A DELIGHTFUL FREE FORMAT PIECE FROM SPY! …

THE ART OF WINNER-FINDING

           (Well, sort of)

‘DO YOU EXPECT ME TO TALK?’

‘No, Mr Bond, I expect you to die.’

Sorry, I could not resist it. The famous line from Goldfinger – I always wanted to write that line and often speak it, much to the intense annoyance of any female I may be accompanying. If you are as sad as I am, you may have noticed women dislike any reference to James Bond whatsoever. This is a fact I cannot claim to understand. I mean they would hardly refuse his advances would they?

Try them with the one-legged Tarzan sketch: (Your right leg I like; it is a lovely leg for the role. I have nothing against it. Trouble is, neither have you), the Monty Python dead parrot sketch: (I wish to make a complaint!) Harry Enfield (Oi! No!), the Badiel and Skinner line: (That’s you that is) and the result is the same; you might as well forget any plans for an evening of wild abandon.

Even though I know this, I cannot help myself in the false belief that one day I will stumble, or hop if doing the Tarzan number, across a woman who finds this funny. It isn’t and I won’t. I mean these sketches are priceless, but only in their original format. The sight of grown men imitating James Bond, Peter Cook, John Cleese et al is only hilarious to those taking part.

I did come close once on a Nile Cruise with a very pretty blonde from Essex. To be fair she was unfamiliar with the Tarzan sketch, but it was a great icebreaker and had her husband not shown up, who knows where it may have led. Other than that, I am one of those men that agony aunts denigrate. They remind the female race that such behaviour is just not funny, and to stay well clear of any man that cavorts about relating word-perfect lines from these sketches. This also applies to lines like, ‘I know what you’re thinking; did he fire five shots or six. To tell the truth, in all this excitement I kinda lost track myself but, seeing as this is a 44Magnum, the most powerful handgun in the world and will blow your head clean off, what you got to ask yourself is: Do you feel lucky? Well punk, do ya?’ Clint Eastwood! Dirty Harry! See, I can’t stop myself! I am a hopeless case, which accounts for the fact I am still single. Well, that and other things I would prefer not to go into.

What has all this got to do with an article on betting I hear you ask? Patience my dear Bond, I am about to come to the point. Meanwhile, I trust the champagne is to your taste – Dom Perignon ’53 if I am not mistaken. Actually, it has nothing to do with world domination or a uniped auditioning for the role of Tarzan. You see, even though I know I should not behave like this, I still do it. I cannot resist whatever the consequences. It is a clear indication we are what we are. People are not for changing. You can adjust their behaviour by fear, or by bribery but you will not change their inherent personalities.

Roll of drums please… so now the point: Careless talk will cost you. Information in racing can be gold dust. On consideration, it is not always knowing a horse is fancied that is most useful but knowing it is not. Let me explain in case this point has escaped you. A fancied horse still has to win. An unfancied horse only has to lose. Losing is easier than winning. But whatever nugget of information you have picked up or even unearthed yourself, once you pass it on to someone else, assume it will be in the public domain before long. If you cannot keep your own counsel, how can you expect others to?

Most news starts out as exclusive information and ends up as common knowledge. In this current climate, nothing is confidential. And sooner or later, once you have a bet or use an agent, information will filter into a market it will affect. That is a fact. There is nothing that can be done to prevent everything being known by race time. Nevertheless, if you do know something that is unique, then consider that your knowledge is only valuable as long as you keep it quiet. It is not always what you know, but when you know it! Timing can be as important as content. If you know what everyone else knows, it is not exactly worthless but it is not a scoop either. If you know what others do not, then you have a distinct advantage.

I am afraid one of our least likeable facets as humans is a compulsion to do what we know we should not. We will hop about reeling lines from the Tarzan sketch, scream, ‘I ain’t bovered’ even though it isn’t funny unless Catherine Tate does it. Whatever our faults, we cannot help ourselves. Similarly, tell someone information in confidence and they will repeat it unless it is in their interest not to do so.

You may have one or possibly two people you know you can trust. Even then, assume they will tell one other. It may be a relative, a close friend or the little old lady at the Post Office. But repeat it they will. And in turn, the little old lady will repeat it and before you know where you are, it is headlined in the Racing Post.

This does not mean you have to clam up completely. There is an art to revealing part rather than the whole of the entire picture. For example, rather than put someone away unless they deserve it, you can say in response to a question concerning a yard you are known to have an association with, that the horse has a chance. ‘I would not put you off backing it,’ is one of the best ways of doing just that. You do not need to be a secret squirrel the whole of the time, but it is important that you release sensitive information when it suits you. It is surprising how many friends one can suddenly acquire when a horse you are likely to know about is scheduled to run.

All I am saying here is to be cautious about to whom you reveal your secrets. And remember, timing is all important, not just to you but to your suppliers and others that may have a vested interest in the animal in question. Those that are paying the bills, directly or indirectly, are entitled to be first in the queue. I know it is hard to resist when flattered by the epithet that you are the man to settle a dispute as you know everything that happens at such-and-such yard but, bear in mind those doing the asking are portraying themselves to others as the man from the yard in question. This is a dog-eat-dog game full of potential freeloaders. Be aware of that. Also constantly reappraise what you are receiving in return for divulging your innermost confidences. Chances are, when you tot it up, you are receiving very little. Do not pass on sensitive information lightly. Due credit will not be accorded to you. Restrict what you know to your closest allies.

Otherwise, you will be including the undeserving in your plans.

And you don’t want to do that! No you don’t want to do that!

You don’t want your suppliers to make a complaint my lad!

I am not sure what benefit you will receive from this, but I feel so much better for finding a legitimate excuse to use so many forbidden phrases! Anyone unaware of the links here has my apologies. Naturally, I appreciate that any female readers were lost after the first two lines.

I ain’t bovered; I don’t need extra readers; I got loads of money!

Somebody stop me!

THE ART OF WINNER-FINDING

Bookies glean information from the bets they accept

THERE IS AN OLD story of the punter who liked to back short-priced horses. He seemed to believe that the shorter the price, the more market confidence it carried; so therefore the bigger certainty it was. He used to attend race meetings and had an entourage of different punters to place bets on his behalf. The story (not to be taken too literally) goes than one day he instructed his punter to, ‘Hurry up and take the 10/11 before if goes Evens,’ about a certain horse. Such thinking, if it ever existed in real life, has long been eclipsed by the value-seekers; those looking for odds they feel represent a cut above true odds. I have addressed this subject before; pointing out that Indefinite Odds as opposed to Absolute Odds [those that are incontrovertible], are based on opinion.

As a result it is very important that punters back horses they fancy rather than getting sucked into bets purely because of prices on offer. Overpriced horses are often overpriced for a reason. Some horses fail to win. Welsh Emperor is a prime example. He always has a greater chance in Listed and Group 3 events than his price suggests, but he rarely wins. In his case, although his technical chance is greater than his odds reflect, his track-record means he is an unlikely winner of whatever race he is contesting. Horses like him make up the numbers, take up a percentage, but invariably get in the way.

Be aware that the danger of seeking out value for value’s sake can mean you are about to step into a minefield.

Bookmakers know what they are doing most of the time. Vulnerability tends to exist when they are pricing races the day before. As race time approaches, the more likely they are to be correct even if they have to make several adjustments. Their vulnerability crumbles as bets start to trickle then flood in and before long, the position between punter and bookmaker becomes reversed. Whatever advantage you felt you had over the bookmaker a day before a race, dwindles as the bookmaker’s intelligence system kicks in. And as he starts to record bets, so a pattern unknown to you, emerges. Every customer that wins money (distinct from a winning account), or has a proven record of backing the right horses from certain yards, is tagged-up. That is to say, within seconds of certain bets being placed, traders are informed. The bet may be small it may be large. Some big punters have an incredible strike rate with certain yards. But once they get in front, they start having £100 Yankees and backing race by race, often with their thought processes considerably diluted by champagne or wine and can lose everything they won and more on a cleverly crafted coup by throwing money at hunches. Others can be small players – £5 or £10 a throw being all they risk – but the fact they have a 64% strike rate with a particular yard means their transactions will not go unnoticed. They could be a friend of the trainer’s family, a cleaner, the bloke who delivers the paper. The fact is that once a bookmaker has established a link, he is getting his card marked merely by laying a bet.

Consequently, a race you might have considered a three-horse affair may contain six serious contenders as far as the bookmaker is concerned. In blind ignorance, you stick to your theory that a certain horse is overpriced but if you knew what Jolly Joe knew, would you be so keen to take the odds? On such occasions, bookmakers hang on to their prices for a long time, confident that they will field enough money to be in a position to make a book. As the time goes on and their odds remain the same, it becomes increasingly obvious that, whilst there may be nothing wrong with your logic or information, your horse faces serious competition. When bookmakers slash a price, trying to wriggle out of their odds, you know they are genuinely worried.

Pricewise is a good indication of how the situation is developing. We all know that when Tom Segal is in form, which he is now, there will be money for anything he nominates. Everyone gets involved. Those that arb will take a price they know can be sold back later and Joe Punter will back the selection because it is the closest thing he gets to having an edge. So bookmakers are under siege. Storm troopers are busting down the doors to avail themselves of the 10/1 and the expectation is that the horse will start in single figures. Now, there have been occasions when Tom Segal, just like the rest of us, has made a mistake or been forced to nominate a horse he thinks is a poor effort – a half-hearted attempt at coming up with something in a race he has no particular feel for. At first the odds tumble. Then, let us say someone with a connection to the yard comes on for a bet but it does not include the Pricewise selection. Even better, from the bookmaker’s standpoint, he actually backs against the horse. Ask yourself what you would do in such a position. Try if you can to see inside that thick hide beneath which lurks the bookmaker. Instead of shortening the horse further, now he is prepared to stand up to it. He is not going to risk going skint. If he has been in the game five minutes, he knows what can go wrong, but he has a major mark against the horse – a big clue that it may not win. There have even been occasions when Ladbrokes have pushed out a Pricewise selection. Like them or love them, they are the best in the business. Their information is the best. No doubt, they pay for it one way or another – either by lavish entertainment, or by allowing widespread facilities to those who bet with them and whose bets can be used as cast iron marks. We know they are in cahoots with several high profile stables and I make no comment on that. It is their business and they run it well.

But with the advent of Betfair, all be it a depleted market these days, punters do not have to be railroaded into showing their hands quite so early. At one time bookmakers would see a tremendous amount of warm business between 8.30 and 9.30 am. It was almost a game of musical chairs. Those with the information would be on to the traders, shopping their business in return for an inflated price for a few hundred pounds. The bookmakers had the mark for little potential outlay and could protect their morning business by ensuring the 16/1 laid was no longer available. That was the way it used to work. These days, times have changed. But the principle is the same. With the slow advance of the hands on the clock, so the bookmaker becomes better informed. Most information is like water; it will leak. Some, however, known to perhaps only the owner or trainer, does not enter the public domain until much later and can, at times, wreck the best-laid plans of the layers.

This leads me to mention the information trail that most novice punters are so desperate to pursue. Information is useful in a wide range of capacities. Often what you are not told (unfancied horses) can be more useful that what you are. Never forget though that information is only someone else’s opinion. And very often that opinion, unless it concerns something of such magnitude you could not possibly know, is not as good as your own. Some yards are very good yards. They churn out winner after winner and you might be empted to believe that if only you had someone who could help you with such messages, you would have it made. You may be surprised that some of these yards, good though they undoubtedly are, will iron you out if you listen to what they actually tip. Some stables, like the Richard Hannon yard, send out horses fit and ready to win 90% of the time. If they are not fit, they don’t run. So it is a good yard from a punting point of view and one where you are capable of marking your own card. Form an opinion about one their horses and invariably you will get a run for your money and if it fails to win, it is more likely to be you that has called it incorrectly. Sadly, not all yards operate in such an open and straightforward way. When I have worked out how to ensure I am not leading our lawyers down the Private Eye route, I shall return to this issue and make a few observations you may find helpful.

THE INFORMATION TRAIL

IT MAY NOT HAVE escaped your notice that the procurement of information for betting purposes is against BHA policy. I cannot say it is against the law because an organisation like the BHA cannot pass laws, they can only regulate. In this respect, they are the same as any private organisation or club that can only state the conditions of membership. Parliament passes laws. As far as I am aware, no law stating that it is illegal to receive horseracing information has crossed the despatch boxes.

Racing is entitled to establish its own rules, as is the Lawn Tennis Association.  White’s Gentlemen’s Club has the same privilege but, although they doubtless invoke a dress code within their premises, it is not against the law to walk along St James Street minus a tie.

Horse Racing Pro needs a degree of policing but in its present desperate attempts to portray itself as being beyond reproach, it is starting to resemble a man who is floating in water but in danger of drowning due to a thrashing panic.

Before the passing of rules, it is important for the legislators to work out how to enforce them. If certain areas are black, certain white, but most are grey, there could be a problem. The BHA finds itself in such a position, hence its latest letter to trainers, attempting to turn grey to black, or indeed white. In this country, betting props up horseracing. Short of instigating a Tote Monopoly, certain facts need facing if the current situation prevails. Wherever there is money to be made – be it in politics, business, or gambling – there will always be those who seek to grab an unfair advantage. That means serious punters use their individual skills to pinpoint what is not generally known or considered and also enlist help. Most combine the two.

I am not talking about the sort of Dick Francis plots outlined on Panorama. Most professional punters have informants, as do racing journalists, jockeys’ agents, trainers and owners. They are not seeking to receive information construed as being illegal. So just how far does the BHA wish to extend the arm that threatens to crack the whip? I make these points because by addressing the subject of information I submit I am not encouraging or promulgating skulduggery.

Let us look at the ways information, in all its various forms, can be obtained. As far as I can determine there are five options.

The first is to become Michael Tabor and own a sufficient number of horses, and pay so many training bills, that the attention of a trainer is only a phone call away.

The second is to spearhead various owner syndicates. Once again, in collusion with an assortment of trainers, you will be plotting the course horses will be taking and, doubtless, during conversations with said trainers other horses in the stable are liable for a mention.

The third is to use contacts within racing to help in your assessments of races. These contacts could be friends who work for stables in sundry guises, bookmaker’s employees who are in key positions or anyone that is close to the action. I will leave you to define how you become acquainted with such friends if you do not know them already.

The fourth is to act as an intermediary for any of the above. That is to say, you handle their betting business. As most backers discussed are high rollers that are victims of their own success, they have difficulty placing bets and are always on the lookout for agents. However, there are a couple of drawbacks with this sort of arrangement. Firstly, there is no guarantee you will get all their business, meaning by pure coincidence you could be handling mostly losers. High rollers are not exempt from losing runs and there are times when you could find yourself having to subsidise such runs whilst awaiting payment. That requires a substantial tank.

The fifth option is to let someone else handle betting plans on your behalf. This man assimilates all the information he receives then, in collusion with a team of form experts, decides when to make a major move as opposed to a minor one. He will expect to receive a fee for masterminding such arrangements. Often this is the best option, as the alternatives can be costly and difficult to initiate. This assumes of course that the person entrusted to make the final verdict has a proven track record and can make what are often difficult and borderline decisions accurately.