Rowleyfile Preview: Northumberland Plate

With Saturday’s John Smith’s sponsored Northumberland Plate, we have the odd situation of a race with a long and storied history but without anything which could be described as “trends” in a definitive sense.

The contest – known colloquially as The Pitmen’s Derby – was inaugurated in 1833, but this will be the first edition since Newcastle replaced turf with Tapeta at the beginning of the year. Any search for patterns in previous results needs to acknowledge that things could change as a result.

Still, it is worth looking at what history does tell us, if with a suitable degree of scepticism. The following is taken from the last 10 runnings of the Northumberland Plate, with performance measured by wins, first-four places, impact values (wins or places compared to chance) for both those, and % of rivals beaten. Higher is better in each case.

Five-year-olds have done best by age group, with nearly a third of such horses having made the first four in the last decade. Horses in approximately the top third of the handicap have over-performed, if not by much (those categories are used, rather than specific marks, as the BHA has proved incapable of keeping its ratings on a standard level). And a two-week to four-week absence has been marginally the best. It is possible, at least, that these effects will persist.

But the most impressive figures of all are for last-time position, which reveal that last-time seconds have won and been placed more than twice as often as could be expected by chance. By contrast, last-time winners are fractionally worse than par when they are usually, and understandably, quite a bit better.

It has been seen in past previews here that a good run, without the penalty or substantial rise in handicap mark associated with an outright win, is a particularly good indicator in certain races.

There are only three last-time seconds in the declared field of 20: namely, Nearly Caught, Polarisation and Nakeeta, with the last-named one of eight five-year-olds and Polarisation one of only two runners (the other the difficult-to-fancy Hardstone) with the “ideal” turn-round in time from the previous race.

Other factors to consider are: the draw (there is almost no data, but a high draw could prove to be a minor disadvantage given track configuration); proven ability on Tapeta (Gang Warfare, Antiquarium, Sunblazer and Steve Rogers have won on the surface, while Gabrial The Hero has run well on it); and current trainer form.

The last-named effect can be measured by % of rivals beaten in Flat handicaps since the end of April, with Nicky Henderson (69.1%, No Heretic) and Charlie Appleby (60.1%, Antiquarium and Polarisation) coming out best and Marco Botti (41.1%, Seismos) coming out worst.

As it is, one of the horses mentioned more than once previously was already very much on my radar after a strong sectional performance in his last race. The “trends” certainly don’t put me off.

Polarisation found only Green Light too good for him last time in a race at Epsom in which he raced closer than ideal to a red-hot pace and the winner came from well back. Most of the other horses to race close up finished much further back, and the closing sectional was notably slow.

Polarisation deserves extra credit for that effort, in other words, with sectional analysis suggesting he was the best horse at the weights.

He also shaped well as a three-year-old last season, when winning four races, including the Melrose Handicap at York. The switch from Mark Johnston to Appleby does not look to have done him any harm at all, and he gets to run off a mark 3 lb lower than at Epsom to boot.

What Polarisation does not have is proven form at two miles, let alone on Tapeta, and his draw in stall 15 could prove an inconvenience depending on how things pan out. But there is plenty to offset that, not least double-figure odds (I priced him at 13/2).  

Twenty runners and a quarter the odds four places would usually have me recommending an each-way bet. The win book at early prices is 125% (you would need to stake £125 proportionally on all horses to guarantee a return of £100 whatever the outcome) and the place book is just 102% per-place. So each-way bets are mathematically better than a win bet all other things being equal.

However, there is more than usual uncertainty around a horse like Polarisation’s prospects in these circumstances, good though those prospects appear on balance, and win-only seems sensible on this occasion.

Recommendation: 2 pts win POLARISATION