Newmarket - Free Friday

My exams have finished at long last so the Blog is up and running again. It has been a long time, too long in fact, since I last wrote about something I was interested in. Now that the tedium of University work is behind me, I can get back to what really matters; horse racing. Newmarket Racecourse have kindly given us students free entry to the July Course on Friday which is a fantastic initiative and just the sort of assistance we need to get people to come racing. I still maintain that racing sells itself if you can get people to come along for the first time. Let us hope that all the first timers enjoy their experience and want to return. Simply put, there is nothing better, but then I would say that.

To celebrate the end of exams I feel compelled to engage in a little bit of 'mug-punting'. I have next to no idea about the form that has played out over the past few weeks. Remarkably I have actually been concentrating on other things for a change. Nevertheless, an hour or so 'revision' this evening has given me something to go to war with tomorrow. At least this 'revision' was enjoyable even if I still feel as badly prepared as I did for my law exam on Monday. I head into battle more in hope than expectation but, nevertheless, I will give it a bloody good try.

1.40 - 2yo Maiden Fillies' Stakes (6f)

The two with previous racecourse experience bring a fair level to the table with preference for the Ed Dunlop trained Summer Isles. She finished 6th on the Rowley Mile last month when running green and just getting tired in the closing stages. She still wasn't beaten far and looks like she could well improve for the experience. Annie's Fortune showed up well for a long way on her debut at Haydock and is entitled to come on for the run. To add to the mix, there are plenty of potentially smart debutants but I would be inclined to take a chance with Summer Isles who could go off a fair price against the well touted newcomers. There is probably a good reason for that of course and she wouldn't be a strong selection. I am sure that paddock inspection will reveal a good deal more but I don't have that luxury this evening.

2.10 - 3yo Fillies' Handicap Div I (6f)

I don't think this looks the strongest of races on paper and I could certainly see Sir Mark Prescott's Athenian completing the quickfire hattrick, even with the burden of a 12lb penalty. Chief amongst the dangers is the Fanshawe trained Isola Verde who has just the one run and one win to her name. That was a most pleasing introduction and she hails from a good family and you would expect her to progress. At 5/2 she isn't much of a price but is taken to keep her unbeaten record intact.

2.45 - 3yo Fillies' Handicap Div II (6f)

Cheworee was a convincing winner of a Newbury maiden in May and looks to be on the upgrade. However, she was disappointing when tailed off behind Moonstone Magic at Leicester in April on soft ground. That was also her first and only try at 7f but soft ground is unlikely to be in her favour. The one who looks to be suited by conditions is Red Larkspur. She travelled well over 7f at Newbury last time and the drop back to 6f would look to be in her favour here. That run suggested that a mark of 78 would be within her compass.

3.20 - 3yo Maiden Stakes (1m4f)

It will be an almighty shock if Shantaram cannot open his account at the 4th time of asking having chased home Main Sequence, 2nd in the Derby last weekend, in the Lingfield Derby Trial on his last start. His odds will be prohibitive but he is all but impossible to oppose. Famous last words.

3.55 - 4yo+ Handicap (7f)

Quite a competitive little heat with Azrael, My Son Max and Mubtabi all making appeal at the prices. Marginal preference is for Azrael who is dropping down the handicap and found things happening too quickly on very fast ground over a sharp 6f at Haydock last time. The return to 7f and a little ease in the ground could be enough to see his head in front.

4.30 - 3yo Handicap (1m2f)

I am really looking forward to this race with some well touted sorts battling it out. Thomas Chippendale held a Derby entry until he met with defeat on his seasonal reappearance at Newbury last month. He is likely to step up on that effort but is priced up as if that is a given and I don't think that it is. Sheikzayedroad could be anything and looks sure to improve for the step up in trip and will handle the ground. I also thought the Hannon trained Valley Of Destiny looked on the big side at 16/1 but there are plenty in this open to any amount of improvement and I would think that there are others with more scope to progress. One of those is Jungle Beat who won well on his debut but found his mind drifting onto other matters on his seasonal reappearance. If he can keep his composure in the preliminaries then he could step up on that performance markedly which was a very decent effort under the circumstances anyway. Furthermore. the form already has a strongish look to it as well. The one concern is if the ground was too soft because he is a good moving horse. If it is riding very soft then preference might switch to Sheikzayedroad.

5.05 - 3yo Classified Stakes (1m)

14 3yo rated within 3lbs of one another and no time to watch their past performances means one thing and one thing only. I will be leaving this well alone, unless something particularly catches the eye in the paddock of course. Jeremy Noseda has Roxelana engaged so we should get the inside track on this ones chances in the morning. 

5.40 - 4yo+ Handicap (1m2f)

In the 'lucky last' or the 'getting out stakes', whichever you prefer, the one I like is the Ed Dunlop trained Red Lover. He was stepped up to 10f for his handicap debut and was staying on in eyecatching fashion before being hampered late on. He can make amends here.

As I am mug punting I feel obliged to have a nice little EW Lucky 15 on the following: Isola Verde, Red Larkspur, Jungle Beat and Red Lover

Best of luck to everyone and, most importantly, have a fantastic day. That is what it is all about.

Solving A Problem Like Sanctuaire

Sprinter Sacre has looked nothing short of exceptional this season with 5 wins from 5 starts and has barely been off the bridle doing so. He is rightly rated as one of the best (if not the best) novice chaser for a very long time. From the impression he has created it is very hard to argue with that. I, therefore, find the very suggestion that another novice could possibly be rated higher tricky to accept but that is the dilemma that Sanctuaire's scintillating win on Saturday poses.


For all his apparent brilliance, Sprinter Sacre's reputation relies to a large extent on the impression he has created and the manner in which he has beaten his rivals rather than who those rivals were. Sanctuaire had beaten nothing in his first two starts but had done it in breathtaking fashion. I can honestly say that his three starts this season would rank very highly in my list of favourite races for the campaign. However, in the Celebration he went from being an exciting novice chaser to a potential champion and in no uncertain terms.

I have backed him at 66/1 EW for the Champion Chase and I am the first to admit that it was a speculative wager that was far more likely to be written off before the end of the season than it was to have any realistic chance of being a winner. My main reason was that the other challengers looked so weak and so few and far between that a speculative bet on a 66/1 shot who just might make up into a contender was worth a stab.

I backed him in the Celebration as well at 11/2 but was concerned by the ground and the absence of Ruby from the saddle who, until Saturday, was the only person to have won on him. I was hopeful of a return but not in my wildest dreams did expect him to pull out a performance of that quality. His jumping was absolutely superb, he travelled strongly without pulling as he has done in the past, and he never stopped in front and galloped right to the line. The thing which impressed me most was the way that the others just could not make significant inroads into his lead. Whether they cut him too much slack I do not know. However, I watched the replay and Richard Johnson (and others) are niggling along down the back straight long before the railway fences suggesting they were fully aware of the situation. When their urgings became more serious they still failed to close him down at anything other than a steady rate. They had got his lead down to about 15 lengths at the last but when Daryl Jacob asked him to put the race to bed after the last he drew away from them again by a couple of lengths. This was what really struck me as being quite remarkable: to jump, travel and finish as well as he did on ground as bad as that was deeply impressive.

I will admit to having a soft spot for the horse. Even over hurdles he has always been one that I have kept a close eye on. For some reason I seem to be drawn to flawed brilliance. I have always thought he had the talent but his temperament was that (significant) flaw in his make-up. It is pleasing that fences (and/or front-running tactics) have (touch wood) put those problems to bed. He had looked sulky over hurdles but has appeared to relish every yard of his three starts over fences. 

It is also important to establish some perspective here as well. He did not make his chasing debut until 31st January this year. In those two starts he had beaten only 7 rivals none of whom were rated higher than 130. On just his third start, three months after his chasing debut, he tackles the Celebration. Of the 7 opponents, only Dan Breen (148) was rated lower than 153, and Somersby, Wishfull Thinking and French Opera were all rated 160+. It was a very good solid field but with nothing that was tip-top class. I hoped Sanctuaire might be which was why I was prepared to give him a chance. He fairly destroyed them from the front.

He was impressive but that is of little benefit if the value of the form is not known. Sanctuaire's Celebration performance is hard to rate because there were no horses anywhere near him for most of the race. It is difficult but not impossible. If we crudely assume 1lb per length (roughly correct and good enough for this purpose) then his rating would come out as follows:

Somersby (166) beaten 17 lengths conceding 4lbs - 179

Dan Breen (148) beaten 19 (to the nearest length) lengths - 167

French Opera (162) beaten 23 lengths - 185

Wishfull Thinking (164) beaten 28 lengths - 192

West With The Wind (154) beaten 31 lengths - 185

Woolcombe Folly (155) beaten 36 lengths - 191

Ignored Cornas (203 for anybody interested!)

A literal interpretation of the form means that he can only be rated lower than Sprinter Sacre by assuming that Dan Breen has run to his mark of 148 and that everything else has run well below form. 

This is the view taken by the BHA Handicappers who have allotted him a revised mark of 167 by using the hellishly inconsistent Dan Breen as their yardstick. That might be the case but it does seem a little convenient in that it drops him nicely 2lbs below Sprinter Sacre. That is understandable because I can imagine there would be a few astonished faces if Sprinter Sacre were to be superceded at the top of the novice chase division. However, I am  far from comfortable with the use of Dan Breen as the marker in this race. In fact, I would go so far as to say that it is laughable. If Dan Breen has run to his mark of 148 then that would have the rest of the field running to:

Somersby (166) - Beat him 2 lengths giving 4lbs which puts him on 154 - 12lbs below form.

French Opera (162) - Beaten 4 lengths puts him on 144 - 18lbs below form.

Wishfull Thinking (164) - Beaten 9 lengths puts him on 139 - 25lbs below form.
West With The Wind (154) - Beaten 12 lengths puts him on 136 - 18lbs below form.

Woolcombe Folly (155) - Beaten 17 lengths puts him on 131 - 24lbs below form.

Cornas ignored.

I think both Somersby and French Opera could be regarded as 'solid yardsticks' but the last named was beaten at an early stage in the Celebration. The same cannot be said of many of the others, Dan Breen included. If Somersby and French Opera have run to form then they should finish level with Somersby conceding 4lbs. Somersby beat French Opera by nearly 6 lengths. For Somersby to have run below form, French Opera would have had to be a lot below his mark which is not impossible.

If Somersby has run to his mark of 166 (previous best performances have been at Ascot, another stiff right handed track) then French Opera has run to 156. Both of those figures put Sanctuaire onto 179. Dan Breen is the anomaly in the race and the above interpretation of Somersby and French Opera's performances would put him up 12lbs to 160. Is Dan Breen a 160 horse? I do not think so on what we have seen so far. He is rated 148 and I would find a mark of 155 believable but no more than that. Dropping them all 5lbs to put Dan Breen on 155 puts Somersby to 161 (I have long held the view that he is a consistent 160ish horse anyway) and French Opera to 151 (well below form, but he was beaten a long way out). Those ratings put Sanctuaire onto 174. That compares to the Arkle winner Sprinter Sacre on 169  and the Champion Chase winner Finian's Rainbow on 173. That rating is arrived at using a fairly pessimistic view of the form (which I am not totally convinced is justified). That gives him 5lbs in hand over Sprinter Sacre and you need to keep chipping away to bring Sanctuaire back down below him, unless, of course, you feel confident that the use of Dan Breen as a marker is justifiable. 

I find 174 as hard to believe as you do, not least because of my apparent shrewdness in taking the 66/1 for the Champion Chase a month or so ago. The above is only my view and my interpretation of what appears the most likely scenario. I could be wrong, I could be very wrong but there is a small chance I could be right. The last time I did this exercise was with the Arkle and I consistently found that Cue Card was 2nd best in the race. I could not have him at all for numerous reasons but, needless to say, he finished a clear 2nd. 

I am sure some will argue that he was given too much slack on the front end but his jumping was so quick and slick that I am not sure the rest had much choice. I am positive that the other jockeys were aware of what was going on early in the race in that Richard Johnson (and others) are noticeably niggling their mounts along after the water jump (if not earlier). They knew what was going on and could do nothing about it. Going down the back it is noticeable how much faster Sanctuaire is at his fences compared to anything else.

There you have it, Sprinter Sacre, unbeaten in 5, the best winner of the Arkle and the best novice chaser for decades, and then up pops the mercurial Sanctuaire from out of the blue to beat him to the title of champion novice (in my opinion at least). I should qualify that by saying that I have not looked at Sprinter Sacre and have assumed that his official rating is correct. It might easily be the case that his rating does not reflect his achievements and it is almost certainly the case that his rating does not reflect his ability.

Now the prices: Sprinter Sacre is 5/4 and Sanctuaire is 12/1 for the 2013 Champion Chase. Which do I prefer? I think the 5/4 is horrific compared to the 12/1 you can get on Sanctuaire. I am certain that Sprinter Sacre has more in the locker but I think Sanctuaire does too. I also think it can at least be argued that his Celebration form is stronger than anything Sprinter Sacre has achieved. Both are unbeaten over fences, both have been immensely impressive in all their starts and I for one cannot wait for the Tingle Creek 2013 when we will find out where they stand. I was finding it very hard to resist taking a bit of the 12/1 and having done this analysis it is even harder. The one thing stopping me is that I already have him at 66/1. If I did not have that tasty ticket I would certainly be 'investing' a little. His performance has come from so far out of the blue that it could be being underrated. I think he is at least a serious challenger to Sprinter Sacre and I do not think it is anything like the formality that the odds suggest that the Henderson superstar will come out on top when they do meet. What is a certainty is that clash will be something to savour.

A National Nightmare?

Since the terrific but tragic 2012 Grand National I have heard plenty about what should be done and what should not be done to make the race safer, if it needs to be made safer at all. I have always thought that this or that might be the problem, and that this or that might be a solution, but I have not really had an  in depth understanding about exactly what happens, where it happens, why it happens and so on, only general theories. I would not say the Grand National is my favourite race, far from it in fact, but I appreciate both its positive and negative contribution, and its importance to the sport.

I have looked in detail at the 2012, 2011 and 2010 Grand Nationals to try and discover more. Time and resources limit me from looking further and I appreciate that the time period is small, and that the period I have looked at is not necessarily reflective of the overall picture. However, I am sure that useful and interesting conclusions have been reached which have enabled me to understand the race better. I hope they help you do the same.

And, before you begin, I must apologise for the length and detail, and any errors you may find. 

What Happened - 2012

In the 2012 Grand National 15 horses completed the race and, of the 25 that failed to complete, 10 fell, 7 unseated riders, 4 pulled up, 3 were brought down and 1 refused.

Start.

Viking Blond - Fell 1st. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Junior - Fell 2nd. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

West End Rocker - Fell 2nd. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

State Of Play - Unseated rider 5th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Rare Bob - Brought down 5th. Interfered with when Noel Fehily fell into his path.

Chicago Grey - Brought down 5th. Interfered with when Rare Bob fell into his path.

Synchronised - Fell 6th (Becher's Brook). Relatively clear view of the fence with no interference.

Alfa Beat - Fell 7th. Relatively clear view of the fence with no interference.

Killyglen - Unseated rider 8th (Canal Turn). On the inside with a lot of horses around him but no interference.

Black Apalachi - Fell 8th (Canal Turn). Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Organised Confusion - Unseated rider 8th (Canal Turn). Direct result of interference.

Tatenen - Unseated rider 8th (Canal Turn). Direct result of interference.

Becauseicouldntsee - Unseated rider 8th (Canal Turn). Direct result of interference.

Treacle - Fell 9th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Arbor Supreme - Unseated rider 9th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Giles Cross - Pulled up before 10th.

Always Right - Unseated rider 15th (The Chair). Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Quiscover Fontaine - Fell 17th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Deep Purple - Pulled up before 19th. 

Vic Venturi - Refused 19th.

Mon Mome - Pulled up before 22nd (Becher's Brook).

Postmaster - Pulled up before 22nd (Becher's Brook).

On His Own - Fell 22nd (Becher's Brook). Interfered with by loose horse and unsighted.

According To Pete - Brought down 22nd (Becher's Brook). 

Weird Al - Fell 27th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Finish.

If the four horses that pulled up and the one refusal are eliminated then the twenty who failed to complete as a result of the fences remain. 

Total - All Fences

• 10 Fallers (10/20 = 50% of total)
• 7 Unseats (7/20 = 35% of total)
• 3 Brought Down (3/20 = 15% of total)
• 20 Total

To get an indication about where the problems are occurring the race can be split into three stages. The result is as follows:

Stage 1 - Fences 1 to 10

• 7 Fallers (7/10 = 70% of fallers)
• 6 Unseats (6/7 = 85.7% of unseats)
• 2 Brought Down (2/3 = 66.6% of those brought down)
• 15 Total (15/20 = 75% of total)

Stage 2 - Fences 11 to 20

• 1 Faller (1/10 = 10% of fallers)
• 1 Unseat (1/7 = 14.2% of unseats)
• 0 Brought Down
• 2 Total (2/20 = 10% of total)

Stage 3 - Fences 21 to 30

• 2 Fallers (2/10 = 20% of fallers)
• 0 Unseats
• 1 Brought Down (1/3 = 33.3% of those brought down)
• 3 Total (3/20 = 15% of total)

What Happened - 2011

In the 2011 Grand National 19 horses completed the race and, of the 21 that failed to complete, 11 fell, 3 unseated riders, 5 pulled up and 2 were brought down.

Start.

That's Rhythm - Fell 1st. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Becauseicouldntsee - Fell 2nd. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Vic Venturi - Brought Down 2nd.

Ornais - Fell 4th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Calgary Bay - Fell 4th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Dooney's Gate - Fell 6th (Becher's Brook). Clear view of the fence with no interference.

The Tother One - Fell 6th (Becher's Brook). Tight for room and interfered with.

Or Noir De Somoza - Fell 6th (Becher's Brook). Dooney's Gate falls in front of him.

West End Rocker - Brought Down 6th (Becher's Brook). Dooney's Gate falls in front of him.

Tidal Bay - Unseated Rider 10th. Relatively clear view of the fence with no interference.

Quolibet - Unseated Rider 11th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Grand Slam Hero - Fell 13th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Quinz - Pulled Up before 16th.

Can't Buy Time - Fell 18th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Majestic Concorde - Unseated Rider 24th (Canal Turn). Clear view of the fence with no interference.

What A Friend - Pulled Up before 27th.

Santa's Son - Pulled Up before 27th.

Killyglen - Fell 27th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Arbor Supreme - Fell 28th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Hello Bud - Pulled up before 29th.

Comply Or Die - Pulled Up before 29th.

Finish.

If the 5 horses who pulled up are eliminated then the 16 who failed to complete as a result of the fences remain. 

Total - All Fences

• 11 Fallers (11/16 = 68.8% of total)
• 3 Unseats (3/16 = 18.8% of total)
• 2 Brought Down (2/16 = 12.5% of total)
• 16 Total

If the race is split into three stages then the result is as follows:

Stage 1 - Fences 1 to 10

• 7 Fallers (7/11 = 63.4% of fallers)
• 1 Unseats (1/3 = 33.3% of unseats)
• 2 Brought Down (2/2 = 100% of those brought down)
• 10 Total (10/16 = 62.5% of total)

Stage 2 - Fences 11 to 20

• 2 Fallers (2/11 = 18.2% of fallers)
• 1 Unseat (1/3 = 33.3% of unseats)
• 0 Brought Down
• 3 Total (3/16 = 18.8% of total)

Stage 3 - Fences 21 to 30

• 2 Fallers (2/11 = 18.2% of fallers)
• 1 Unseat (1/3 = 33.3% of unseats)
• 0 Brought Down
• 3 Total (3/16 = 18.8% of total)

What Happened - 2010

In the 2010 Grand National 14 horses completed the race and, of the 26 that failed to complete, 10 fell, 8 unseated riders, 7 pulled up and 1 refused to race.

Start.

King Johns Castle - Refused To Race. 

Eric's Charm - Fell 1st. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Pablo Du Charmil - Fell 2nd. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

My Will - Fell 4th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Made In Taipan - Fell 5th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Can't Buy Time - Unseated Rider 8th (Canal Turn). Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Irish Raptor - Fell 14th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Royal Rosa - Unseated Rider 14th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Arbor Supreme - Unseated Rider 15th (The Chair). Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Beat The Boys - Pulled Up before 19th.

Madison Du Berlais - Fell 19th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

The Package - Unseated Rider 19th. Difficult to see but possibly slightly impeded though not significant.

Backstage - Unseated Rider 20th. Hampered after fence by falling loose horse. 

Vic Venturi - Fell 20th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Nozic - Unseated Rider 20th. Hampered by fall of Vic Venturi.

Flintoff - Pulled Up before 21st.

Maljimar - Fell 22nd (Becher's Brook). Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Ballyfitz - Fell 22nd (Becher's Brook). Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Ellerslie George - Unseated Rider 23rd. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Dream Alliance - Pulled up before 24th (Canal Turn).

Mon Mome - Fell 26th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Palypso De Creek - Unseated Rider 27th. Clear view of the fence with no interference.

Ballyholland - Pulled Up before 28th.

Niche Market - Pulled Up before 29th.

Conna Castle - Pulled Up before 29th.

Ollie Magern - Pulled Up before 29th.

Finish.

If the 7 horses who pulled up and the 1 who refused to race are eliminated then 18 remain. 

Total - All Fences

• 10 Fallers (10/18 = 55.6% of total)
• 8 Unseats (8/18 = 44.4% of total)
• 0 Brought Down
• 18 Total

If the race is split into three stages then the result is as follows:

Stage 1 - Fences 1 to 10

• 4 Fallers (4/10 = 40% of fallers)
• 1 Unseat (1/8 = 12.5% of unseats)
• 0 Brought Down
• 5 Total (5/18 = 27.8% of total)

Stage 2 - Fences 11 to 20

• 3 Fallers (3/10 = 33.3% of fallers)
• 5 Unseat (5/8 = 62.5% of unseats)
• 0 Brought Down
• 8 Total (8/18 = 44.4% of total)

Stage 3 - Fences 21 to 30

• 3 Fallers (3/10 = 33.3% of fallers)
• 2 Unseat (2/8 = 25% of unseats)
• 0 Brought Down
• 5 Total (5/18 = 27.8% of total)

What Happened - 2012, 2011 and 2010 Combined

Total - All Fences

• 31 Fallers (31/54 = 57.4% of total)
• 18 Unseats (18/54 = 33.3% of total)
• 5 Brought Down (5/54 = 9.3% of total)
• 54 Total

Stage 1 - Fences 1 to 10

• 18 Fallers (18/31 = 58.1% of fallers)
• 8 Unseats (8/18 = 44.4% of unseats)
• 4 Brought Down (4/5 = 80% of those brought down)
• 30 Total (30/54 = 55.6% of total)

Stage 2 - Fences 11 to 20

• 6 Fallers (6/31 = 19.4% of fallers)
• 7 Unseats (7/18 = 38.9% of unseats)
• 0 Brought Down
• 13 Total (13/54 = 24.1% of total)

Stage 3 - Fence 21 to 30

• 7 Fallers (8/31 = 25.8% of fallers)
• 3 Unseats (2/18 = 11.1% of unseats)
• 1 Brought Down (1/5 = 20% of those brought down)
• 11 Total (11/54 = 20.4% of total)

Size Of The Field

If, on average over the past three renewals, 55.6% of incidents occur in the first third of the race then one plausible explanation would be that the size of the field is the problem. This might be because horses suffer interference or are unsighted at a fence when there are so many other horses around them. 

Using the descriptions of each incident outlined above:

2012

• 10 Fallers and 1 (On His Own) was a direct result of interference. 
• 7 Unseats and 3 (Becauseicouldntsee, Organised Confusion and Tatenen) were as a direct result of interference. 
• 3 Brought Down (Rare Bob, Chicago Grey and According To Pete)
• 7 of the 20 horses (35%) failed to complete as a result of direct interference with another horse.

2011

• 11 Fallers and 2 (The Tother One and Or Noir De Somoza) were a direct result of interference.
• 3 Unseats and 0 were a direct result of interference.
• 2 Brought Down (Vic Venturi and West End Rocker)
• 4 of the 16 horses (25%) failed to complete as a direct result of interference

2010

• 10 Fallers and 0 were a direct result of interference.
• 8 Unseats  and 2 (Backstage and Nozic) were a direct result of interference.
• 0 Brought Down
• 2 of the 18 horses (11.1%) failed to complete as a direct result of interference.

Combined

• 31 Fallers and 3  were a direct result of interference.  
• 18 Unseats and 5 were a direct result of interference.
• 5 Brought Down.
• 13 of the 54 horses (24.1%) failed to complete as a direct result of interference.

Over the last three renewals of the Grand National, nearly a quarter of those who fell, unseated or where brought down suffered interference which led directly to the incident. It is clear that interference is a problem but the argument for a reduced field size would be strengthened if cases were concentrated in the early part of the race when there are more horses around. If interference occurs regardless of the number of runners then there is little to support a reduced field size from the start and it must be other factors causing the problem.

Stage 1 - Fences 1 to 10

• 18 Fallers and 2 were a direct result of interference.
• 8 Unseats and 3 were a direct result of interference.
• 4 Brought Down
• 9 out of 30 (30%) incidents were a direct result of interference.

Stage 2 - Fences 11 to 20

• 6 Fallers and 0 were a direct result of interference.
• 7 Unseats and 2 were a direct result of interference.
• 0 Brought Down
• 2 out of 13 (15.4%) incidents were a direct result of interference.

Stage 3 - Fence 21 to 30

• 7 Fallers and 1 was a direct result of interference.
• 3 Unseats and 0 were a direct result of interference.
• 1 Brought Down
• 2 out of 11 (18.2%) incidents were a direct result of interference.

The above shows that interference is responsible for a higher percentage of incidents in the first third of the race when compared with the final two thirds. This would suggest that the number of runners is an important factor. 

If a field of 40 is too big, then what size would be more appropriate?

Over the past three years 40 runners have lined up on each occasion. Stage 1 has, on average, accounted for 10 horses (15 in 2012, 10 in 2011 and 5 in 2010). Therefore, by the start of stage 2 there were, on average, 30 horses still running. Stage 2 accounted for 4  horses (to the nearest horse), leaving 26 still running. The interference data shows that the number of cases of interference does not fall from stage 2 to 3. If, on average, there are 30 horses running at this stage, then 30 might be a more appropriate number with which to start the race. The above would suggest that cases of interference may be almost halved if the field was reduced to 30.

However, it is not that simple because interference can be caused by horses that are no longer in the race. There were 13 cases of interference and 3 (23.1%) of these were a result of loose horses. These three incidents occurred at Fence 20 (Backstage unseated after hampering by a falling loose horse) and Fence 22 (On His Own fell after interference from a loose horse and brought down According To Pete). 

There were 4 cases of interference in Stages 2 and 3 of the race, and 3 of these are the result of loose horses. Once the initial field is reduced to 30 runner (on average) by fence 10, the cases of interference from horses still in the race falls even more dramatically than the bare result would suggest.

Speed Of The Race

The speed of horses is often quoted as a reason for fallers, and a reason why falls can be fatal. It is difficult to be completely accurate with crude hand timing but it can at least provide an indication as to whether there is a significant pace difference between the first and second circuit. Times are for the leading horse, except where indicated, from take off to take off. MR = Melling Road, F1 = Fence 1 and so on.

Note 1: Where fences have been bypassed, averages are calculated using the figures available. 

Note 2: F1 to F2 on the 2nd circuit in 2012 I have used the time of the 3rd horse. Richard Johnson and Planet of Sound steadied the pace and it is noticeable that the field close up on him indicating that the leader's speed does not reflect that of the race. Shakalakaboomboom was hampered on landing in 2nd. The time for Planet Of Sound is 12.7 seconds.

Note 3: I have ignored Conna Castle in the 2010 renewal who set an erratic pace which was not reflective of the race.

The sample of three races is not ideal but the above table still provides a hugely interesting insight. The noticeable trend is that the pace is fast over the first three fences, particularly into fences 1 and 2, and then settles down. I have often heard the term "the race to Becher's", and, whilst I think the race to Becher's might be overstating the case, there is a pace problem over the first couple of fences. 

We now know that the early pace is fast before steadying towards the 3rd fence. The next question is why? Despite the build-up, I find it hard to believe that experienced jockeys will ride unnecessarily fast just because it is the Grand National. If they are going too quickly there must be a reason. Many riders say "I want to sit handy early", "get a position" and very few seem to want to "drop in" in the Grand National. The need for 'a position' is crucial and this could be the cause of the fast early pace. Why is 'a position' so important? When there are so many horses the best place to be is out the front with a clear view of the fence and some space, out of the way of possible interference. This could generate a vicious circle where jockeys need to travel too fast and risk a fall to get a good position in the race, so that they avoid the problems of being in behind. A catch 22 if you like. 

It is often stated that handy horses run well in the National and that it is difficult to make up ground from the rear. This fact (or myth) could be the problem. So is it fact or myth? In the last 5 Grand National the first 4 home have recorded the following in running comments:

2012

1. Mid division
2. Held up in mid division
3. Tracked leaders
4. Mid division

2011

1. With leaders
2. Tracked leaders
3. Mid division
4. Chased leaders

2010

1. Mid division
2. With leaders
3. Prominent
4. Tracked leaders

2009

1. Towards rear
2. Mid division
3. Mid division
4. Prominent

2008

1. Tracked leaders
2. Held up in mid division
3. Chased leaders
4. Held up in mid division

The above gives the theory that you need to be handy, or at least in mid division, some sort of credibility. By way of comparison, during those years a total of 81 horses were described as being in worse than mid division using Racing Post comments in running. There were 16 in 2012, 18 in 2011, 17 in 2010 (not including King Johns Castle who refused to race), 17 in 2009 and 13 in 2008. That is 40.5% of the 200 horses that took part and yet only one (Mon Mome in 2010) was able to make the first 4. It seems that being handy pays.

In the past three renewals, the pace has been relatively fast approaching the first and second fences. Does this fast early pace increase the chance of fallers?

Fence 1

• 2012 - 1 Faller
• 2011 - 1 Faller
• 2010 - 1 Faller

Fence 2

• 2012 - 2 Fallers
• 2011 - 1 Faller, 1 Brought Down
• 2010 - 1 Faller

The first two fences have claimed at least one casualty in each of the past three years. It is hard to say whether this is a direct result of the fast pace so when the pace begins to steady on the approach to the 3rd and 4th are there fewer fallers?

Fence 3

• 2012 - No Fallers
• 2011 - No Fallers
• 2010 - No Fallers

Fence 4

• 2012 - No Fallers
• 2011 - 2 Fallers
• 2010 - 1 Faller

So, since 2010, fences 1 and 2, when the pace is relatively fast, have claimed 8 horses. In the same period fences 3 and 4, when the pace begins to steady, have claimed 3 horses. Most interesting is the fact that fence 4 was the subject changes implemented after the Review because of its difficulty. The sample size is small, but the difference is noticeable. It seems the speed at the first couple of fences which steadies approaching the 3rd and 4th does have an impact.

If they are going too fast and the reason for this is the need for a position and the increased pace does have an impact, then what can be done? Again, if the field size was reduced then that might give horses more space, reduce the risk of interference and make it easier to move through the field, reducing the need to be out the front. It might not. 

Fences

ST1 = Stage 1 and so on, F = Fell, UR = Unseated Rider, BD = Brought Down, % of Totals.

The above table is a fence by fence account of what happened where, as already outlined previously. Having investigated the impact of field size and the pace of the race, the next factor to consider is whether any particular fences have had a significant impact over the last three years. 

7 fences (3, 13, 16, 21, 25, 29 and 30) have had no incidents in the past three years.

10 fences (7, 10, 11, 12, 17, 18, 23, 24, 26 and 28) have had one incident.

4 fences (9, 14, 15 and 19) have had two incidents.

4 fences (1, 4, 20 and 27) have had three incidents.

2 fences (5 and 22) have had four incidents.

2 fences (2 and 6) have had five incidents.

1 fence (8) has had six incidents. 

There are nine fences that have averaged one incident per year or more over the last three renewals. In numerical order: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 20, 22 and 27.

Before looking at why these fences are more influential than others there are a few points that need to be made. The first is that Fence 20's appearance on that list could be (though may not be) an anomaly. All three incidents occurred in 2010 when a loose horse fell hampering and unseating one, and one horse fell, hampering a third horse who also unseated his rider. Only one of the three actually fell at the fence, the two others were as a result of interference. I am, therefore, going to eliminate it from the list of influential fences. The second fence that might appear like an anomaly is fence 27. However, it has claimed one horse for the past three years, each with no other reason, and so it remains.

Fence 1

• 3 Fallers (1 in 2012, 1 in 2011, 1 in 2010) 
• Interference responsible for 0.

Fence 2

• 4 fallers (2 in 2012, 1 in 2011, 1 in 2010)
• 1 Brought Down (2011)
• Interference responsible for 1.

Fence 4

• 3 Fallers (0 in 2012, 2 in 2011, 1 in 2010)
• Interference responsible for 0.

Fence 5

• 1 Faller (2011)
• 1 Unseated Riders (2012)
• 2 Brought Down (2012)
• Interference responsible for 2.

Fence 6

• 4 Fallers (1 in 2012, 3 in 2011, 0 in 2010)
• Interference responsible for 3.

Fence 8

• 1 Faller (2012)
• 5 Unseated Riders (4 in 2012, 1 in 2010)
• Interference responsible for 3.

Fence 22

• 3 Fallers (1 in 2012, 2 in 2010)
• 1 Brought Down (2012)
• Interference responsible for 2.

Fence 27

• 2 Fallers (1 in 2012, 1 in 2011)
• 1 Unseated Rider (1 in 2010)
• Interference responsible for 0.

The problem fences can now be split into two groups depending on whether it is the fence itself which is the issue, or whether interference is the problem. 

Fences with 3 or more incidents not explained by interference - 1, 2, 4, 8, 27.

Fences with less than 3 incidents not explained by interference - 5, 6, 22.

Using the speed analysis above, it would appear that fences 1 and 2 are problematic because of speed. The times from the past three renewals suggest that horse travel relatively fast into the first two fences before slowing. This could explain why fences 1 and 2 feature on this list and fence 3 does not. Fence 3 is the first open ditch so does this have anything to do with it? Perhaps the pace is quick over the first couple of fences because they are plain, 'easier' fences, but, the pace then steadies in preparation for the open ditch at fence 3. It is impossible to say with any certainty whether this is the case but it is a theory which the evidence could support.

Fence 4 was the first full height plain fence on the course and was found to be one of the most influential fences for fallers in the Grand National Review with 12.6% of all falls occurring here since 1990. Furthermore, of the 32 incidents at the fence, 4 were fatal, a much higher proportion than at any other fence. The Review concluded that the fence should be lowered by 2 inches. It is at this point that the omission of fence 20 from the list of problem fences may seem erroneous because, of course, fence 20 is fence 4 on the second circuit. Perhaps the fence has been a problem in the past but, whilst it is far too early to say whether the changes have been effective, there were no incidents at the fence in 2012 (after the changes) and in the previous two years there were 4 fallers and 2 unseated riders. Many of the changes as a result of the 2011 Review have been given short shrift but in this instance perhaps more credit is deserved. Time will tell.

As I am sure you are all aware, fences 6 and 22 are Becher's Brook on the 1st and 2nd circuit respectively. This would suggest that the major problem with Becher's Brook is not the fence itself but the frequency with which interference occurs. There were 3 incidents in 3 years at Becher's Brook (1 at fence 6 and 2 at fence 22) which could not be explained by interference. This means that of the 8 incidents at Becher's Brook, 5 were the result of interference rather than the fence itself. This is not what I expected, and probably not what you expected either. However, the unexpected is exactly what this is about. I want to know what actually happened rather than what people believe happened. Why have there been 5 cases of interference in the last 3 years? After this year's race, ex-jockey Mick Fitzgerald said:

"I spoke to Robbie Power (rider of Killyglen) after the race and he said normally when you got to Becher's there was a lot of room because the way the drop was before nobody, except the really brave men and the guys who were on horses they knew would he able to cope with the drop, went down the inside. It meant the whole field spread out when they got to Becher's whereas now the drop's been levelled off nobody moved off that inside. Because of that you had a bit of a pile-up situation and a knock-on effect almost. That's the danger. Suddenly no-one wants to go to the outside of the fence. They all piled up on the inner, hence the reason you get a faller and one being brought down."

The data from the last three renewals suggests that interference rather than the fence itself is the problem so could it be that Mick's argument is correct. Is Becher's now too easy? I somehow doubt that making Becher's harder, and, therefore, ensuring the horses are spread across the track is a suggestion that will find favour with those opposed to the race. However, I am not trying to appease, I am trying to find out what needs to be changed and the evidence suggests that interference is the major problem at Becher's and not the fence itself. 

Before getting too carried away it must be remembered that the fall of On His Own, who brought down According To Pete, was a result of interference from a loose horse, a horse without a rider choosing which path to take. In this instance, the 'riders choosing to come down the inner' argument does not hold sway. If that case (On His Own. Both On His Own and According To Pete's jockeys did choose where to be) is eliminated then that leaves 7 incidents at Becher's Brook in the past 3 years. Of which, 4 were the result of interference and 3 which were not. It is clear that, even if allowances are made, interference is the bigger problem over the past three renewals.

If interference is a bigger problem than the fence, then what is the solution? The obvious one is to have fewer runners. A smaller field means more space and less interference. Is this the right solutions? If it is, then more cases of interference would be expected at the first Becher's than the second. Over the past three renewals, there have been 3 cases of interference at the first Becher's and 2 at the second. The average field size over the past three years at the first Becher's is 35 (to the nearest horse) and at the second is 23 (to the nearest horse). On average, the field size is 2/3rds as large on the 2nd occasion, and there is only 2/3rds of the interference. This would suggest that fewer horses means less interference and support a smaller field. 

An alternative is the argument suggested by Mick Fitzgerald (and others) outlined above, the drop element of the fence could be reinstated to encourage (or force) jockeys to take a wider course, spreading the field across the track. However, given the evidence that appears to support the case for a smaller field it will be difficult to argue that the fence should be made more difficult in the face of so much criticism to the contrary.

Fence 8 is the first Canal Turn and is the most difficult fence to categorise in that of the 6 incidents that happened there in the past 3 years, 3 were as a result of interference and 3 were not. The incidents at fence 8 predominantly occurred in the 2012 renewal which could skew the results. Of the 6 incidents, 5 were in this year's renewal. Also of note is the 5 of the 6 incidents were unseated riders with only 1 fall. The 2nd Canal Turn (fence 24) has only been responsible for 1 unseated rider in the past three renewals. I think it is fair to say that it is congestion which is the problem at the first Canal Turn. As the runners swing in to angle the fence, some interference is inevitable. This is unlikely to ever be eliminated but it could be argued that it would be reduced with a smaller field.

Fence 27 is the 4th last fence and one horse has come to grief here in each of the past three seasons. Their comments in running are:

• 2012 Weird Al - Behind when hampered 2nd Becher's, fell 4 out.
• 2011 Killyglen - Disputing 3rd and staying on when fell next.
• 2010 Palypso De Creek - Behind well fell 4 out. He actually unseated.

So with the exception of Killyglen, the other two horses were in rear at the time. It could be tiredness that is responsible, but no other fences at this late stage have had such an impact. However, fence 27 is the last open ditch and, this, together with the tiredness factor, could be the explanation. The fence is 5ft high so perhaps it might be lowered should the high incidents trend continue. 

Experience

Another theory put forward is that horses lack experience of the Grand National fences and that this leads to problems. In the past three renewals the first 4 horses home were:

2012

1. Neptune Collonges - No experience of the fences.
2. Sunnyhillboy - No experience of the fences.
3. Seabass - No experience of the fences.
4. Cappa Bleu - No experience of the fences

2011

1. Ballabriggs - No experience of the fences.
2. Oscar Time - No experience of the fences.
3. Don't Push It - Previous experience.
4. State Of Play - Previous experience

2010

1. Don't Push It - No experience of the fences.
2. Black Apalachi - Previous experience.
3. State Of Play - Previous experience.
4. Big Fella Thanks - Previous experience.

This shows that a lack of experience over the unique Aintree fences is no barrier to success. This is all well and good, but, unfortunately, the fallers and the unseats are those under consideration. You can win without experience of the fences but would a 'trial race' over the fences eliminate some of those who are unsuitable.

F = Fall, UR = Unseated Rider, F/UR = Fall or Unseated Rider Combined, BD = Brought Down, PU = Pulled Up, R = Refused, RR = Refused to Race.

None = No previous experience of the Grand National fences

% None = Percentage of those with no experience to fall etc.

Comp = Previously completed a race over the Grand National fences.

DNF = Previously experienced the Grand National fences but not completed a race.

LT10 = Less than 10 chase starts before running in the Grand National. These horses are included into the other categories as appropriate.

All = All starters.

What can be deduced from this? The list of placed horses in the past 3 renewals indicates that a lack of experience of the fences is no barrier to success. However, those lacking experience do fall or unseat more often than those that have previously negotiated the track. However, those without any experience of the track were roughly on a par with the average over the period. It was the inexperienced horses and those that had already failed to complete the track that fared worst of all.

This would suggest that a trial race might have some benefits. There is nothing to stop a horse running well on its first attempt at the fences but nearly 70% of horses that have tried and failed to complete the course either fell or unseated in the past three Grand Nationals. Therefore, a trial race could be used to eliminate those that are not suitable, rather than finding those that are. A general lack of experience was also a negative with 60% of horses with less than 10 chase starts either falling or unseating in the past three renewals. 

The completion percentages tell a similar story. The horses that had no experience of the fences fared slightly worse than average, the horses that had already completed the course fared best, inexperienced horses fared the same as those experienced but without experience of the fences, but, again, it was the horses that had tried and failed in the past that had the lowest completion rates (just 15.4%). 

Loose Horses

Using the figures above, on average over the past three renewals 45% (40.8% fell or unseated + 4.2% brought down) of the field can be expected to part company with their rider at some point in the race.  That means we can expect 18 loose horses per race.

The problem of loose horses is a major concern. 5 of the last 10 fatalities suffered in the Grand National were by horses running loose, as has been shown already, they can impede other runners.

In the past three renewals there have been 3 incidents that could be attributed to interference by a loose horse. 

How to catch loose horses is a difficult question. Often the loose horses follow their herd instinct and run with the field. It is likely that these will always be impossible to 'extract' from the field. These are the horses which cause interference with the rest of the field but I cannot see a way to prevent this.

However, it is noticeable that loose horses running with the field jump much better than those running alone in rear. Without any evidence or figures, I would suggest that the horses injured when running loose are those in rear who end up taking on the fences in a half hearted manner. This is certainly the fate that befell Synchronised. I have heard the idea of US style outriders put forward as a solution to the loose horse problem. It could be that they might be able to have a positive impact in catching loose horses in rear. 

Fatalities

As you can probably tell by the fact that it has taken me this long to address the most pressing question, I am uneasy with the complete focus on just those who died. To my mind there are plenty of others who were in similar situations but live to fight another day. 

By way of explanation, 3 horses were brought down in 2012, but only According To Pete was fatally injured and a total of 20 horses lost their jockeys (10 fallers, 7 unseated riders and 3 brought down) and yet it was only Synchronised that suffered a fatal injury when running loose. The reduction of fatalities is the ultimate aim but focussing on what led to their demise to the exclusion of everything else is short sighted in my opinion. It is more important to focus on the broader picture and reduce incidences which could have led to fatalities, and, obviously, eliminate to the best of our ability, the factors which have. 

Another example is how both fatalities in the 2012 Grand National fell at Becher's Brook. It might, therefore, seem that getting rid of Becher's Brook is the way to go. It might be, but these two horses cannot be used as statistics to support such an argument. As already stated, According To Pete was brought down, like 2 other horses, and yet was the only one to lose his life. It could so easily have been one of the others and the fact that it happened at Becher's is a coincidence. Similarly, Synchronised fell at Becher's but suffered his injury at Fence 11 when running loose. This could have happened to any of the 17 horses that lost their jockeys at other fences (9 other fallers On His Own also fell at Becher's). Whilst their importance is paramount, and their elimination the ultimate objective (though unachievable), they must not cloud our judgement.

Conclusion

In the immediate aftermath of the 2012 Grand National, Gavin Grant, Chief Executive of the RSPCA, said:

"As far as the Grand National is concerned there are lots of factors, Firstly, the scale of the field. Forty horses is a heck of a lot. Secondly, there are unique jumps there that horses aren't experienced in going over and I think we need to look at those jumps again. Becher's Brook has claimed another casualty [According To Pete] and perhaps it's time for that to go. We need to look at the landing areas. Some improvements have been made there, but when you've got a drop on the other side of the fence a horse isn't expecting that. And the going. The ground conditions are very important. Aintree has made a lot of progress making sure the going is softer because when it's hard the horses run faster. There is lots of work to be done to take the risks to horses out of this."

He outlines a number of concerns: the number of horses, the 'unique' fences, Becher's Brook, the going and the speed of the race. It could be argued that the number of horses does contribute to the number of fallers early in the race, the fast pace approaching the first and second fences and the incidences of interference. It can be shown that horses that have previously shown a liking for the unique fences do fare better than either those who have no experience or those with bad experience. However, a lack of experience is no barrier to success in the Grand National. Over the past three seasons, the major problem with Becher's Brook has been the number of cases of interference. These have outweighed the number of incidents not caused by interference. Therefore, it could be argued that the problem is not the fence itself but perhaps the size of the field, leading to crowding and other problems. I do not have the access or time to analyse any further back than the past three years but, if going was the major concern, then you would expect incidents to be spread around the track assuming that the going is similar all over. This has not been the case indicating that it is other factors that are causing the problems.

It is essential that no changes are implemented for the sake of changes. There must be a reason, and a valid explanation for what a particular change is designed to improve, and how. Just looking at the past three years is insufficient to come to such conclusions, but nevertheless, general themes can be discovered. Any changes that are made will most likely be irreversible so it is crucially important that a comprehensive review and understanding of the situation is first carried out.

Grand National

4.15 John Smith's Grand National Chase (4m4f) Grade 3

1. Synchronised 11-10: Labelled a mudlark courtesy of wins in the Welsh and Midlands Nationals but has dropped that tag in no uncertain terms this season. He won the Lexus Chase on good ground over Christmas and then added the most prestigious prize of them all, the Cheltenham Gold Cup, last month. Officially 7lbs well in but I am happy to oppose him in this. He has never been a fluent jumper and that must be a concern over the big fences, and he had a hard race in the Gold Cup and has tended to show his best form when fresh. He might win but offers little value.

2. Ballabriggs 11-09: Winner of the race last year but must defy a 10lb higher mark this season. Has been prepared with this in mind all year but suspicion is that he will run well but find at least a couple too good. Jumped the fences very well last year and has place prospects.

3. Weird Al 11-08: Quietly fancied by many for the Gold Cup but was pulled up after breaking a blood vessel. That is not the first time he has done that and whilst his mark looks fair this test might be too much for him.

4. Neptune Collonges 11-06: Formerly top class (174 rated) and has slipped down the weights to a mark of 157. Ran a cracker in the Haydock Grand National Trial and not impossible for him to run well if things fell his way. However, he tends to jump low and might find the early pace too hot to handle.

5. Calgary Bay 11-06: Fell in the race last year but has shown improved form this season. The downside is that his handicap mark has rocketed from 145 to 157 here. Others look better treated and also has stamina questions to answer.

6. Alfa Beat 11-05: Winner of the Kerry National for a 2nd time this season but a mark of 156 looks a tough ask considering he was no match for Chicago Grey in the NH Chase last season.

7. Planet Of Sound 11-05: A good second in the Hennessy earlier in the season but that didn't look the strongest renewal beforehand and looks even weaker now. The winner Carruthers has done little since and nothing in behind has given the form any strength either with the notable exception of Gold Cup 2nd The Giant Bolster. Well beaten in the Racing Post Chase since and others look to have stronger claims.

8. Black Apalachi 11-03: 2nd behind Don't Push It in this race back in 2010 and has only been seen once since when a staying on 2nd behind Prince De Beauchene. Now 13 and that form still suggests that 147 is only fair. Have to think his chance has been and gone though he could run into a place.

9. Deep Purple 11-03: Much of his early form is over less than 3m but won the London National over 3m6f in December under a fine ride from Paul Moloney. Stamina still a question mark however because the pace was steady that day, and Moloney passes him over.

10. Junior 11-02: Well fancied for this since a 24 length romp in the Kim Muir last season. His mark has rocketed to 153 (from 134 at Cheltenham) but showed that he was up to the task when a close 2nd to the improving Ikorodu Road in the Grimthorpe who has won again since. However, his low jumping style is a concern over the fences and his mark looks stiff enough. 

11. Chicago Grey 10-13: A leading fancy who showed his best form when a ready winner of the NH Chase last season. He has done little since but this has been the aim. Jumping is a concern and his hold up stalking style could land him in trouble if he gets too far back.

12. Tatenen 10-13: Something of an Ascot specialist and has yet to show any form over further than 2m6f. A mark of 150 over this trip looks a big ask.

13. Seabass 10-12: Super progressive with 7 straight wins starting from a mark of 95 and culminating in a cosy Grade 2 success to push his rating up to 155. Races off 149 here and is one of the more interesting contenders but majority of his form is over much shorter and on softer ground.  

14. Shakalakaboomboom 10-12: Improved this season but behind Calgary Bay in the Skybet Chase and has to defy another 5lb rise. A little disappointing in a novice hurdle last time but that is no great concern. Not without a chance but trainer has a poor record in long distance chases.

15. West End Rocker 10-12: Impressive winner of the Becher Chase on heavy ground but my fear is that he left the Grand National behind because he has to defy a 12lb higher mark. That, together with a preference for softer ground are causes for concern. Also not been seen since 3rd December, a major trend negative. Should jump and stay so has place claims.

16. According To Pete 10-12: Winner of two big handicaps this season, the Rowland Meyrick and the Peter Marsh but both on soft ground. 4lb badly in on official ratings. Might find a few too classy but not completely out of it.

17. On His Own 10-11: The choice of Ruby Walsh and his price has collapsed as a result. He was an impressive winner of the Thyestes Chase, a good Grand National trial, but now has to defy a 23lb higher mark here. Suspicion, confirmed by Walsh, that he might be better going right handed. Also short on experience and jumping is a question mark for me.

18. Always Right 10-10: Progressive but the wheels have fallen off in his past two starts when pulled up on both occasions. He has had a breathing operation since and that might help him recapture his form. He would require a career best to win but you couldn't completely discount him.

19. Cappa Bleu 10-10: Very promising young horse when a convincing winner of the Cheltenham Foxhunters. Things haven't fallen his way since but returned to form this season with 3 good efforts in handicaps. Stays and jumps well and choice of Paul Moloney. Big chance.

20. Rare Bob 10-09: Recent form leaves a little to be desired but an improved effort in the Leinster National last time. Still needs to find more. High scorer on trends.

21. Organisedconfusion 10-08: An impressive winner of the Irish National last season but at 7 is much younger than your typical winner. Remains unexposed at the trip and an interesting contender.

22. Treacle 10-08: Pricewise selection after a close 2nd in the Paddy Power Chase (off 128) and a staying on 3rd in the Irish Hennessy. However, probably flattered by the Hennessy effort, and it wasn't the strongest race either, and this looks a tough ask.

23. The Midnight Club 10-08: Favourite for the race last season when a 27 length 6th. Rejected by Ruby Walsh this time (said to be a bit careful at the fences) and last year was probably his chance. Not shown the same form yet this campaign.

24. Mon Mome 10-08: Grand National winner in 2009 at 100/1 but has shown little since. 2nd in a Cheltenham Handicap in January but that looked a poor race beforehand and even worse afterwards. Others look to have stronger claims, but the same could be said when he won.

25. Arbor Supreme 10-07: Fell last year and unseated the year before that. Little to recommend him on form this season and needs a career best to win. Trainer voiced stamina concerns.

26. Sunnyhillboy 10-05: One who had been threatening to win a big one for some time and finally put it together to run out an impressive winner of the Kim Muir. A small horse and the fences would be a concern but very well handicapped (10lbs well in) and stayed strongly into 3rd in the Irish National after being hampered. If he finds his rhythm early on he has a big chance.

27. Killyglen 10-04: Fell when still in contention last season and races off 5lbs lower this year. Suggestions that he would have been involved in the finish may be a little premature because there was still a way to travel. I'm not sure he's an out and out stayer.

28. Quiscover Fontaine 10-04: 4th in the Irish National last season and has raced exclusively over hurdles since. This has clearly been his target but AP, Ruby and Paul Townend have passed him over. Could go well but others preferred. 

29. Tharawaat 10-04: A winner at Galway in October but well beaten in both the Troytown and Thyestes since. Looks the stable second string and needs to find more.

30. Becauseicouldntsee 10-03: A solid 2nd to Sunnyhillboy in the Kim Muir when ultimately no match for the winner but he was still nicely clear of the remainder. Fell at the 2nd last year when reportedly too fresh after an interrupted preparation and that Cheltenham spin should put him spot on this time around. Stamina is proven but the fences are a slight concern given that he has fallen three times but he actually jumps well in the main. Nice weight and another with a solid chance.

31. State Of Play 10-03: 4th, 3rd and 4th in the last 3 renewals and no impossibility that he could run into the money again. However, he has never looked like winning and suspect he will find at least a few in front of him again. 

32. Swing Bill 10-03: Easy winner at Cheltenham in the Spring but has found life tougher since and was well beaten behind Sunnyhillboy last time. Others have more compelling claims.

33. Postmaster 10-02: A solid handicapper around the mid 130 mark but needs to find a different level to win this from 139. 

34. Giles Cross 10-01: A confirmed mudlark who has twice finished 2nd in the Welsh National but finally won the big one he deserved in the Haydock Grand National Trial in February. A bold jumping front runner but my concern is just how strongly he stays. That seems a strange concern but has been outstayed twice in the Welsh National, and found less than expected at Haydock last time. Could see him treading water up the run in.

35. Midnight Haze 10-00: Generally upward profile but seemed to find the 3m7f of the XC Chase at the Festival last month too much and this is further still. 

36. Vic Venturi 10-00: Plummeted down the weights (now off 137 and ran in this race off 156 last year) but was disappointing in a Hunter Chase last time. Has form over the fences (Becher Chase winner in 2009) but needs to recapture some sort of form, even from this mark.

37. In Compliance 10-00: A distant 13th last year  (beaten 98 lengths) and only 4lbs lower. At 12 he isn't getting any younger and difficult to fancy.

38. Viking Blond 10-00: Just 7 and a novice which immediately makes him hard to fancy given their poor record in the race. Pulled up in the Welsh National and a distant 5th beaten 49 lengths in an Ascot Handicap last time. Needs to find more. 

39. Hello Bud 10-00: 14 years old now but has form in the race (5th in 2010) and over the fences (winner of the Becher Chase in 2010). Hard to see him furthering his Aintree record this time around.

40. Neptune Equester 10-00: 5lb out of the handicap which he can ill afford. Also been dropped a 1lb since the weights were published after being well beaten behind Ikorodu Road and Junior in the Grimthorpe. 

Conclusion:

From a personal perspective this looks a fantastic race to have a good go at. I think there are solid reasons to oppose many of those at the top of the market, and some with excellent chances are trading at much bigger prices as a result: 

• I am concerned about the fences and his hard race in the Gold Cup for Synchronised and couldn't touch him at the price as a result. 
• I am unconvinced that Junior will relish the test and think the fences might catch him out. 
• On His Own has a huge handicap rise to defy and looks to be better going right handed. 
• Chicago Grey can take chances with his fences and his stalking style is not ideal in this race with the prospect of trouble in running.
• It is tough for a horse to win this race twice and Ballabriggs has a 10lb rise to defy to become the first back to back winner since Red Rum.
• West End Rocker prefers softer and races off a career high mark after winning the Becher Chase by a wide margin. Long break to overcome as well.
• Killyglen is possibly a doubtful stayer in my book but a wind operation may help in that regard.
• Seabass has shown his form on softer ground and has yet to win over further than 2m6f (Points excluded).
• Treacle has a big rise against him and is probably flattered by the Hennessy result.

The three I like are Cappa Bleu, Sunnyhillboy and Becauseicouldntsee.

Cappa Bleu looks really solid. He has yet to face the fences but is a fine jumper and does not want for size and scope. He stayed on well in unsuitable ground in the Welsh National and fairly stormed up the Cheltenham hill to win the Foxhunters as a 7yo. He has proven his liking for good ground and it looks as if things are finally falling into place so that he might be able to confirm his early promise.

Sunnyhillboy is the best handicapped horse in the field and yet trades at around 16/1. He wouldn't be the biggest but is a less awkward jumper than Synchronised. He stayed really well in the Irish National after being hampered and handles good ground well. He won the Kim Muir impressively and looks right at the top of his game. He has a lovely weight and, with a clear round, looks sure to go close.

Becauseicouldntsee has always looked an Aintree horse in the making. He was a good second in the 4m NH Chase in 2010 proving his stamina for marathon trips. He was well fancied last year but fell at the 2nd having been too fresh after an interrupted preparation. A fine run in defeat behind Sunnyhillboy last month should have put him spot on for this year's race and he generally jumps well. His front running style should stand him in good stead too. 

The best time to back is early on the Saturday morning when the bookies will be competing for business. Most firms are paying 5 places, with a couple going 6 places. It might be that more follow suit as the race nears but be sure to take advantage of the best EW terms.

1pt EW Cappa Bleu at best morning price with 5 places or more.

1pt EW Sunnyhillboy at best morning price with 5 places or more

1pt EW Becausicouldntsee at best morning price with 5 places or more..