Rowleyfile Preview: King George V Handicap 2016

Much of tipping is just space-filling, though these previews also provide evidence which may enable the reader to make his or her mind up separately. At the end of the day, or at the end of the blog/column, it all comes down to one thing: is a horse a value bet or not?

“Value” still seems to be misunderstood in some quarters. It can exist at very short prices and may not exist at very long ones. It exists only when a horse (or other betting proposition) can be backed at odds bigger than implied by their probability of winning or laid at odds shorter than the same.

The problem is, no-one knows what the “true” probabilities are in the context of a horserace, and one-off events certainly do not “prove” what they are, either. Betting is, in effect, an extended experiment in an individual’s ability to judge probabilities and value.

So, you should not, in the normal run of events, back a horse at a shorter price than you think it deserves to be, even if it appears to have comfortably the best chance of winning. 

Which brings us to Royal Ascot’s King George V Handicap, in which I had anticipated tipping Lovell as a horse with a good chance, only to find that he is around 4/1 when I had him at 11/2. His sectionals at Sandown last time were really good, and he could well prove a lot better than his mark, but I am not biting unless his odds drift.

As it is, “trends” suggest a few chinks in Lovell’s armour. Let’s look at what they say.

Ten years of results show that there has been an advantage in being drawn high over low, something which we used to our profit 12 months ago.

While only two of those races – the 2011 edition won by Brown Panther and the 2012 one won by Fennell Bay – took place on ground softer than good, the figures from those races (plus the Duke of Edinburgh Handicap in the former year, which also featured a big field) suggest the effect may be even more pronounced when the going rides that way. Lovell is stalled in 7 of 18.

Ten years of results also point to positives for last-time winners and horses which have won more than once in the current season (the two are associated, of course), and they point to negatives for horses having a quick turn-round and which have not won in the season under review. Lovell has one run and one second to his name this campaign.

Against that, Lovell did particularly well in that contest, making up ground against a pace bias to be beaten only half a length by Stargazer, though he has gone up 8 lb in the handicap as a result.

There are certainly plausible alternatives in the field of 18, not least the upwardly mobile Primitivo, but I think it is worth looking at something at much bigger odds which fits a number of those aforementioned trends.

Navajo War Dance is one for one this term, goes well on soft going, comes here after a suitable absence and will be berthed in stall 15 of 18.

The problem is that he is not conspicuously well-treated, though the evidence can be interpreted differently. He was a clear second to 111-rated Abdon and a close third to 117-rated Stormy Antarctic at Newbury last year, for all that the rest of his form did not measure up. A mark of 90 does not seem so bad in that context.

Navajo War Dance won easily at Ayr on his return, on what was his first start since moving from Timothy Jarvis to Karl Burke, and shaped there as if likely to stay beyond ten furlongs. He has a straightforward, prominent style of racing.

Navajo War Dance would not be coming into the reckoning if, like Lovell and Primitivo, he was at single-figure odds. But he can be backed at 25/1 at the time of writing, and the shape of the market makes an each-way bet appealing, with the win book around 127% and the place book around 100% per-place if four places are secured at a quarter the win odds.

Make sure you check those bookmaker each-way terms, as a few are offering only three places and, disappointingly, one is offering one-fifth the win odds to boot.

Recommendation: 0.5 pt each way NAVAJO WAR DANCE at ¼ odds first four places