really the only way to beat the bookmaker. A punter can back as many "winners" as he likes, but if he fails to take into account the bookmaker's prices, it may not be enough to return a profit. There will always be some losers. Really, the argument about value betting is a hypothetical one. The "back winners, not losers" philosophy is itself inherently all about finding a betting edge. If a punter is finding winners and making a profit with them, it means simply that he is winning more bets than the bookmaker believes the punter ought to be winning, according to the odds the bookmaker had set. If this is the case, the punter has found value and established a betting edge, whether he quantitatively set out to do so or just followed his hunches. Successful betting, then, is really all about understanding and managing probabilities. Know the true chances of a sporting win, and there may be profitable opportunities waiting at the bookmakers. As Geoff Harvey says in his book Successful Football Betting, "Find the value, [and] the winners will take care of themselves."

Saturday Tipping Competition - Lucky In Love

A new month brings the Saturday Tipping Competition. January saw Capt Heathcliffe and Clint chomp their way to the winner's line and pocket some lovely cash. By all accounts it was a relatively low-scoring event so perhaps we will see some fireworks this February. We have a couple of new pro tipsters with Mark and hopefully OneEyeEnos, who had gone missing in action. It doesn't feel the same without Tom (Tecbet) being part of our little community. I'm in a generous mood this month as being Valentne's Day on the 14th February, if you win the pro competition with a 14/1 winner I will give an extra £50 to the pot. Not a bad day's work. For all those who haven't given the pro comp a go then you could well be missing out of good prize money (£100+). Literally you need to win once in a year to make it pay. Get those tips in by 1pm. Read The Rules 

2015 Cheltenham Festival - Triumph Hurdle History & Trends

This Grade 1 National Hunt race is open to colts & fillies aged four years old. It is run on the New Course at Cheltenham over a distance of 2m 1f. It's open to novice hurdlers and run on the 13th March, Gold Cup Day, the last day of the Cheltenham Festival at Prestbury Park. 

This race was established in 1939 and won by a horse called Grey Talk, trained by George Batchelor. 

In those early days it was held at Park Hurst, Surrey. Surprisingly it was contested by a number of horses trained in France. Indeed, six of the first seven winners were French-based. Unknown to many, Letser Piggott won this race in 1954. 

The Triumph Hurdle moved to Cheltenham in 1965 and became part of the Festival in 1968. Most notable winner include Clair Soleil (1953), Persian War (1967), Kribensis (1988) and Katchit (2007). All these juveniles went on to win the Champion Hurdle.

Nicky Henderson is the leading trainer with five wins. Last year's race was won in fantastic style by the Gordon Elliot-trainer Tiger Roll, ridden by Davy Russell at odds of 10/1, by three-and-a-quarter lengths. 

What about the Triumph Hurdle trends? Here are some pointers. 

• The vast majority of recent winners have won on their last start before the big day. 
• Generally horses have an official rating over 80 on the Flat and raced over one and a half miles.
•  Tiger Roll won in 2014, the year before we saw the impressive Our Conor. 
• However, there had been a twelve-year void for the Irish challengers before this duo shone.
•  English-trained horses hold the aces from a statistical pointer.
•  A preparatory race in the month before the festival is another key factor to finding a winner.
• Most runners have at least three runs over hurdles. 
• Fancied horse often go best - so outsiders are best watched. 

This year's leading lights are detailed by the first three favourite with the next best 20/1 bar (written: 5th February). 

Peace And Co (pictured) is fancied to run a big race and presently 7/4f. This bay gelding, a son of Falco out of a French mare, is trained by Nicky Henderson. It races in the familiar silks of Simon Munir & Isaac Souede. He started his hurdling career in Clairefontaine, France. Some six-months later, this four-year-old made an impressive debut for his new connections at Doncaster - prevailing by nineteen lengths. The dogs have been barking about this exciting prospect and it is fitting he made a winning return at Cheltenham in one of the Triumph Hurdle Trials, ridden by Barry Geraghty. Considering Henderson's charge pulled hard in the early stages that victory was all the more pleasing. With earnings of over £45,000 there could be more to come. 

The two major fancied include Irish hope Kalkir, trained by Willie Mullins. This grey gelding has won once in three starts to date. He is generally priced at 8/1. 

Nicky Henderson has a strong hand with stablemate Hargam, owned by J P McManus. This grey gelding, a son of Sinndar, has been busy with six races so far. His first three efforts were in France on the Flat, before racing at Cheltenham for new connection. In December, he beat Karezak, who had been similarly defeated by Peace And Co. His most recent victory at Musselburgh saw a ready success in the hands of A P McCoy. By all accounts Henderson looks the man to follow this year.
     

2:50 Lingfield Racing Tips (2nd February) LADBROKES MAIDEN STAKES (CLASS 5) (3yo+)

A Maiden Stakes over 1m 1y on standard going for three and four-year-old colts & fillies. Eight lightly-raced thoroughbreds take part from leading stables. A difficult race to assess with a good few likely to progress with experience - but one horse does have some appeal. Wajeeh should make a bold show after a promising debut over course and distance. This three-year-old chestnut gelding is trained by Richard Hannon, racing in the colours of Al Shaqab Racing. A son of Raven's Pass, he cost 250,000gns at Tattersalls October Sales 2013. This January foal finished a respectable third on debut when ridden by Martin Dwyer and should improve on that first start. It is a plus to see Frankie Dettori takes the ride, his only mount of the day. Silent Thunder is one of the main dangers, being fancied to go well on all three starts to date but chopping and changing distance suggests William Haggis' colt is just ordinary and an official rating of 70 reflects that opinion. Looking at the exchanges, Wajeeh is shorter than the tissue prices suggested (9/4) - most likely odds-on. Remember it pays to look at bookmaker prices and especially free bets. Use this promo code to get a free £25 matched bet at William Hill. The betting suggests this expensive purchase will be very hard to beat.