Of late I have been limiting my posts here to horses from my 2009 2yos running as 3yos list, and posting about other selections on the Mathematician’s forum. Today I posted there about Seeking The Buck, who runs in today's 4.45 Lingfield, and a friend has suggested that it is worth posting here, for two reasons.
First, it immediately invites the question could Seek The Buck reasonably be seen as a consistent horse for the purposes of today’s race, not an insignificant question given that consistency is a cornerstone of VDW’s main method. Obviously I think he can, for reasons partly touched upon in the post I made on Math’s forum, but I’ll leave any readers sufficiently interested to work out the thinking in detail on this aspect and to see if they agree.
Second, because the post illustrates the difficulty of reaching confident decisions prior to a race. Whether Seeking The Buck wins today or not, after the race a convincing account can easily be put together to justify the result. Before the race, however, there are questions that analysts can’t with much certainty answer and that, in my view, precludes reaching a confident decision.
Anyway, here is a very slightly edited version of the post from Math’s forum:
”Last season STB came back after a year off, with a winning seasonal debut over 10f in a class 78 race at Newmarket. He then ran in the class 249 Investec Challenge at Epsom on Oaks day, again over 10f, winning fairly comfortably. After that he went on to the equivalent of today's race, again over 10f, and went down by half a length when even money favourite. Next he went to the John Smiths Cup at York on 11 July, 10.5f, where he came a decent fourth. Finally for 2009 he was tried over 12f at York on 18 August but arguably didn't stay.
This season he had his seasonal debut at the Epsom Derby meeting but instead of trying to win the Investec Challenge again, he ran in the much less valuable Investec Surefoot handicap on Derby day, over 12f, and came 7th, again possibly not getting the trip. The Challenge was worth £24,900 to the winner, the Surefoot only £12,500, and on known form the former was over the horse's better trip.
STB now comes out today in the equivalent of the race in which he came a close second last year, off the same rating (89) and carrying the same top weight of 10.00. Having been beaten, perhaps a shade unluckily, last year by half a length (unluckily as inferred from the Form Book comments), he is clearly in with a serious chance and on the face of it looks as solid an EW bet as one will find: he is forecast at 7/1 in the Post and there are only 10 runners.
But now the problem. STB is again entered in the John Smith's Cup at York in mid July, a race worth last year £97,000 to the winner with virtually as much going to the fourth place in which STB finished last year as goes to the winner today.
The John Smith's Cup in one of the ten most valuable turf handicaps of the season and far and away the most valuable handicap for 10f horses - worth £30,000 more to the winner than the next most valuable. It thus has to be of prime interest to connections with good class 10f horses. Last year STB got in off a rating of 89, but 89 isn't always sufficient - in 2008 the lowest rated horse ran off 94. So the problem facing STB's connections is if he wins today's Lingfield race, and thereby picks up a 5lb penalty so making the rating for the John Smith's 94, he maximises the chance of a run, but if he doesn’t win they can hope he gets into the John Smith's off 89 which, if he does, obviously gives him a better chance of winning the £97,000.
In trying to work out connections' thinking, the run at the Derby meeting may or may not be relevant: did they choose the less valuable and seemingly less suitable race because they thought STB would be less likely to win and go up perhaps more than 5lb? If so, does that apply to today's race, because if he wins he will (subject to checking the fine print of the conditions of the John Smith's) automatically go up 5lb? The fact is STB was only put up a couple of pounds for winning the Investec Challenge last year, and I am not convinced he'd have picked up a more than 5lb rise had he run in it, and won, this year, so logically I doubt they really want the 5lb penalty winning today would incur.
Thus I am taking the view that connections believe STB will probably get into the John Smith's off 89 (2008 was the only recent year where he would not have), and would obviously prefer him to be contesting it off 89 than 94. Last year he was beaten 5.5l in the John Smith's off 89, so it would perhaps be optimistic to think he could win it off 94. This - admittedly speculative - line of thinking means that one has to re-consider the view that today STB is a rock solid EW bet. Obviously from the perspective of his handicap mark for the John Smith's he can finish 2nd or 3rd without penalty, and could very well place. On the other hand, with several younger and lower weighted horses in opposition, the stewards are unlikely to haul Mr Beckett in should STB finish 4th or 5th, beaten a few lengths yet go on to win the John Smith’s.
In sum, my best guess is that STB is being prepared for the John Smith's and while obviously he’ll be there to win if he can connections won’t want him flogged to death to do so. This takes the shine off him as an EW bet. And although I doubt he’ll be given a hard race, he could still win if the opposition proves to be of straw. But if I am right and he doesn't win today and goes for the John Smith's, he'll be of considerable interest there off 89. I could easily be completely wrong, with connections seeing him as in future a 12f horse (the weakening towards the end of his seasonal debut this year could simply reflect a slight lack of fitness). In which case today could be about trying to pick up an easy £8,400 over 10f before setting him off on a career in better class 12f handicaps. If so, I'll probably miss a decent priced winner.
Sadly, at this stage only connections know what is the true plan for the horse, a situation which almost always applies, but sometimes plans are easier to deduce than that for STB today.”
