The Leopardstown Pertemps Qualifier on the 28th December has provided 3 of the last 4 winners of the Cheltenham final: Mall Dini (2016 – 4th), Presenting Percy (2017 – 5th) & Sire Du Berlais (6th – 2019)
As such, there were plenty of keen eyes on this race with a view to the festival in March – and they were all drawn to the performance of The Storyteller. Never better than midfield for the majority of the contest, Davy Russell sat quietly as the race began to unfold approaching 2 out. As a wave of 9 began to break away from the rest of the field, Davy began to tentatively urge his mount to close; which he did. Staying on to pass fading horses, he finished 6th to ensure that he qualified for the final; a race he is now the clear 8/1 favourite for.
The Storyteller won the Plate handicap chase at the 2018 Cheltenham Festival off 147; 5lbs higher than he’s rated over hurdles. Now rated 158 over fences, it’s easy to make a solid case for him and he’s likely to go off a shorter price on the day. It’ll be interesting to see how the British handicapper assesses him – I don’t think he’ll be kind.
Pundits and tipsters alike were quick to heap praise on Davy Russell, lauding him a “genius” with “magic hands”. Even I, caught up in the Cheltenham Festival buzz, described him as “superb” with the tagline “Job done Davy, see you in March”.
But in this post- Little Rory Mac world, is it right to applaud a jockey for riding to qualify, rather than riding to obtain the best possible position?
It’s hard not to draw comparisons between the run of The Storyteller and the now infamous “handbrake” situation. Both horses, quite obviously, were not ridden with the intention of winning. But if the former was to bolt up in March, the reaction would be overwhelmingly positive where as the connections of Little Rory Mac were widely and emphatically condemned.
By no means am I defending those involved with Little Rory Mac. Landing a “plot” is one thing, but intentionally deceiving punters and unceremoniously gloating about it turned a bad situation into an abhorrent one which painted the sport as a whole in a bad light.
And come March, if Davy Russell wins his 4th Pertemps Final in 5 years (that is, if he does ride The Storyteller), I very much doubt that connections will be quick to brag about it all over social media.
To be eligible for the final, all you need to do is finish in the top 6 of any qualifying race. For the classier horses with a mark already high enough to make the final field, there is little to no motivation for them to try and win a qualifying race when their end goal is the final. This is especially true for the Irish – the British handicapper already hikes them up in the weights (not that it stops them winning), why make it even tougher by winning a qualifier when you can lob around for 5th and still end up at Cheltenham?
Looking at the finishing positions of the last 10 final winners in their qualifying races (I’ve used their first qualifying run as some ran in multiple qualifiers), we get: 6354412478 – note that you could previously finish in the first 8 and qualify. Understandably, they don’t tend to win. Fingal Bay was the one exception in 2012, and he was a grade 1 winning hurdler who’d been off the track for over a year before returning to win at Exeter and following up at Cheltenham.
In a perfect world from a betting perspective, every horse that turned up at a racecourse would be going all out for the win; but that is not reality. Gauging the “intentions” of connections on a given day is a key factor to consider when having a bet. This is the problem of asymmetric information; most people do not know the whole story.
That is the reality we live in and nothing is going to change that.
But the nature of the Pertemps qualification is encouraging uncompetitive behaviour. It’s hard to deter this type of activity in normal handicaps, but qualifying races where those that perform well are rewarded with the chance to win a big festival handicap are ideal to stop “plots”.
I’d like to see the qualification criteria changed so that only the top 4 qualify for the final.
In big fields (16+ runners), this would ensure that only the winner and placed horses qualify. Not only would this make for a more competitive race, it would make for fairer betting; you wouldn’t have to worry about your each-way selection sneaking round and grabbing 6th.
There are enough qualifying races to ensure that the field size does not suffer in the final; there were 70 entries last year, so roughly 47 would be entered under my proposed rules. This should be sufficient to guarantee that a large field heads to post.
In my opinion, this would encourage more competitive races throughout the season – and certainly less “suspicious” rides! Surely that can’t be a bad thing?
Let me know your thoughts!
overandclear.com 