THE FATE OF FAVOURITES.

Otago Witness, Issue 2479, 18 September 1901, Page 49

THE FATE OF FAVOURITES.

The result of a close investigation of I'HilJor's Turf Chronicle" has convinced "The Special Commissioner' of the Melbourn© Sportsman that backers are "deadly" in picking winners of jumping raee3. The writer mentioned says l— While strolling through the ring at Caulfield recently, just before the Hurdle Race, I came across a well-knowp fielded, who had doffed the satchel and was nonchalantly watching the operations of hi* bipotber pencilled. "Hullo !" I exclaimed, "not bettiny to-day?" "Oh, yes>" he replied,, "but I never bet on jumping races nowadays; they are too deadly." lpeaningy thereby, that the punters Seldom fail to pick the winner. This little rencontre came back to my mind one of the idle rainy days of last week, so I determined to see if there was anything in the bookmaker's implied assertion that barker"Jiave the best of the deal in ihes>e particular r<t r e=. Armed with "Miller's Turf Chronicle," I caiefully went through the starting prices of all the hurdle races, steeplechases, and jumpers' flats run in the metropolis and at the principal provincial meetings, such as Bendigo, Ballarat, and Geelong, during the past season. The result cf my investigations indicated that ihei-e is excellent grounds for my bookmaking friend'.s disinclination to bet on these particular events. Jumpers' flat races in particular have thrown few obstacles in the path of backers. Out of 59 decided, only 13 were won by other than first or second favouirtes, and of this baker's dozen many were almost as well backed as the shorter-pi iced ones. In fact, on very few coeasione — only onoe or twice — <lid an outsider prevail. Though putitcrs beat the bookmakers badly ovei jumpers' flat races on the racecourse, stay-at-home backers following the fortunes of first favourites would not win Tery -much. A"h investmenttof £1 on each first favourite at Starting price would return * profit of only £6. Forty-two first favourites ,were successful, but in one race two JtOrees started equal favourites, and in a yase of thi3 kind the bet would be declared off. This is the rule, I believe, with S.P. bettors, unless otherwise specified. The smallness of the winning div. is accounted for by the fact that the favourite, as a rule, started at a very short price. The 42 that were successful averaged fcarely 2 to 1. while the best price of any was 4 to 1. Followers *ef- second favourite? would do niuck better, the figures showing a credit balance of £44. This sum would have been fai greater had not two or more horses divided second favouritism on no fewer than seven occasions. Of course, bookmakers) operating on the spot would lose heavily o\er these, while their stay-at-home brethrer would not be called upon to "part." presuming they adhered strictly to the rule above-mentioned. Notwithstanding the oftquoted expression about the folly of seeing your money "flying iv the air," backers, on the whole, fared very well over steeplechases last season ; in fact, they found the task of selecting jross-r-ountry winner 1 * much easier than backing hurdle race victors. There were 85 steeplechases decided, 28 falling to first favourites and 29 to second favourites. But. in consequence of the large number of "equal fa-vourites" that scored — ■ six first? and six seconds — S.P punters were ulaced at a serious disadvantage. With an investment of £1 per race they would lose £13 10s over first favourites, but would win £17 backing second favourites. Followers of "the money" on the course, confining thenoperations to steeplechases alone, would be handsome winners at the end of the season. Of all events open to jumpers, hurdle races panned out the worst from a backer's point of view, for no fewer than 36 out of the 93 run were taken by other than tbe favourites, and a good many were rank outsiders. Nevertheless, punters would win — •that is, those who confined theii operations to the racecourse. Thirty-three first favourites won, but S.P. opeiators would lose £3 on the season, while follower? of second favourites would collect £6 10s. It is §aid that figures can be made to prove anything, but few racegoers will cavil at the foregoing' statistics. It is as plain as a wart on a pretty girl's face that backing jiiiuperr — especially the "one-race-qualification" sort that favour the jumpers' fiat events — is far better business than punting on fhe-furlong WAUibl^ to say the least of it.