Gallops research lab
What the lab wants to know next. An investigator raises a question when an observation surprises it, and ranks it by how much an answer would teach. Each links to the thread it belongs to and the observations that raised it; the highest priority comes first.
Loading questions…
In Flat sprints (distance_yards <= 1340), does a winner over at least 330 yards further also beat its price at non-stiff tracks, or is the 1.51 special to stiff finishes?
answered0.80The broad rival lifted about as much as the stiff-track parent, so the live system's mechanism rests on this comparison alone. If non-stiff sprints also score about 1.4 or more, the system is mislabelled and should be rebuilt on the trip drop. Columns: race_type, distance_yards, track_stiff_finish, last_win_distance_yards, track_sharpness.
Answer: Not at the system's level: non-stiff Flat sprints scored 1.10 on 164 bets (CI 0.62 to 1.81), 0.69 up to 14/1 and lifted only after April, so nothing shows the 1.51 outside stiff tracks, though the sample is thin.
Thread: H181: proven over further at a stiff tracktested by Rival: stayers dropped to a sprint pay at non-stiff tracks tootrack-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the festival-course lift (A/E 1.2 on 544) carried by long-priced winners rather than by the field generally?
answered0.75BSP ROI +40.7% against SP ROI -23.7% points to a few big BSP winners. Split the published system by `sp_decimal` bands (<6, 6-10, 10-20, 20+) and `sp_rank`. If the lift sits only at 16/1 or bigger, it is a variance artefact, not a mark-lag edge, and the live system is fragile.
Answer: Mostly yes. At the four courses, runners under 10/1 scored A/E 0.833 on 32 against a same-race control of 1.082, so the system's lift sits in the longer prices, not across the field.
Thread: H228: dual purpose horse in an irish summer flat handicaptested by Rival: the festival-course lift is a long-price artefactseason-irelandraised 17 Oct 2026
Why did the vault query for all last-time chase unseaters (H-f8d6b9d7) return 0 bets? Did the vault window fall outside the availability of last_non_finish_code?
answered0.75A vault result on 0 bets wastes the rule's one sealed test and leaves the lab misreading the 'supportive' tier. If the vault window comes before last_non_finish_code is populated, the other UR rules frozen in shadow (H-2ac5dd09, H-9f59a0ed, H-dcbc54fb) will also meet an empty vault. Columns: last_non_finish_code, last_fell_going_well, race_date.
Answer: Yes, almost certainly. last_non_finish_code only tells F from UR from 2025-01-01 (every non-finisher is PU before then), and all three UR rules (H-f8d6b9d7, H-a44d6bdc, H-e2cae105) got 0 vault bets. The vault window comes before the column, so the 'supportive' tier means nothing here.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the chase lift need the horse to have been going well when it fell or unseated, or do all last-time chase fallers and unseaters beat their price?
answered0.75If chasers that fell or unseated while NOT going well show the same lift, the mechanism is a general bounce-back after an F or U (the market over-punishing the letter), not a hidden good run. Columns: last_fell_or_unseated, last_fell_going_well, race_type, last_race_type.
Answer: For fallers in GB, the going-well condition matters: GB non-going-well chase F/U score 1.035 on 191 (0 from 61 at 16/1+), against about 1.46 for GB going-well. The only general lift without going well comes from unseated riders (1.26 on 190).
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Rival: chase fallers/unseaters NOT going well show the same lifttested by Rival: GB fallers going well vs GB fallers not going well, the going-well premium within GBtrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the lift for easy winners back within 14 days caused by the easy-win flag, or do all last-time winners back within 14 days beat their price?
answered0.75The live system rests on a split. If winners that did not win easily (last_position = 1, last_won_easily = 0, days_since_last_run <= 14) score close to 1.15 as well, the edge comes from the quick return and not from the margin underselling the horse. That would change what the system claims to capture. Columns: last_position, last_won_easily, days_since_last_run, sp_decimal.
Answer: The easy-win flag carries the lift: winners that did not win easily and came back within 14 days scored A/E 0.999 on 2,015 against a control of 1.001, while easy winners scored 1.147 on 597.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Rival: quick-returning last-time winners beat their price whether or not they won easilystoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Can the lab add a race-country flag (or a GB course_id list), so that GB-only versions of H199 and its top-two variants can be stated as rules and tested on the vault?
answered0.75Ireland has scored at par in both slices that were split by country (0.99 and 0.95), while GB scored 1.40 and 1.57. With no country column, every pooled rule is diluted and a GB-only rule cannot be written. Columns: course_id, course; a country column is missing from the catalogue.
Answer: No country column exists (a catalogue search for 'country' returned nothing). But `course` (upper-case name) is pre-off from 2020, so a GB-only rule can be written today as course NOT IN a list of the 26 Irish track names. A proper flag would still be cleaner.
Thread: H199: favourite at a big price in a big handicaprace-bettingraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the live stiff-sprint system (1.51 on 303) still beat its price when restricted to runners at 14/1 or shorter, or does the lift live in the 16/1+ band like its rivals?
answered0.75Both rivals this round put their lift in 16/1+ (Flat turf 1.41 on 792 with 25 wins; non-stiff sprints 1.31 against 0.69 up to 14/1). If the live system shares that shape it is a thin longshot effect and fragile. Columns: sp_decimal, sp_rank, race_type, distance_yards, track_stiff_finish, last_win_distance_yards.
Answer: Yes. Capped at 14/1 or shorter, the stiff-sprint system scored 1.34 on 31 bets in discovery and 1.64 on 141 in the sealed vault (p 0.0068). The lift is not just a 16/1+ longshot effect, but it missed the corrected threshold of 0.0029.
Thread: H181: proven over further at a stiff tracktrack-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Does a recent winner over at least 330 yards further beat its price at non-stiff tracks too, i.e. is the stiff finish needed at all?
answered0.75If the trip drop alone carries A/E about 1.07 everywhere, the stiff-track mechanism is wrong and the live system is mislabelled. Columns: track_stiff_finish, track_sharpness, last_win_distance_yards, distance_yards, cp_down_trip_exp.
Answer: For the broad rule the stiff finish adds little. Non-stiff tracks scored 1.048 on 4,671 against 1.068 at stiff ones, so the drop in trip carries most of the lift. Whether the hill matters in Flat sprints is still untested and moves to a new question.
Thread: H181: proven over further at a stiff tracktested by Rival: dropping in trip after a win over further pays at any track, stiff or nottrack-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
On 7f+ last runs at 14/1 or shorter, does a wide trip with a narrow defeat still beat the price once the early-setback-and-recovery story runners are removed?
answered0.70The 7f+ cut (1.259 on 643) includes the parent system's runners, and the all-trip complement fell to 1.089. If the 7f+ complement holds near 1.2 in GB, the bends mechanism stands on its own and the system can widen. If it falls to about 1.0, the bends cut is just the story repackaged. Columns: last_raced_wide, last_distance_yards, last_early_setback, last_recovered, sp_decimal, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: Mostly yes. With the early-setback-and-recovery story runners removed, the 7f+ wide-trip narrow defeats at 14/1 or shorter still score 1.20 on 462 (p 0.044, control 0.95). The GB part is only 1.12 on 364 and IRE 1.53 on 98, so the bends mechanism stands without the story, but it is thinner in GB.
Thread: H20: wide early and got back into ittested by Rival: the 7f+ wide-trip lift is the story runners repackaged; test the complement on round tripsstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Within the going-well chase system, is the lift carried by fallers (F) or by unseaters (UR)? If it is UR-only, the 'hidden good run' and the 'unseat over-punished' mechanisms are the same thing.
answered0.70last_fell_going_well covers both F and UR. Unseaters that were not going well already score 1.26, so the system's 1.30 could be mostly unseats. Splitting it decides whether there is one mechanism or two. Columns: last_fell_going_well, last_non_finish_code (from 2025-01), race_type, region.
Answer: Both carry it. Going-well fallers scored 1.26 on 85, which implies going-well unseaters at roughly 1.34 on about 80, so the system is not an unseat-only effect.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Rival: the going-well chase edge is carried by actual fallers, not unseaterstrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the H24 chase edge come from finishers beaten more than 10 lengths, or from runners that did not finish (fell, unseated, pulled up)?
answered0.70The rule's last_position IS NULL branch merges fallers and unseaters with genuinely well-beaten finishers. If the lift is only in non-finishers, it repeats the known fell/unseated forgive story rather than a remark-based edge. The scanner should split on last_position IS NULL, last_fell_or_unseated, last_pulled_up and last_code, inside race_type = 'Chase' with jumping_errors_last3 = 1.
Answer: Both branches contribute, and the finishers carry most of it: chasers that completed and were beaten more than 10 lengths scored 1.182 on 389 (6/6 neighbours hold), against a kill line of 1.03. So the edge is not only the faller/unseater story.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Rival: H24 chase edge is only the faller/unseater story; finishers beaten 10L+ do not beat their pricestoryraised 17 Oct 2026
In chases, do last-time winners with a top-third Jump Index score clearly higher A/E than those with a bottom-third index, so that poor jumping (not just having won) drives the deficit?
answered0.70The pre-registered falsifier compared against good-jumping winners, but that number was not reported. Read last_jump_index_pct (>= 0.67 vs <= 0.33), last_position = 1, race_type = 'Chase' and last_race_type. If good jumpers score about 1.07 (the control level) and poor jumpers about 0.78, the mechanism is jumping-specific.
Answer: Partly. Good-jumping last-time chase winners scored 1.05 on 902, against 0.78 on 240 for poor jumpers, so winning alone does not cause the deficit. The poor-jumper side (p 0.067) is still too weak to show that poor jumping causes it.
Thread: Chase-bound winners that jumped poorly when winning are over-bettested by Test-mechanism: the poor-jumping deficit should be absent in last-time winners whose jumping was goodnegativeraised 16 Oct 2026
Within the handicap-to-handicap fortnight rule, is the lift carried by runners already raised by the handicapper (rating_change > 0), or by the rows where rating_change is missing?
answered0.70The complement of H-97b1373c implies about 1.28 on ~231 bets, but that group mixes raised runners with missing ratings. Missing could mean Irish runs, a data gap or first-time marks. Columns: rating_change, official_rating, last_official_rating, region, days_since_last_run, last_won_easily, is_handicap, last_is_handicap.
Answer: Raised runners carry it: easy handicap winners back within 14 days with rating_change > 0 scored 1.334 on 231 (p 0.013, periods 1.35/1.32, control 0.905). The no-rise or missing rows scored 1.096 on 247.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Raised easy handicap winners turned out within 14 days beat their pricestoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the easy-winner handicap lift last past the first reassessment (back in 15 to 35 days), or is it confined to runs before the handicapper has reacted?
answered0.70This decides between two causes. If the mark lags because the handicapper sees only the margin, the lag survives reassessment and the lift should hold at 15 to 35 days. If it is about timing (the trainer striking before reassessment, or a horse in peak form), the lift should fade to about 1. The broad easy-winner A/E of 1.048 hints at fading. Columns: days_since_last_run, last_won_easily, is_handicap, last_is_handicap, rating_change.
Answer: It does not last. Easy handicap winners back in 15 to 35 days scored 1.013 on 636 (p 0.45; periods 1.14 and 0.88; control 1.002), so the lift is confined to quick returns, although not only to runs before reassessment.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Test-mechanism: easy handicap winners still beat the price after reassessment (15-35 days)storyraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the lift specific to the favourite, or do all short-end runners at 5/1+ in big-field handicaps beat their prices (an overround or price-band effect)?
answered0.70Compare same-race runners at the same price with sp_rank = 2 or 3 against sp_rank = 1. Columns: sp_rank, sp_decimal, field_size, is_handicap, book_pct, favourite_sp. If second favourites at 6.0+ score the same, the mechanism is overround distribution, not market consensus.
Answer: Not specific to the favourite. Second favourites matched it in discovery (1.158 on 721), but the long-history vault cut that to 1.04 on 4,207 (p 0.199), and third favourites sit at par. Whatever lift exists covers the top two and is small.
Thread: H199: favourite at a big price in a big handicaptested by Rival: second favourites at 5/1+ in big handicaps also beat their price (overround effect, not favourite status)tested by Sharpen: top-two in the betting at 5/1+ in handicaps of 18+ runnersrace-bettingraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the lift caused by the interrupted run, or would any horse beaten 2 lengths or less (but not first) beat its price just as well?
answered0.70If narrowly beaten horses that met no trouble also show A/E near 1.18, the trouble flag adds nothing and the system is really a 'narrow loser' rule, which the market should already price. Columns: last_momentum_interrupted, last_position, last_beaten_lengths, sp_decimal.
Answer: The trouble flag is the cause. Narrowly beaten horses with no trouble scored A/E 0.979 on 12,205 bets (control 1.008), against 1.28 on 218 for the troubled ones.
Thread: H19: momentum interrupted beaten narrowlytested by Rival: narrowly beaten runners with no trouble last time beat their price as wellstoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the returner lift a year-round all-weather effect, strongest when a horse switches from a turf campaign to the AW after 150+ days, rather than anything seasonal?
answered0.70Dropping month from H-ce91b64d gave 1.138 on 1213 (periods 1.12 and 1.20). The last_surface='Turf' refinement scored 1.32 on 283, and removing the layoff gave 1.00 on 3925. If this is true, the thread should move out of the seasonal family. Columns: surface, last_surface, days_since_last_run, month, prior_surface_runs.
Answer: No. The year-round turf-to-AW returner rule after 150+ days scored 1.14 at discovery but 0.979 on 3155 in the sealed vault (p 0.64), so there is no robust year-round AW switch effect.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Turf-to-all-weather handicap returners after 150+ days beat their prices in any monthseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the young-stayer lift carried by horses that have not yet run at 3m4f+ (stepping up in trip), as the 'market doubts unproven stamina' mechanism requires?
answered0.70If the reversed mechanism is right, the mispricing should sit with runners whose stamina is unknown, not with young horses already proven at the trip. Columns: last_distance_yards, st_3m_runs, st_placed_3m, chase_runs, prior_runs, age, distance_yards. A clear split would confirm or undercut the live system's story.
Answer: Not as far as the data show. First-time step-ups to 3m4f+ score 1.115 on 97, at or below the system's 1.18 overall, so young horses already proven at the trip do at least as well and the unproven-stamina mechanism is unsupported.
Thread: H175: young horse in a marathon chasetested by Young marathon chasers stepping up to 3m4f+ for the first time carry the liftage-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the complement (wide-trip narrow defeats without the early-setback-and-recovery story) still beat its prices at 14/1 or shorter, once the 8 longshot winners are taken out?
answered0.65The complement scores 1.162 on 786, but its 16/1+ band is 1.92 from 8 wins and its CI crosses 1. This is the one test that separates 'wide trip alone pays' from 'only the early-setback story pays'. It would settle Q-574e98a4 and Q-8cf76069. Columns: last_raced_wide, last_early_setback, last_recovered, last_slow_start, last_beaten_lengths, last_position, sp_decimal.
Answer: Mostly no. The ≤14/1 complement is 1.089 on 701 (p 0.17, control 0.98) and GB is 1.011 on 562. What is left rests on 139 IRE runners at 1.44, so wide trip alone does not reliably beat the price.
Is the jumps lift a rebound from one bad run after recent close form, holding without the never-involved flag and without a big last field?
answered0.65In the H-baef90d8 attacks, close finishers without the flag scored 1.47 on 186, close finishers from 6 to 13 runner fields scored 1.334 on 517, and lowering the field cut to 11+ raised it to 1.77 on 410. If the close finish carries the lift, the flag and field-size conditions are only rough ways of finding the run, and the published rule should be rebuilt around best_last3_beaten. A test would read best_last3_beaten, last_beaten_lengths, last_never_involved and last_field_size within jumps handicaps.
Answer: Largely yes. The close-finish rule holds without the flag and big field at 1.161 on 1359 (p 0.04), and is 1.232 on 1600 overall, against 1.023 on 5287 with no close finish. The flag niche adds to it but is not needed.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: the lift is a one-bad-run rebound after close recent form, needing neither the flag nor a big fieldstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the lift strongest where the Flat mark has the least information, i.e. horses lightly raced on the Flat but proven over hurdles?
answered0.65The mechanism says the Flat mark lags behind hurdle form. That lag should be biggest when `flat_runs` is low and `hurdle_wins` >= 1, at any Irish summer course. If the whole broad population is flat, this is the one cut the mechanism itself names. Columns: `flat_runs`, `flat_wins`, `hurdle_wins`, `hurdle_runs`, `last_official_rating`.
Answer: No. The lightly-raced proven-hurdler cut scored A/E 0.99 on 340 vault bets (p 0.55), so the lift is not strongest where the Flat mark has the least information.
Thread: H228: dual purpose horse in an irish summer flat handicaptested by Sharpen: proven hurdlers lightly raced on the Flat in Irish summer staying handicapstested by Generalise: hurdle winners lightly raced on the Flat beat their prices in Irish staying Flat handicaps all yeartested by Replicate: hurdle winners lightly raced on the Flat in British summer staying Flat handicapsseason-irelandraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the drift edge an overreaction to the error, or a general drifter effect after any bad chase run? Do clean-jumping chasers beaten 10+ lengths whose price lengthened also beat their price?
answered0.65Drifted runners scored 1.50 and non-drifted 1.08. If drifters after any well-beaten run score the same, the jumping-error condition adds nothing and the edge is a generic drifter or price-movement effect. Columns: sp_decimal, last_sp_decimal, jumping_errors_last3, remarked_last3, last_beaten_lengths, last_position, race_type.
Answer: No. Clean-jumping chasers who were well beaten and drifted scored 1.09 on 658 (p 0.31; GB 0.84), and only 0.96 on 324 in same-size fields, against 1.46 to 1.55 for one-off-error drifters. The drift edge needs the jumping error.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Rival: drift edge is a generic chase drifter effect after any well-beaten run, not the jumping errorstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the Snowden lift yard-wide (non-novices, handicaps, all codes) rather than specific to novices, so that 'novice' is a label on a general trainer effect?
answered0.65Dropping the bumper filter in the stability check left all Snowden runners at 1.085 on 359, while bumpers without the trainer sat at 0.99. Backing out the 76 novice bets leaves the non-novice remainder near 1.06. If non-novice jumps runners also beat their prices, the mechanism is trainer-level mispricing rather than novice development, and the system definition should change. Columns: trainer, is_novice, race_type, is_handicap, sp_decimal.
Answer: No. Over jumps the lift is novice-specific: Snowden's non-novice, non-maiden hurdlers and chasers scored 0.975 on 187 (periods 1.04 and 0.84, control 1.01), so 'novice' is not just a label on a general trainer effect.
Thread: H17: jamie snowden novicestested by Rival: the Snowden lift is a yard-wide effect; his non-novice jumps runners beat their prices toonamed-trainerraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the 3m4f+ young-horse lift really the mirror of older, proven marathon chasers being over-bet in the same races?
answered0.65The lift appears only at 3m4f+, does not depend on unproven stamina, and the same-race controls there sit below 1 (0.89 and 0.97), against 1.10 at 3m to 3m3f. If older horses (10 and up) in marathon handicap chases are over-bet, the system's edge is the market's 'hardened stayer' bias seen from the other side. Columns: age, distance_yards, is_handicap, race_type, sp_decimal, st_3m_runs, st_placed_3m.
Answer: Not as a general older-horse over-bet: ages 8 to 9 (0.97 on 229) and 10+ (0.97 on 148) sit near par, and older horses high in the weights scored 1.154 on 352. Any older shortfall is confined to the light-weights.
Is the thread's lift a calendar effect of one early spring: returners of any age and any price beating their SP in March to 27 April 2026, then fading?
answered0.65Every rule shows the same pre/post 27 April split (here 1.24 vs 1.01, H-71a94a07 1.18 vs 0.97), and the age control lifted as much as the four-year-olds. If all March-April handicap returners score about 1.10, the age, price-band and won-last-time slices are just cuts of one seasonal effect. Columns: month, days_since_last_run, age, sp_decimal, region, is_handicap, last_surface (all-weather prep vs turf).
Answer: Only weakly. All March-April handicap returners scored 1.09 on 1424 at discovery (mostly spring 2026) but 1.03 on 6934 in the vault (p 0.235). Any repeatable calendar lift is about 3% at most, and spring 2026 looks unusual. Inside March-April, the 28-30 April bets scored 1.41 on 101, so the fade does not start on 27 April.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by All early-spring Flat handicap returners: a calendar effect rival to the four-year-old story
Is the brought-down/unseated edge only a 16/1+ longshot effect, and is it fading (1.17 then 1.02)?
answered0.65The gap between SP ROI (+16.6%) and BSP ROI (+140%), and the falling period A/E, both point to a few outsized winners. The test would split `last_non_finish_code IN ('BD','UR')` by `sp_decimal` bands (up to 15, and over 15) and by period. If the capped band sits at 1.0 in recent data, the live system is a longshot bet, not a reading-the-form edge. That would change how the system is staked and judged.
Answer: Yes. Capped at 14/1 the edge is 1.021 on 312 (control 0.999), and in the quick-return subset the lift comes from 16/1+ (2.05 on 166 bets, 6 wins). Period A/E fell from 1.12/1.17 to 0.90/1.02.
Thread: H98: brought down or unseatedtested by Rival: the unseated edge is only longshot drift; capped at 14/1 it matches the pricelettersraised 16 Oct 2026
How many of H-2af132dc's 506 runners are also in H-6243bb06, H-807e3cb2 and H-b0d006d8, and does the close-form non-winner remainder keep a lift on its own?
answered0.60Six frozen rules from one thread can look like replication when they are one population. If the non-winner part of H-2af132dc (best_last3_beaten between 0 and 6, not 0) is about par, the generalisation is the winner rule repackaged. Columns: best_last3_beaten, rating_change, days_since_win, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: About 269 of H-2af132dc's 506 runners are recent winners. The close-form non-winner remainder scores 1.184 on 237, but only in the 8/1 to 14/1 band and at 0.98 in the later period, so it was killed and the generalisation rests on the winner part.
Is the stronger rebound of undropped recent winners (rating_change >= 0) an official-excuse signal, or a quick return that came before the handicapper's reassessment?
answered0.60The complement scored 1.412 on 269, against 1.249 for dropped horses, the opposite of the mark-relief prediction. If quick returners (days_since_last_run under about 10) carry it, it is a timing artefact. If horses returning after 14+ days with an unchanged mark carry it, the handicapper's refusal to drop is the information. Columns: rating_change, days_since_last_run, last_official_rating, official_rating, region.
Answer: It is not a timing artefact. Only 12 undropped winners came back before reassessment, while horses given time to be reassessed scored 1.42 on 249 (H-6243bb06, 6/6 attacks held).
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Test-mechanism: undropped recent winners after a heavy beating, given time for reassessmenttested by Rival: the no-drop lift is quick returners racing before the new mark appliesstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the 7f+ wide-trip lift a turf-season effect? The 10f+ cut is 1.33 after 27 April 2026 and 0.90 before it, which suggests winter all-weather runs score at par.
answered0.60O-6fe083c8 splits the 10f+ cut by date, and the early winter period (mostly all-weather) sits below par. If all-weather last runs carry no edge, the live system and the frozen 7f+ rules should be read as turf-only, and their forward results will be seasonal. A test would read last_surface, surface, last_distance_yards, last_raced_wide, last_beaten_lengths and sp_decimal.
Answer: No. The turf-only cut scores 1.19 on 294 (p 0.09), below the 7f+ parent's 1.26, so all-weather last runs carry at least as much lift. The only weak winter period is turf's own (0.68 on 50).
Is the lift carried by the wide trip plus a narrow defeat, or does it need the early-setback and recovery flags too?
answered0.60If the broad rule (last_raced_wide = 1, last_beaten_lengths <= 5, last_position > 1) prices as well as the full rule, the system can be widened to many more bets. If it scores near 1.0, the specific story of being caught wide early and working back into the race is what the market misses. Columns: last_raced_wide, last_early_setback, last_recovered, last_beaten_lengths, last_position, race_type.
Answer: At ≤14/1 across all trips the story flags are needed. The complement is near par in GB, while the story rule scores about 1.35 to 1.45. Whether the flags are still needed on 7f+ trips remains open.
Thread: H20: wide early and got back into ittested by Rival: any narrow Flat defeat after racing wide, without the early-setback and recovery flagstested by Rival complement: wide-trip narrow Flat defeats without the early-setback-and-recovery storystoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Do wide-trip narrow defeats that lack the early-setback and recovery flags still beat their prices on their own, once the parent system's runners are removed?
answered0.60The 1.204 on 1119 includes the parent's ~256 bets at about 1.45, so it cannot show on its own that the flags are unnecessary. Only the complement can settle Q-8cf76069. Columns: last_raced_wide, last_early_setback, last_recovered, last_beaten_lengths, last_position, race_type.
Answer: Not convincingly. With the story runners removed and longshots capped, the lift drops to 1.089 (GB about 1.01), so the early-setback-and-recovery flags carry most of the GB value in the broad rule.
Thread: H20: wide early and got back into itstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the recent-winner rebound hold below 16/1, or is the 1.34 carried by about 12 winners at 16/1 or bigger?
answered0.60H-363890c3 scores 2.01 on 222 at 16/1 or bigger from 12 wins. The rest of the rule is only about 1.2, and the confidence interval runs from 1.07 to 1.65. Whether this is bettable depends on the band up to 14/1. Columns: sp_decimal, best_last3_beaten, last_beaten_lengths, race_type, is_handicap.
Answer: Yes, it holds below 16/1: the sub-16/1 rival scores 1.265 on 447 (p 0.03), 1.335 on 207 up to 14/1, and it survived 6 of 6 attacks.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: the recent-winner rebound is a longshot artefact and vanishes at 14/1 or shorterstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Should the lab stop running vault queries on rules that use last_non_finish_code, and instead mark them forward-only when they freeze?
answered0.60A fourth 0-bet 'supportive' vault result (H-4cf8f914) uses up a sealed test with no information, and it risks reading as validation. The fix is procedural: check the column windows (last_non_finish_code from 2025-01-01) against the vault period before spending the query.
Answer: Yes. H-f5df804d survived 5 of 5 attacks and then spent its vault query on 0 bets, the fifth such case. Rules on last_non_finish_code or last_pulled_up should be marked forward-only when they freeze, not sent to the vault.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the lift in lightly raced Flat staying handicappers about hurdle form, or about any horse with few Flat runs whose mark is still settling?
answered0.60H-cf4b198a selects on `hurdle_wins` >= 1 and `flat_runs` <= 6 together. If horses with `flat_runs` <= 6 and `hurdle_runs` = 0 in the same races score just as well, the hurdling story is wrong and the effect is plain light Flat experience. Read `flat_runs`, `hurdle_runs`, `hurdle_wins`, `sp_rank`.
Answer: Neither. The hurdle version is 0.99 on 340 in the vault. The no-hurdle version is 1.05 on 215, resting on 3 winners at 16/1 or bigger, so there is no real lift for hurdle form or few Flat runs to explain.
Thread: H228: dual purpose horse in an irish summer flat handicaptested by Rival: lightly raced Flat staying handicappers beat their prices whether or not they have hurdledseason-irelandraised 17 Oct 2026
Do horses beaten 20 lengths or more last time over hurdles beat their price when running in a jumps handicap next, in both countries? Is the chase-debutant lift just a slice of that?
answered0.60A perturbation of H-cc72aea8 that drops race_type='Chase' scored 1.13 on 3675 (p 0.022), GB 1.16 and IRE 1.06. Dropping the debut condition scored 1.16 on 531, IRE 1.09. If the broad effect is real, the narrow GB-only debutant cuts are noise around it, and the thread should move to the broader population. Columns: last_beaten_lengths, last_race_type, is_handicap, race_type, region, sp_decimal, last_is_handicap.
Answer: Yes. Jumps handicappers beaten 20 lengths or more last time scored 1.08 on 6743 (p 0.041) with GB 1.087 and IRE 1.067, and survived 6 of 6 attacks. The GB-only chase-debutant lift (killed at IRE 0.367) looks like a noisy slice of this broader effect.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Generalise: jumps handicappers beaten 20 lengths or more last time beat their pricestoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Why do non-going-well chase UR (190 bets) plus non-going-well chase F (167 bets) come to 357 bets, when last_fell_or_unseated = 1 with going-well excluded gives only 270?
answered0.60The two flags must differ in definition (e.g. last_fell_or_unseated may miss some F/UR codes) or in availability window. Either would bias every comparison in this thread made by subtraction, and it may explain the vault's 0 bets. Columns: last_fell_or_unseated, last_non_finish_code, last_fell_going_well, race_date, region.
Answer: It is a window mismatch. last_fell_or_unseated and last_fell_going_well start on 2025-11-01, while last_non_finish_code starts on 2025-01-01. The UR rules with no date bound pick up Jan–Oct 2025 runners that the flag-based 270 pool cannot see.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Do last-time chase unseaters beat their price below 16/1, or is the A/E 1.40 carried by 4 long-priced winners?
answered0.60The 16/1+ band scored 1.79 on 91 bets from only 4 wins. If the mechanism is that the market over-punishes the UR letter, the lift should also show at shorter prices, where results are less noisy. Columns: last_non_finish_code, race_type, sp_decimal.
Answer: Mostly yes. Chase unseaters below 16/1 scored A/E 1.35 on 122 (control 0.94, p 0.084), and 1.65 on 53 in the up-to-14/1 band, so the lift is not carried only by the long-priced winners. It is still not significant at this size.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Rival: the chase unseater lift is a long-price artefact; test unseaters under 16/1trajectory
Is the chase-debutant lift after a heavy hurdle beating carried by yards that are good at chase debuts, so that it is really the published yard effect (H104, SYS-chase-debut-from-a-good-yard) and not a misread of form?
answered0.60H-448cb451 passed as a niche at 1.24 on 335, and good chase-debut yards already show 1.18. If the debutants come mostly from those yards, the 'bad hurdle form misread' story adds nothing. A scan would read tx_chase_debut_runs, tx_chase_debut_wins, tx_chase_debut_exp, chase_runs, last_beaten_lengths and last_race_type.
Answer: No. The yard-skill cut (H-2e457254) scored only 1.09 on 296 (p 0.35), below the yard-free debutant niche at 1.24 on 335. The good-yard effect does not carry the debutant lift.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: the debutant lift is the yard's chase-debut skill, not misread hurdle formstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Within the 226 jumps-to-jumps switchers, is the lift in hurdle-to-chase (a first try over fences) or chase-to-hurdle (fences taken away), and does a jumping error in the pull-up matter?
answered0.60The code switch carries a lift that holds in both periods (1.44, then 1.24), and jumps-to-jumps switches make up most of it (1.42 on 226). Which direction carries it would tell us whether the cause is new conditions or obstacles the horse could not cope with. Columns: last_race_type, race_type, chase_runs, hurdle_runs, last_jumping_error, jumping_errors_last3, sp_decimal.
Answer: Both directions carry a lift: hurdle-to-chase held-up pull-ups scored 1.50 on 76 and chase-to-hurdle 1.38 on 150, so the cause looks like the change of code rather than a first try over fences. The jumping-error part is still untested.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: a change of handicap status, not of code, carries the switcher lifttested by Sharpen: held-up hurdle pull-ups sent chasing next timetested by Test-mechanism: held-up chase pull-ups dropped back to hurdles
Is the under-performance of error-free chase non-finishers concentrated in horses that led or raced prominently before stopping, where pulling up most likely means a physical problem rather than a horse being given an easy time?
answered0.60H-b4454f9c came out at 0.71 on 208, opposite to its prediction, while the held-up pull-up thread scores 1.2 to 1.3. Run style may be what divides an excuse from a real problem. Columns to read: last_pulled_up, last_jumping_error, last_led_in_running, last_run_style, last_non_finish_code, race_type, sp_decimal.
Answer: No: chase pull-ups with clean jumping that led last time score 0.68 on 43 (CI 0.14 to 1.97), the same as the whole clean pool (0.71 on 208). The broad led/prominent pull-up rival (H-a2870576) was killed, so run style does not concentrate the under-performance.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Discovery: error-free chase pull-ups that had led last time are over-betstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Which going transitions make up the roughly 400 changed-going held-up pull-ups that are neither mud-to-better nor better-to-softer, and do they include a change of surface or race code (jumps to Flat or AW)?
answered0.60Changed going overall scored 1.296 on 940, but the two directional cuts total only 526 runners and score 1.05 and 0.92. The lift must sit in the residual. Scanner should cross-tab going_group x last_going_group, race_type x last_race_type, and last_surface, restricted to last_pulled_up = 1 AND last_run_style IN ('held_up','midfield').
Answer: Yes: about 300 held-up pull-ups changed race code, mostly hurdle to chase or back (226). They score 1.36, steady across periods, while same-code runners on changed going owe their 1.30 (at 14/1 or shorter) to the late period.
Do well-beaten chasers with no jumping error last time, priced 8/1 to 14/1 today, score as well as the one-off-error pool in the same band (1.46)?
answered0.60H-c66cb8b5 shows price level, not drift, locates the lift. Error-free fancied well-beaten chasers already scored 1.11 on 397. If error-free runners in the band are near 1.4, the error is not the cause. A test reads last_jumping_error, jumping_errors_last3, remarked_last3, last_beaten_lengths, last_position, sp_decimal, race_type.
Answer: Partly. Error-free well-beaten finishers at 9 to 15 scored 1.18 on 302, but only after 27 April (0.92, then 1.42). In-band error-pool finishers scored 1.14 on 115, so among finishers the error adds nothing. The error pool's 1.46 comes from last-time non-finishers.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Rival: the 8/1 to 14/1 chase lift is generic to well-beaten chasers with no jumping errorstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the changed-going lift for held-up pull-ups survive among horses brought back within 35 days, where freshening cannot be the cause?
answered0.60The changed-going cut (1.296 on 940) and the long-gap cut (1.335 on 674) probably overlap heavily. The quick-return pool as a whole was flat (1.027). If changed going lifts quick returners too, ground is the cause rather than rest. If it does not, freshening and season remain. Columns: days_since_last_run, going_group, last_going_group, last_pulled_up, last_run_style.
Answer: Barely. Changed going among horses back within 35 days scored 1.09 on 449, close to the quick-return pool's 1.027. Only the up-to-14/1 band carried it, and it was killed (rest 0.97, 2 of 5 attacks broke it).
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Test-mechanism: changed going lifts held-up pull-ups even on a quick returnstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the drifted-runner lift really a sign that the horse was fancied before its blunder (short last_sp_decimal), rather than a reaction to today's drift?
answered0.60A drift of 20% or more did not strengthen the lift (1.24 on 104 against 1.46 on 132), so the drift is not a graded market overreaction. A horse is more likely to drift when it was short last time. If the lift sits in runners who were fancied last time, whether or not they drifted, the real signal is 'a rated horse hidden by one blunder'. Columns: last_sp_decimal, sp_decimal, last_jumping_error, jumping_errors_last3, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: No. Runners not fancied last time (last_sp_decimal > 7) scored 1.231 on 332, the same as fancied ones (1.218 on 204). Fancied runners that shortened today scored 0.864 on 49. Today's drift, not the last-time price, goes with the lift.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Rival: one-off chase-error edge is carried by horses fancied last time, not by today's driftstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the held-up PU lift concentrated in horses returning after a longer break (over 35 days), and does it rise with gap length or plateau?
answered0.60The quick-return test failed at 1.027 on 777, so the implied long-gap remainder carries about 1.4. If a break after a held-up PU signals a fixed problem (wind op, freshening) that the market reads as injury, the lift should sit beyond 35 days and may persist to 90+ days. Columns: days_since_last_run, last_pulled_up, last_run_style, sp_decimal, first_headgear, race_date (season check).
Answer: In discovery, yes: over 35 days scored 1.335 on 674 against 1.027 on 777 for a quick return. But 2 of 5 attacks broke it. Whether the lift rises with gap length or levels off is still untested.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Test-mechanism: held-up PU horses returning after a break of more than 35 days beat their pricestoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the pulled-up lift depend on how quickly the horse is brought back, as it should if the run took nothing out of it?
answered0.60If the horse was looked after, the trainer can bring it back quickly; a long absence after a PU points to injury or a problem the market is right to fear. Columns: days_since_last_run, last_pulled_up, last_run_style, sp_decimal. This tests the mechanism directly rather than re-cutting the pool by jumping figures.
Answer: Yes, but the opposite way to the prediction: quick returns (35 days or fewer) scored only 1.027 on 777, so the lift implied for longer absences is roughly 1.4 on about 550 bets.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Test-mechanism: held-up PU horses brought back quickly beat their pricestoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Within the one-off chase-error pool (GB), is the edge carried by not dropping in class rather than by a close earlier run, so that class droppers are the weak group whatever their earlier form?
answered0.60In H-8443fa31, no-drop horses scored 1.409 with a close run and 1.286 without one, while close-run droppers scored 0.997 on 40. The earlier 1.304 vs 1.092 close-run split may really be a class split. A scan would cross race_class vs last_race_class (drop, same, rise) with best_last3_beaten (<5 vs >=5) in the GB chase pool, reading A/E and BSP ROI per cell. Region is GB only because race_class starts in IRE only from 2026-07.
Answer: Mostly yes. Within no-drop horses, a close run moves A/E only from 1.29 to 1.41. Within close-run horses, dropping in class moves it from 1.41 to 0.997. The whole no-drop GB pool scores 1.36 on 253, so class choice is the larger split. Droppers without a close run are still unmeasured.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Generalise: one-off chase error, well beaten, not dropping in class (GB), with or without a close runstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Within the H24 chase pool, is the lift larger when the sectionals show the error actually cost ground (low l_lgj_pct / last_ground_gained_pct)?
answered0.60The mechanism says the mistake cost the run. If that is true, a costly error should pay more than an error that cost nothing by the figures. The imported siblings found by search (error with large cost 1.057, error with little cost 0.901) suggest it may not. The scanner should read l_lgj_pct, last_ground_gained_pct and l_speed_lost_pct.
Answer: Barely. Errors that cost ground by the sectionals scored 1.29 on 243, and errors that cost no measured ground scored 1.223 on 280. Measured ground cost does not carry the chase edge.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Test-mechanism: one-off chase error that the sectionals show cost groundstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the 'one-off' condition needed? Do well-beaten chasers that made a jumping error last time also beat their price when they had errors in the runs before too?
answered0.60The finishers and costly-ground splits both hold, and Q-ba0a5913 shows poor jumpers outperforming inside the rule. Together these suggest the market over-penalises any recent jumping error, not specifically a one-off slip. If repeat-error chasers also beat their price, the system's narrative and filter should change. Columns: jumping_errors_last3, last_jumping_error, remarked_last3, last_jump_index_pct, last_position, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: Yes, the one-off condition is needed. Well-beaten chasers whose last-time error came on top of earlier errors scored only A/E 1.043 on 670 (p 0.375, control 1.0), against 1.224 for the one-off pool.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Rival: market over-penalises any last-time chase error, not only a one-off slipstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Are all handicap runners at 9/1–14/1 (sp_decimal > 9 AND <= 15) under par in this window, whatever their last run, so that the winner deficit at that band is just a property of the price band?
answered0.60Every winner pool's deficit sits at up to 14/1 (0.84 on 1,552; 0.78 on 966), while 16/1+ is at par. If non-winners in the same band also score around 0.85–0.90, the tag explains nothing and the thread should close. A descriptive scan over sp_decimal bands, is_handicap and last_position settles it cheaply. Columns: sp_decimal, sp_rank, is_handicap, last_position, region.
Answer: No. Handicap runners at 9/1–14/1 that did not win last time scored 1.029 on 15,550 against a control of 1.0, so the winner deficit at that band is not a property of the price band.
Thread: Raised handicap winners sent off at 9/1+ are over-bet, at any gap since the wintested by Rival: handicap runners at 9/1–14/1 that did not win last time are equally over-bet (band effect, not winner tag)negativeraised 16 Oct 2026
Do last-time handicap winners at 9/1+ that were NOT raised (rating_change <= 0) score as poorly as raised ones, so that the over-betting comes from the winner tag and not the higher mark?
answered0.60This is the spec's own falsifier for the mark mechanism, and it has not been measured. It decides whether the lab follows the handicap-mark idea or a broader 'drifting last-time winner' idea. Columns: rating_change, last_position, last_is_handicap, is_handicap, sp_decimal, last_official_rating.
Answer: Measured: unraised winners at 9/1+ scored 0.82 on 144, about the same as raised winners. The mark adds no visible deficit, but the pool is too small, and the pooled result makes further splits by mark low-value.
Thread: Raised handicap winners sent off at 9/1+ are over-bet, at any gap since the wintested by Rival: unraised last-time handicap winners at 9/1+ are over-bet too (winner-tag money, not the mark)negativeraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the fortnight lift concentrated where the handicap mark has not yet caught up, i.e. handicap to handicap?
answered0.60The mechanism says the handicapper reacts only to the margin, and a quick return can beat the reassessment. The lift should therefore be strongest in handicaps after a handicap win and weak in non-handicaps. Columns: is_handicap, last_is_handicap, days_since_last_run, last_official_rating.
Answer: Yes. Handicap-to-handicap runs scored A/E 1.188 on 478 (p 0.019, periods 1.21/1.17, control 0.92). That implies the other ~119 parent bets come out near A/E 0.98.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Test-mechanism: easy-winner quick-return lift lives in handicap-to-handicap runsstoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Do big-yard top-two runners at 5/1+ in 14+ runner handicaps (trainer_runs >= 1500) beat their price, as the arithmetic implies, and is that true in Ireland as well as GB?
answered0.60The small-yard pool came in at 1.03 against a pooled top-two figure near 1.14, which implies the big-yard remainder is about 1.2. That is the reverse of what the rival predicted. Measuring it directly decides whether yard size is a real lever or just noise from the split. Columns: trainer_runs, sp_rank, sp_decimal, field_size, is_handicap, course.
Answer: In discovery, yes. Big-yard top-two runners at 5/1+ in 14+ runner handicaps score 1.33 on 386, with IRE 1.38 and GB 1.27. Small-yard runners score 1.03 on 468, with IRE 0.88. The Irish par comes from small Irish yards, not from big ones.
Thread: H199: favourite at a big price in a big handicaptested by Big-yard runners at the front of the market in big handicaps beat their pricerace-bettingraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the trouble edge shrink as the beaten margin grows (0-2 lengths strongest, 2-5 lengths weaker but still positive), as a dose-response would require?
answered0.60If the interrupted run really hides ability, horses checked and beaten a bit further should still beat their price, but by less. A sharp cliff at exactly 2 lengths would suggest the 2-length cut is chosen to fit the data rather than a mechanism. Columns: last_momentum_interrupted, last_beaten_lengths, last_position, race_type.
Answer: No dose-response: checked runners beaten 2 to 5 lengths scored A/E 0.80 on 263 (both periods under 1, control 1.03), so the effect stops sharply at 2 lengths rather than fading.
Thread: H19: momentum interrupted beaten narrowlytested by Generalise: checked mid-run and beaten 2 to 5 lengths still beats its price, by lessstoryraised 16 Oct 2026
In 3m4f+ handicap chases, do runners priced 7/1 or shorter beat their SP whatever their age or weight, so that the lift in the young slices is really a price-band effect?
answered0.60Every positive 3m4f+ slice takes its lift from up to 7/1: higher-weighted under 16/1 scored 1.55 there against 0.78 at 8/1 to 14/1, and the young step-ups scored 1.358 on 36. If short-priced marathon runners of all ages beat their SP, youth adds nothing. Columns: sp_decimal, sp_rank, distance_yards, is_handicap, race_type, age.
Answer: No: short-priced (up to 7/1) marathon handicap runners of all ages scored only 1.17 on 157 (p 0.205), carried by the 4/1-7/1 band with up to 3/1 at 0.95, so the young lift is not a general short-price effect.
Thread: H175: young horse in a marathon chasetested by Rival: short-priced runners of all ages beat their SP in marathon handicap chases
In 3m4f+ handicap chases, do the higher-weighted (better-class) runners of every age beat their price, so the young-stayer lift is partly a class effect?
answered0.60Older horses more than 7 lb above bottom weight scored 1.154 on 352 in the same races where older light-weights scored 0.48 on 124. The old saying 'weight stops trains' may make the market too wary of high weights over marathon trips. Columns: weight_lbs, bottom_weight_lbs, top_weight_lbs, weight_rank_high, last_official_rating, age, distance_yards, is_handicap.
Answer: No. Higher-weighted runners of all ages in 3m4f+ handicap chases scored A/E 0.98 on 1378 bets in the sealed vault (p 0.59). So the discovery lift of 1.21 on 338 was not a class effect that held up.
Thread: H175: young horse in a marathon chasetested by Rival: higher-weighted runners of all ages beat their price in marathon handicap chasesage-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the H126 lift caused by four-year-old physical maturation that the handicap mark hasn't caught up with, or just by lightly raced horses returning fresh at any age?
answered0.60O-7b05ae3b shows A/E 1.12 on 2958 bets, but the rule mixes age, light racing and a long break. If lightly raced five-year-olds returning after 150+ days score the same, the age story is wrong. A test reads age, prior_runs, days_since_last_run, race_type, is_handicap and month.
Answer: Not maturation. In the vault the four-year-old March-April rule scored 1.02 on 1548 and all spring returners 1.03 on 6934. Non-four-year-olds scored 1.048 on 965 at discovery. Age four adds nothing measurable once tested out of sample.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Lightly raced five-year-olds back from a break: is age the cause?tested by Fewest prior runs: the mark has the least informationtested by Lightly raced older handicappers back from a break: a powered age controltested by Lightly raced three-year-old spring returners: is the mispricing only for four-year-olds?seasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the 14/1-or-shorter lift among jumps fallers and unseaters carried by fallers (last_non_finish_code = 'F') rather than unseaters, given that capped BD/UR scored only 1.021?
answered0.60Pooled, fell or unseated at 14/1 or shorter is about 1.11 on 612 bets, against 1.021 on 312 for capped BD/UR. The gap points at fallers. If true, the thread's premise flips: the market over-penalises a visible fall. Columns: last_non_finish_code, last_fell_or_unseated, sp_decimal, race_type, jumping_errors_last3.
Answer: Not convincingly. Fallers at 14/1 or shorter scored 1.07 on 389 (CI 0.83 to 1.36, GB 1.00) against 1.021 for capped BD/UR. That gap is well inside the noise, so neither departure type clearly carries a short-price lift.
Thread: H98: brought down or unseatedtested by Jumps fallers at 14/1 or shorter beat their price: the market over-penalises a visible falllettersraised 16 Oct 2026
Do short-priced (3/1 or shorter) Flat handicap returners after 150+ days in spring beat their prices at any age and experience level, which would make the H126 short-band lift a general returner-confidence effect?
answered0.60Three separate rules in this thread were each carried by the up-to-3/1 band (H-5998bc20 1.97 on 28; H-1a3e129f; sp_rank<=3 at 1.175). If all ages and all experience levels show the same lift, then age four and light racing are not the mechanism. Columns: sp_decimal, sp_rank, days_since_last_run, age, prior_runs, is_handicap, month, race_type.
Answer: No. Short-priced returners at any age were carried only by the up-to-3/1 band (the rest scored 0.71), and the 3/1–7/1 any-age band scored 1.08 on 473 (p 0.26, IRE 0.88). That is not a general returner-confidence effect.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Rival: short-priced spring handicap returners pay at any age, so H126's short band is not about four-year-oldsseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the A/E 1.08 (and the sprint 1.51) carried by runners at 16/1 or longer, given BSP ROI +19% against SP ROI -14.5%?
answered0.60Other threads found lifts that lived only in the 16/1+ band. If the lift holds up to 14/1, the system is credible. Columns: sp_decimal, sp_rank, race_type, distance_yards.
Answer: For the sprint system, no: the lift holds at 14/1 or shorter (vault 1.64 on 141). The broad 1.08 rule was not price-capped here, so that part stays untested.
Thread: H181: proven over further at a stiff tracktested by Rival: the stiff-sprint system's lift is a 16/1+ longshot effecttrack-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Within the H126 base, is the lift confined to returners priced 14/1 or shorter, with 16/1+ returners at or below their prices in both countries and on both surfaces?
answered0.60Across separate cuts the long-priced returners blank: Irish 16/1+ 1 win from 63 (A/E 0.77) against up-to-14/1 2.28 on 49; all-weather 16/1+ 0 from 48; exposed 16/1+ 0 from 86. The H-625f1f2d kill was also driven by the up-to-14/1 band. A test reads sp_decimal and sp_rank within the H126 predicate (age, prior_runs, days_since_last_run, is_handicap, month), split by region and surface. If the effect is entirely a price-band effect, the lab should publish it with a price cap or drop it.
Answer: No. The 14/1 cap met the vault at only 1.11 on 1567, about the uncapped base level. Unfancied returners scored 1.11 on 450 (1.19 on 245 at 16/1+), so the lift is not confined to the shorter prices.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Fancied lightly raced four-year-old returners: the market flags which ones are readyseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the small-field wide-trip edge belong to last time's small field, or to today's race also being small (a property of today's market)?
answered0.60Last and today's field sizes are correlated, and A/E in small fields can carry its own market bias. If wide runners from a small field last time still score about 1.3 when today's field has 10 or more runners, the edge is in the last-run reading. If it falls to about 1.0, it is a property of today's small fields. A test would read last_field_size, field_size, sp_decimal.
Answer: Mostly last time's small field. Wide runners from a small field last time still scored 1.57 on 148 bets (p 0.017, control 0.92) when today's field had 10+ runners, and 4 of 4 attacks held. The sample is small (CI 1.04–2.29).
Thread: IQ140a: wide trip with figurestested by Small field last time, bigger field today: is the small-field wide edge a last-run reading or today's market?overlayraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the wide-trip edge bigger when last time's track had tight bends, where going wide costs the most ground?
answered0.60If the cause is extra ground covered, the cost grows with how tight and frequent the bends are, so the edge should scale with last_track_sharpness and fall on galloping or straight tracks. Columns: last_track_sharpness, last_track_character, last_raced_wide, last_beaten_lengths. If the edge is flat across track shapes, the cause is something else, such as a property of the horses tagged 'wide'.
Answer: Not as predicted. Wide runners from sharp tracks (sharpness 2 or more) scored A/E 1.18 on 612 bets, below the 1.30 to 1.45 predicted and below the parent's 1.27, so tight bends do not visibly enlarge the edge. A matched comparison with galloping tracks is still needed.
Thread: IQ140a: wide trip with figurestested by Wide trip at a sharp track last time costs more ground, so it pays moreoverlayraised 16 Oct 2026
Within undropped close-form jumps runners, is the lift carried by marks left exactly unchanged (an excuse accepted) or by marks raised (a win penalty landing late, a horse rated better)?
answered0.55'Undropped' joins two different stories. An unchanged mark means the handicapper excused the run. A raised mark usually means the earlier win's reassessment landed after the beating. Only the first fits the excuse mechanism. Columns: rating_change, last_official_rating, best_last3_beaten, last_beaten_lengths, days_since_win.
Answer: Exactly unchanged marks carry the lift: rating_change = 0 scores 1.444 on 392 against 0.762 on 114 for raised marks, so the late-win-penalty/improver rival is ruled out.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: the undropped lift is raised marks (late win penalties), not marks left unchangedstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the jumps recent-winner rebound handicap-only because the handicapper drops the mark after a heavy beating, so the lift comes from mark relief rather than from the market overreacting to form figures?
answered0.55The non-handicap replicate came out the wrong way: 0.88 on 211, with IRE at 0.62 and GB at 1.15. In non-handicaps no mark is dropped, so a mark-relief mechanism would explain the gap. A test would split the handicap winner rule by rating_change (<0 against >=0), using official_rating and last_official_rating, both available from Nov 2025. If the lift is the same whether or not the mark fell, market overreaction stays the explanation.
Answer: No: mark relief does not carry it. Dropped winners scored 1.249 on 380, against 1.412 on 269 for those whose mark was held or raised. The handicap-only pattern needs another explanation, such as the handicapper's no-drop working as an excuse signal.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: the jumps winner rebound is mark relief, strongest when the handicapper has dropped the horsestoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Among jumps handicappers beaten 20+ lengths, do recent winners (best_last3_beaten = 0) beat their price more than horses with a close placed finish, and why does this reverse the parent niche?
answered0.55Excluding recent winners cut H-332b49e9 from 1.232 to 1.152 and GB to 1.031. That implies about 1.34 on 669 for winners, the reverse of the never-involved niche (2.00 without winners). A test would read best_last3_beaten, days_since_win, rating_change and last_race_class.
Answer: Yes on the first part. Recent winners beaten 20+ lengths score 1.34 on 669 (GB 1.33, IRE 1.36), above the roughly 1.15 for non-winning close finishers. Why it reverses the never-involved niche is still open, and 2.01 on 222 at 16/1 or bigger from 12 wins means part of it may be longshot noise.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Sharpen: recent winners beaten 20+ lengths next time over jumpsstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Among GB jumps handicappers beaten 20+ lengths, does dropping in class beat staying at the same class, or is the 1.155 just the GB heavy-beating base rate?
answered0.55H-6f7a705a scored 1.155 on 1271 but has no internal control for class. Compare race_class > last_race_class against race_class = last_race_class within region = 'GB', is_handicap = 1, last_beaten_lengths >= 20, reading A/E by sp_decimal band. If the two are equal, class relief is not the mechanism.
Answer: Dropping in class adds little. The drop scored 1.155 on 1271 against 1.071 on 2834 for no drop, with overlapping CIs. Class droppers whose mark had not been cut scored 0.668, so the 1.155 is mostly the GB heavy-beating base rate plus mark relief.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: the GB heavy-beating lift needs no class dropstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the 'unearned discount for a blank figure' extend to other chase non-finishes (F, PU) that drift from their last SP, or is it unique to UR?
answered0.55If the market marks down any letter in the form figures, fallers and pulled-up chasers that drift should also beat their price. A PU says more about the horse, so it should show less. This separates 'market overreacts to a blank figure' from 'UR is specifically uninformative'. Columns: last_non_finish_code, last_pulled_up, last_fell_or_unseated, sp_decimal, last_sp_decimal, race_type.
Answer: No, the drift lift does not extend to other chase non-finishes. Drifting fallers scored 1.058 on 130, below fallers that shortened (1.159), and drifting pulled-up chasers scored 0.963 on 363 against a control of 1.012. The drift effect is specific to unseaters.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Test-mechanism: chase fallers that drift from their last SP also beat their pricetested by Rival: the drift lift is any chase non-finish, including pulled-up horsestrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the big-field heavy-beating lift a step down in competition (a smaller, weaker race today) rather than beaten lengths overstated by the size of the field?
answered0.55The big-field rule (O-93b1b6e2) is IRE-heavy and lives under 16/1, which suggests festival-type handicaps. If the lift sits where today's field_size is much smaller than last_field_size, or where race_class is a drop from last_race_class (GB only; IRE race_class only from 2026-07), it is a competition effect. If it is flat across today's field size, the misleading-margin story stands. Columns: field_size, last_field_size, last_race_class, race_class, region.
Answer: No. The smaller-field-today cut scored 1.15 on 526, below the parent's 1.187, and was killed for resting on the up-to-7/1 band alone (rest 0.88). A step down in field size does not carry the big-field lift.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: the big-field lift is a drop into a smaller race today, not a misleading marginstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Within jumps handicappers beaten 20+ lengths last time, does the lift sit with horses whose official rating fell since that run, compared with horses whose mark held or rose?
answered0.55The broad rule (O-58c96d7b) is frozen. The mark-drop debutant cut (O-6a459966) scored 1.33, but only on 164 bets, and it was GB-only like its killed parent (O-b03feb4f), so it never tested the mark directly. A test would split the broad set on official_rating vs last_official_rating (both available from Nov 2025). If the lift is no higher where the mark fell, the lenient-mark story dies and a form-misread story is left.
Answer: No. Heavily beaten jumps handicappers with a cut mark scored 1.069 on 4709, against 1.075 on 1241 for a held or raised mark. Under 16/1 the cut group was only 1.038, so the mark cut does not carry the lift.
In all three chase-debutant cuts, GB scored 1.27 to 1.86 and IRE 0.73 to 0.91. Is the split explained by handicap status or novice status, rather than by the country?
answered0.55The split now repeats across three overlapping cuts, so it is a pattern and not a single scan segment. If debutants in handicaps are above par in both countries, the mechanism is a lenient mark after bad hurdle form, and the country is a side effect of GB running more novice handicap chases. If Ireland stays below 1 within handicaps, the market itself differs by country. A descriptive split would read region, is_handicap, is_novice, last_beaten_lengths, chase_runs, last_race_type and sp_decimal bands. race_class is not usable for Ireland before 2026-07.
Answer: Handicap status does not explain the split. Within handicaps GB scored 1.38 on 182 and IRE 0.37 on 43, and non-handicap debutants (mostly IRE) scored 1.22 on 110, level with the handicap group. Country and handicap status are nearly collinear in this population. Novice status is still untested (see Q-33ece0c3).
Is the fell-when-going-well chase edge GB-led, as the chase-error edge is?
answered0.55In the chase-error thread, IRE non-finishers scored 0.43 against GB 1.59. If the live system's edge is only in GB, it should be restricted to GB. Columns: region, race_type, last_fell_going_well.
Answer: Yes, as far as the thin samples go. IRE scored 0.92 on 53 in the replicate and 0.78 on 47 in the sharpen cut, against GB 1.46 on 92, the same GB lead as the chase-error thread.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Replicate: fell-going-well chase edge in IREtrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the code-switch lift specific to pull-ups that were held up, or does any last-time pull-up (including prominent or front-running ones) that switches code beat its price?
answered0.55Fallers and unseaters who switch code score 0.75, so the switch alone is not the cause. If prominent pull-ups that switch also score around 1.3, the cause is the pull-up plus the switch rather than being held up. If they score at or below par, the 'looked after, form hidden' mechanism stands. Columns: last_pulled_up, last_run_style, last_race_type, race_type, sp_decimal.
Answer: The lift is specific to held-up pull-ups. Prominent or front-running pull-ups that switch code scored A/E 0.87 on 161 bets, against a same-race control of 1.01, while held-up switchers scored 1.36 on 304.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: any pull-up switching code beats its price, held-up or notstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does a single jumping error two or three runs back, followed by a clean heavy defeat last time, carry the same chase lift as an error last time?
answered0.55When last_jumping_error = 1 was dropped from the same-field drift rule, the pool still scored 1.335 on 321 (GREEN). If the error need not be last time, the mechanism 'the error cost the last run' is wrong, and the trait is broader. Columns: jumping_errors_last3, last_jumping_error, last_beaten_lengths, remarked_last3.
Answer: No. A single error two or three runs back, with a clean but heavy defeat last time (H-98bdc7e0), scored 1.019 against a same-race control of 1.005. The error has to come last time.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Rival: chase lift comes from any one-off jumping blip in the last three runs, not an error that cost the last runstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the held-up PU lift (and its long-gap concentration) really a change of ground between a winter pull-up and a spring or summer return, rather than the horse being freshened?
answered0.55The long-gap cut passed discovery but broke under attack. The lone-PU lift is entirely after April 2026, and the parent's periods were 1.07 then 1.41. A horse pulled up on soft winter ground that returns after a break on better ground would explain all three facts at once. Columns: last_going_group, going_group, days_since_last_run, last_pulled_up, last_run_style.
Answer: Neither cleanly. The winter-mud-to-better-ground story fails (1.05 on 377), and the freshening (long-gap) cut broke under attack, so neither ground nor freshening alone explains the held-up pull-up lift.
Does the one-off chase-error lift sit in the 8/1 to 14/1 band today, whatever the drift, so that drift only helps by moving runners into that band?
answered0.55The 'up to 14/1' band scores high in every disjoint split: drifted 1.66 on 94, shortened 1.45 on 77, fancied last time 1.49 on 54, unfancied 1.60 on 117. The 16/1+ and 3/1-or-shorter bands sit near par. If the band alone explains the lift, the drift mechanism is redundant. Columns: sp_decimal, last_sp_decimal, race_type, remarked_last3, jumping_errors_last3, last_jumping_error, last_position, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: Mostly yes. In the 8/1 to 14/1 band drifted runners scored 1.39 on 85 and shortened or steady runners 1.53 on 74, so drift does not carry the edge. The fall-off at 16/1+ (0.775 on 150) does the separating, more than any narrow band. The band's own A/E of 1.46 on 159 is still a niche at p 0.09.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Rival: chase-error lift is an 8/1 to 14/1 price-band effect, not a drift effectstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Do pulled-up horses that led or raced prominently (and so likely stopped) fail to show the lift, confirming that run style is doing the work?
answered0.55This is a negative control for the H36 mechanism. A PU after making the running usually means the horse stopped while trying. If those runners also score about 1.19, then the lift is a general PU discount and not 'held up and looked after'. Columns: last_pulled_up, last_run_style, sp_decimal.
Answer: Mostly yes. Led/prominent pulled-up horses showed no lift (A/E 0.916 on 727, control 1.01) against 1.198 for held-up ones, so run style is doing the work, though the negative side is not significant (CI 0.67 to 1.22).
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: pulled up after leading or racing prominently shows the same liftstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
How much of the drift is mechanical (a bigger field, or a step up in class) and not a market judgement on the bad run?
answered0.55A larger field or a class rise lengthens prices by itself. If the 1.50 lift sits only where field_size > last_field_size or race_class < last_race_class, the 'market marked it down' reading is wrong. Columns: field_size, last_field_size, race_class, last_race_class (GB only), sp_decimal, last_sp_decimal.
Answer: Very little. Error drifters scored 1.46 on 132 when the field did not grow and 1.55 on 131 when it grew. GB runners with no class rise scored 1.54 on 67, so field size and class rises do not explain the lift.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Rival: chase-error drift is mechanical (a bigger field), not a market markdownstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Within the one-off chase-error pool, do runners that finished well beaten (last_position not null, last_beaten_lengths > 10) beat their price more than those that fell, unseated or were pulled up?
answered0.55A fall or unseat is an excuse everyone can see on the form line. A finished run beaten 20+ lengths after a blunder reads as lost ability, and that is the run the figures should disagree with. If non-finishers carry the lift, the 'hidden by the result' story is wrong. Columns: last_position, last_beaten_lengths, last_fell_or_unseated, last_pulled_up, last_jumping_error.
Answer: No. Finishers beaten 10+ lengths scored 1.18 on 389, below the non-finishers' 1.35 on 147 (GB 1.58). Runners beaten 20+ lengths scored 1.02, so the finished-and-well-beaten story fails.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Test-mechanism: one-off chase error where the horse finished well beaten, not fell/URstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the class 'no-drop' lift really a GB-only effect, because race_class is missing for IRE before July 2026 and the class condition removes Irish runners?
answered0.55H-c2928b4e's by_country shows only GB. Earlier, the hurdle replicate failed on IRE (0.94) while GB scored 1.16. Compare the full one-off chase pool split by region against the GB no-drop pool. Columns: region, race_class, last_race_class, last_jumping_error, remarked_last3, jumping_errors_last3, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: Partly. The class condition does drop every IRE runner because IRE race_class is missing, but the full IRE one-off chase pool scores 1.19 on 189, close to GB's 1.24 on 347. The base effect is not GB-only. Whether the no-drop lift holds in IRE cannot be tested until IRE class data builds up.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Rival: GB no-drop chase lift is a GB-region effect, not class choicetested by Replicate: one-off chase error, well beaten, in Irish chasesstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Do handicap runners at 9/1+ that did not win last time but are back within 14 days also fall short, so that the quick-return deficit is about the quick return rather than the winner tag?
answered0.55The quick-return cut deepened the winner deficit from 0.88 to 0.65. Quick-returning winners at all prices are at par, and non-winners at 9/1–14/1 at any gap are at 1.03. If quick-returning non-winners at long prices also sit near 0.8, the mechanism is about recovery or placement, not the tag. Columns: last_position, days_since_last_run, is_handicap, sp_decimal.
Answer: No. Quick-returning handicap non-winners at 9/1+ scored 0.989 on 7,481 against a same-race control of 1.0, so the 0.65 deficit belongs to the winner tag combined with the quick return, not to the quick return alone.
Thread: Raised handicap winners sent off at 9/1+ are over-bet, at any gap since the wintested by Rival: quick-returning handicap non-winners at 9/1+ are over-bet too (quick-return effect, not winner tag)negativeraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the quick-return lift about the easy win at all once a handicap winner has been raised, or do all raised handicap winners turned out within 14 days beat their price?
answered0.55The broad rival (0.999 on 2,015) mixed non-handicaps and unraised horses. If raised non-easy handicap winners also beat their price, the cause is a form peak plus an over-penalised-looking 'up x lb' price, not the easy-win label. Columns: last_won_easily, rating_change, is_handicap, last_is_handicap, days_since_last_run.
Answer: The lift needs the easy win. Raised handicap winners that did not win easily, back within 14 days, scored 1.034 on 1,050 (p 0.32), and that fell from 1.10 to 0.98 across the periods. Easy winners in the same frame scored 1.334.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Rival: any raised handicap winner turned out within 14 days beats its pricestoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the GB/Ireland gap in big-handicap short-end runners a country effect, or a big-yard effect? Irish big handicaps are dominated by a few huge yards whose runners may be over-bet on reputation.
answered0.55Ireland has been at par in every split (0.99, 0.95), GB well above. If the Irish par comes from mega-yard runners at the front of the market, then excluding big yards should bring Ireland up to GB's level and the rule would carry over. If Ireland stays at par without them, it is a market-structure difference between the countries. Columns: trainer_runs, trainer_id, course, sp_rank, sp_decimal, field_size, is_handicap.
Answer: Not a big-yard effect. With big yards removed (trainer_runs < 1500), Ireland stays at par or below (0.88 on 328) while GB holds at 1.37 on 140, so the gap is a country/market effect.
Is the lift really hold-up/closing run style, rather than trouble? Horses that made headway late and were beaten narrowly without trouble would test this.
answered0.55Trouble is met mostly by horses held up and making late headway, and that style may be under-rated on its own. The no-trouble rival covered all narrow losers, not closers in particular. Columns: last_made_headway, last_run_style, last_strong_finish, last_momentum_interrupted, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: Not run style: late-headway closers beaten 2 lengths or less without trouble scored 0.969 on 5,540 (CI 0.91 to 1.03), so the lift needs the interruption flag.
Thread: H19: momentum interrupted beaten narrowlytested by Rival: closers that made late headway and were beaten narrowly without troublestoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Do young (7 or under), lightly raced (6 or fewer chase runs) handicap chasers at 3m to 3m3f lose to their price, so the same profile flips sign at the 3m4f line?
answered0.55H-aa66431f scored 1.24 on 75 at 3m4f+ but only 0.899 on 266 at 3m1f+, which leaves roughly 190 bets at 3m1f to 3m3f well below par. Young chasers at 3m to 3m3f were already graded NEGATIVE (0.923 on 971). If the sign flips at 3m4f, the cause is how the market treats youth at extreme trips, not a smooth jumping-and-stamina gradient. Columns: distance_yards, age, prior_chase_runs (chase_runs), is_handicap, race_type, sp_decimal.
Answer: Not convincingly. Young chasers with 6 or fewer chase runs at 3m to 3m3f scored 0.93 on 743 bets (CI 0.76 to 1.13, p 0.78) against a same-race control of 1.06, so the sign leans negative but is not distinguishable from par, and 0 wins from 107 bets at 16/1+ carry much of it.
Thread: H175: young horse in a marathon chasetested by Young lightly raced chasers at 3m to 3m3f are over-bet: the youth signal flips sign below marathon tripsage-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Do young (7 or under) marathon handicap chasers near the bottom of the weights still beat their price, which would separate youth from weight position?
answered0.55This decides between youth and class as the driver. If young light-weights hold at 1.1 or more, the cause is youth. If they fall to around 1.0 or below, the system's lift comes from young horses higher in the weights. Columns: age, weight_lbs, bottom_weight_lbs, weight_rank_low, distance_yards, is_handicap.
Answer: Tested as H-0464cf15. Young light-weights scored 0.80 on 37 bets against a control of 1.07, so they do not beat their price. The lean says the young lift sits higher in the weights, but 37 bets is far too thin to call it settled.
Thread: H175: young horse in a marathon chasetested by Young marathon chasers near the bottom of the weights: youth versus weight positionage-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Once weight position is held fixed, does youth add anything in marathon handicap chases?
answered0.55Older higher-weighted runners scored 1.154 on 352, close to the young system's 1.18. If young and older horses above bottom weight score the same, the live system is a weight effect under another name. A test would read age, weight_lbs, bottom_weight_lbs and distance_yards.
Answer: Weight position cannot be what drives the young-stayer system, because the weight split itself failed the vault (0.98 on 1378). So the young-stayer system is not a weight effect under another name. Youth stays the live explanation.
Thread: H175: young horse in a marathon chasetested by Older higher-weighted marathon chasers match the young: weight position, not youth, carries the systemage-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Is it the turf-to-AW switch that is mispriced at any layoff, or does it need a 150+ day absence?
answered0.55This separates two causes. One is a market that discounts old turf form on the AW. The other is a market that discounts rust, and the AW is just where ready horses return. A short-gap switch control decides it. Columns: surface, last_surface, days_since_last_run, prior_surface_runs.
Answer: Both the switch and the layoff matter, and the switch is necessary. Short-gap switchers are not fairly priced (1.07 on 4045), long-gap switchers score higher (1.23 on 654), and long-gap AW-to-AW returners score about 1.0 (1.015 on 559).
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Rival: turf-to-AW switchers after a short gap carry the same lift, so the layoff is irrelevantseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the young-stayer lift at 3m4f+ a weight effect, with young, lower-rated horses carrying light weights over trips where every pound counts more?
answered0.55The two rivals tested so far (big fields, older horses over-bet) have not explained the lift. Young marathon chasers tend to be lower-rated, so they sit near the bottom of the weights. A test would compare light-weighted older runners in the same races, reading weight_lbs, bottom_weight_lbs, weight_rank_low, age, distance_yards and is_handicap. If light weight is the cause, the system is mislabelled and older horses near the bottom of the weights should carry the same lift.
Answer: No. Older horses within 7 lb of bottom weight at 3m4f+ scored A/E 0.48 on 124, far below the heavier older control (1.154 on 352), so light weight does not carry the young-stayer lift.
Does the 'going well' flag add information beyond a fall or unseat, i.e. do jumps runners that fell or unseated while not going well score clearly below the going-well group at 14/1 or shorter?
answered0.55H-9f384f7c scores 1.099 against a control of 0.983 and the capped plain BD/UR rule's 1.021. If the not-going-well complement also scores about 1.0 to 1.05, the flag carries no information and the thread can stop slicing. Reads last_fell_or_unseated, last_fell_going_well, race_type and sp_decimal.
Answer: No. Not-going-well departures at 14/1 or shorter scored 1.126 on 367 bets, above the going-well group's 1.099 on 245, so the going-well flag adds no information.
Thread: H98: brought down or unseatedtested by Contrast: fell or unseated while NOT going well, at 14/1 or shorter, only matches its pricelettersraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the 16/1+ lift specific to brought-down/unseated runners, or does any jumps non-finisher (PU, F) at 16/1+ beat its price because the non-finish blanks its visible form?
answered0.55Both BD/UR rules made their money from 6 or so big-priced winners. If PU and F longshots show the same lift, the cause is a general longshot or blank-form effect, not 'had no race'. The test reads last_non_finish_code, sp_decimal and race_type.
Answer: Settled: PU and F jumps non-finishers at 16/1+ score 0.981 on 1854 bets (H-8841a2b0, killed), so the BD/UR longshot lift is not a general blank-form effect shared by every non-finisher.
Thread: H98: brought down or unseatedtested by Rival: the BD/UR longshot lift is a general blank-form effect shared by PU and F longshots over jumpslettersraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the won-last-time returner effect (1.27 on 371 at age four) also appear in lightly raced three-year-old spring returners, whose overall group scored only 1.03 on 640?
answered0.55If a returner coming off a win is underrated whatever its age, the published system's mechanism is the market discounting a winner's mark rise after a long break, not four-year-old maturity. Columns: age, last_position, prior_runs, days_since_last_run, month, is_handicap, last_official_rating.
Answer: Mostly no. Lightly raced three-year-old spring returners that won last time scored 1.05 on 110 (periods 1.27 then 0.52, RED), so the pooled 1.27 rested on the age-four part (1.51 on 75) and the up-to-3/1 band.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Lightly raced spring handicap returners that won last time, at age three or fourseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the four-year-old returner lift concentrated in March and April, fading by May when late returners are more likely to be horses that had setbacks and the market has seen how the crop came out of the winter?
answered0.55Every cut decays from period 1 (to 27 April) to period 2. The capped rule went 1.36 to 1.02; at 180+ days off, 1.46 to 0.97; top three in the betting, 1.22 to 1.12. A test reads month, days_since_last_run, age, prior_runs and is_handicap. If March and April carry it, the published rule should narrow. If May matches, the decay is noise from one spring.
Answer: No concentration is shown: March–April scored only 1.02 on 1548 in the sealed vault, against 1.29 on 322 at discovery, and May scored 1.06 on 197. The early-spring lift did not replicate.
Do four-year-old returners whose first run back falls in May score at or below their prices, as a setback-selection reading of the early-spring concentration predicts?
answered0.55O-ed858a4b puts March–April at 1.29 on 322, while the full March–May H126 base sits near 1.13. That implies May is weak, but May has not been measured as its own population. If May returners score below 1.0, the edge is an early-calendar effect and H126 should be restricted. If May scores near 1.13, the March–April figure is just noise. A test reads month, days_since_last_run, age, prior_runs, is_handicap and sp_decimal.
Answer: No: May four-year-old returners scored 1.06 on 197 (CI 0.66–1.60; GB 0.95 on 159), so May is not shown to be below its prices, and the setback-selection reading is unsupported.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by May four-year-old returners: the late end of the window carries no edgeseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the stiff-sprint edge need a past win over further, or does any recent run over further (last_distance_yards) carry the same signal?
answered0.55If stamina is the cause, a horse that last ran over further, not only one that won over further, should benefit too. That would give a larger and more natural base. If only last-win horses pay, the edge may be a class or form proxy instead. Columns: last_distance_yards, last_win_distance_yards, last_beaten_lengths, track_stiff_finish, distance_yards, sp_decimal.
Answer: A past win is not needed. Runners whose last run was over 330+ yards further, with no win at that trip, scored 1.65 on 69 at 14/1 or shorter (control 0.90). That matches or beats the last-win version, though no cut is yet significant.
Thread: H181: proven over further at a stiff tracktested by Generalise: last run over further (not just last win) pays in stiff Flat sprints at 14/1 or shortertrack-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the edge shrink as today's trip gets longer, as the hill-adds-stamina mechanism predicts?
answered0.55A climb adds proportionally more stamina demand to a sprint than to a mile or more, so A/E should fall with distance. Columns: distance_yards, race_type, track_stiff_finish, track_straight_furlongs.
Answer: Thinly, yes. At 7f to a mile the edge is gone (0.90 on 109, below the same-race control of 1.015), against 1.51 in sprints. That fits an edge confined to sprints, though the sample is too small to show a smooth fall with distance.
Thread: H181: proven over further at a stiff tracktested by Dose-response: the stiff-track edge is weaker at seven furlongs to a mile than in sprintstrack-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the after-April lift in the trip-drop rule a Flat-turf effect rather than instability over time?
answered0.55The non-stiff lift (1.14 after 2026-04-27 against 0.98 before) coincides with the Flat turf season. Splitting by race_type and going_group (turf against all-weather) would show whether this is a code effect. Columns: race_type, going_group, region, track_stiff_finish, last_win_yards, distance_yards.
Answer: Only weakly: Flat turf trip-droppers scored 1.13 in discovery but 1.05 in the vault (p 0.07, short of the 0.003 bar), so a turf-season effect adds little beyond the general trip-drop drift.
Thread: H181: proven over further at a stiff tracktested by Rival: the trip-drop lift is a Flat turf summer effecttrack-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the four-year-old spring returner edge a British phenomenon: do Irish runners in the H126 base score at or below their prices while British runners carry the whole lift?
answered0.55Ireland is weak in every cut that reports a country split: non-handicaps 0.86 on 75 against GB 1.21 on 107 (O-b0af52cb), exposed returners 0 from 21 (O-2b083477), and earlier the unraised-mark and all-weather cuts. If Ireland scores 1.0 or less on the full base, the live system and the shadow candidates should be restricted to GB. A test reads region, trainer, sp_decimal, days_since_last_run, prior_runs and age.
Answer: No: Irish runners in the H126 handicap base scored A/E 1.35 on 135 bets (p 0.21 against the over-bet prediction). Irish weakness is confined to the non-handicap, unraised-mark and exposed cuts, not the core effect.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Irish lightly raced four-year-old returners in spring handicaps are fully pricedseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the H126 lift and its second-run follow-up a late-spring turf effect, weak or absent on the all-weather in March and early April?
answered0.55The second-run rule scored 0.61 before 27 April 2026 and 1.16 after. With only one spring of data, the period split is also a surface and calendar split. If the edge is turf-only, the published system should be restricted. A test reads surface, month, days_since_last_run, prior_runs and age.
Answer: No. The all-weather version met the vault at A/E 1.10 on 698 bets, the same as turf at 1.10 on 1741, so the lift is not a late-spring turf effect and the published system need not be restricted to turf.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Lightly raced four-year-olds back from the winter on turf onlytested by Lightly raced four-year-old returners on the all-weather: is the edge really turf-only?seasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Within the full parent rule (tilt exclusion and figures kept), does the wide-trip A/E differ between sharp and galloping last-time tracks, and between low and high draws today?
answered0.55Both children dropped the parent's exclusion clause, so comparing them with 1.27 mixes two changes. A like-for-like split is the only fair test of the ground-on-bends mechanism. Columns: last_track_sharpness, last_track_character, draw, field_size, last_race_tilt, last_run_style, l_top_speed_pct.
Answer: Track half: like-for-like, sharp tracks score 1.21 on 571 against 1.27 for the whole base, so the rest score about 1.33. Sharp tracks do not carry more edge, but the draw half is still unmeasured.
Thread: IQ140a: wide trip with figurestested by Wide trip at a galloping track last time should pay less if lost ground on bends is the causetested by Like-for-like: ground-on-bends test inside the full parent base (sharp last-time tracks)overlayraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the wide-trip edge present on all-weather racing today, or only on turf?
answered0.55Three subsets carry their effect after 2026-04-27: galloping 1.35 vs 0.99, low draw 1.2 vs 1.0, and the parent's halves 1.15 vs 1.41. A split by today's surface separates the surface explanation from the calendar one. This decides whether the live system should stand down through the winter all-weather months. Columns: surface, last_surface, race_type, last_raced_wide.
Answer: Yes, on both surfaces. On the same base, A/E was 1.23 on 462 bets on all-weather today and 1.25 on 554 on turf, against 1.00 on 8669 for close-up all-weather losers that were not wide.
Thread: IQ140a: wide trip with figurestested by Wide trip last time on all-weather today still pays
If the horses are really improving, does the edge carry on to their second run after the winter break?
answered0.55Maturation that the mark hasn't caught up with should still be there on the next start, and the first-run result may have been missed by the market. Freshness or yard readiness would fade by then. A test reads last_days_since_last_run, days_since_last_run, age, prior_runs and last_position.
Answer: Only weakly. The second run after the break scored A/E 1.06 on 459 bets (p 0.35), and it all came from the late-season period (0.61 before, 1.16 after). That is not the persistent lift that maturation would predict.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Second run after the winter break for lightly raced four-year-oldsseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Are short-priced horses having their first run for a new trainer after a heavy beating over-bet whatever the new yard's record, i.e. does the market price the move itself rather than the yard?
answered0.50Both short-priced negative rules in the family (0.81 on 84 at strong yards, 0.87 on 195 at poor yards) point down with controls near 1.05. If the overreaction belongs to the move, dropping the tx_new_yard_* filters should keep A/E near 0.85 on a sample large enough to judge. A test would read trainer_id, last_trainer_id, last_position, last_field_size and sp_decimal, with tx_new_yard_wins/tx_new_yard_exp as a split.
Answer: No. With the yard filters dropped, the rule scored 0.81 on 400 in discovery and survived 5 of 5 attacks, but the vault scored 1.02 on 1793 (p 0.65). The market does not over-bet short-priced runners on a visible move after a heavy beating.
Pooled across all planned moves (chase debut, handicap debut, new yard, fresh), are short-priced runners from yards with a long, poor record at that move over-bet?
answered0.50Single-move negatives point down (0.874 on 195, control 1.05; 0.81 on 84, control 1.04) but each is too small. Pooling the moves where the positive carry-forward holds would test the mirror image at a sample that can settle it. Columns: tx_chase_debut_*, tx_hcap_debut_*, tx_new_yard_*, tx_fresh_* (runs/wins/exp), sp_decimal, country.
Answer: No. Pooled across all planned moves, short-priced runners from yards with a poor record at the move are not over-bet out of sample: A/E 1.02 on 1804 vault bets (p 0.66), so the 0.80 on 413 in discovery did not hold.
Thread: Negative: short-priced planned moves from yards proven poor at that movetested by Generalise: short-priced planned moves from yards proven poor at that move, all four moves pooledyard-planned-moveraised 17 Oct 2026
Does an unchanged mark after a 20+ length beating mark a rebound in close-form jumps handicappers generally, beyond recent winners?
answered0.50If the no-drop signal is real, it should lift the wider close-form rebound (best_last3_beaten <= 6, 1.232 on 1600) and not only winners. Columns: rating_change, best_last3_beaten, last_beaten_lengths, is_handicap, race_type.
Answer: Yes. An unchanged mark after a 20+ length beating lifts close-form jumps handicappers generally: 1.31 on 506 (p 0.026, control 0.98), positive in both GB (1.22) and IRE (1.55).
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Generalise: an unchanged mark after a heavy beating lifts close-form jumps handicappersstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the heavy-beating rebound need a visible excuse (ground or trip change) when there is no recent close finish?
answered0.50The close-form rebound with ground and trip unchanged was killed as single-band driven (0.94 outside up to 14/1), while the ground/trip-change rule holds at 1.26 on 917. Testing the excuse without close form separates the two causes. Columns: going_group, last_going_group, distance_yards, last_distance_yards, best_last3_beaten.
Answer: No. Without a recent close finish, a ground or trip change carries almost nothing: 1.05 on 4162 (p 0.21), with IRE at 0.937, and it was killed. The rebound needs recent close form.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: a ground or trip excuse alone, without recent close form, carries the heavy-beating rebound
Is the broad wide-trip lift a longshot artefact? Does it hold at 14/1 or shorter?
answered0.50The 16/1+ band scores 1.945 on 204 bets but from only 11 wins, so a few results could carry the headline. If prices of 14/1 or shorter score near 1.0, the broad rule is a longshot effect and not a trip effect. Columns: sp_decimal, sp_rank, last_raced_wide, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: No. The broad wide-trip lift holds at 14/1 or shorter: 1.178 on 915 bets (p 0.015, CI 1.016 to 1.357, control 0.96), 5/5 attacks survived. It is not a longshot artefact, though this cut still includes the parent system's runners.
Thread: H20: wide early and got back into ittested by Rival: the broad wide-trip lift is a longshot artefact; test it at 14/1 or shorterstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the winner effect strongest when the heavy beating was the first run after the win: a bounce or a mark-hike run that the market reads as the horse being found out?
answered0.50If the beating came straight after a win, the likely causes are a fresh mark rise, a bounce or a step up in grade, and those cluster in one run. A winner beaten 20+ lengths two runs after the win has more evidence of decline. Columns: days_since_win, days_since_last_run, last_days_since_last_run, last_official_rating, best_last3_beaten.
Answer: No: requiring the heavy beating to be the first run after the win lowers A/E to 1.25 on 502 (p 0.049) from the parent's 1.34 on 669, so the effect is not concentrated in the bounce run.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Sharpen: winners beaten 20+ lengths on their first run after winningstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Do Flat handicappers beaten 20+ lengths in a 14+ field and marked 'never involved' beat their price? The removed-race_type neighbour implies about 1.22 on roughly 539 non-jumps bets.
answered0.50The jumps-only conclusion rests on H-7358e6fb, which had no comment flag and used 8+ lengths. Dropping race_type from H-f956317c gave 1.296 on 1754 bets against 1.324 on 1215 for jumps, which implies about 1.22 on the rest. If the Flat version holds, the mechanism is 'not ridden out once beaten', not jumps fatigue, and the lab's scope widens. A test reads race_type, last_race_type, is_handicap, last_beaten_lengths, last_field_size, last_never_involved and sp_decimal.
Answer: Partly. Flat handicappers beaten 20+ lengths in a 14+ field and marked never involved score 1.31 on 463 (niche, p 0.09), against 1.019 unflagged. But 16/1 or bigger carries all of it (2.13 on 303, 11 wins), below 16/1 is 1.062 on 160, and the 11+ field neighbour is 0.932.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Replicate: Flat handicappers heavily beaten and never involved in a big field last timestory
Is the unseater lift carried by horses the market rated last time (short last_sp_decimal), so the edge is an unearned discount on proven market regard rather than the drift itself?
answered0.50The drift split works for UR (2.10) but not F (1.06) or PU (0.96), and earlier work found no dose-response in drift size. A cleaner reading is that a UR removes no ability information, so a horse well fancied last time keeps its ability but loses its price. A test would read last_sp_decimal, last_non_finish_code, race_type, sp_decimal and sp_rank. If fancied unseaters carry the lift whether or not they drift, the mechanism is about prior regard, and the post-hoc drift cut is not needed.
Answer: No. Unseaters well fancied last time (last SP 7.0 or shorter) scored 1.50 on 76 (CI 0.89 to 2.37). That cannot be told apart from the pool's 1.40 and is below the drifters' 2.10, so prior market regard does not explain more than the drift.
Is last_eased sparsely recorded in jumps results, so that easing tests return tiny samples? Would last_never_involved or last_one_paced be usable proxies for a horse not ridden out once beaten?
answered0.50H-52702d58 found only 18 big-field jumps handicap bets with an eased flag, out of more than 2000 parent bets. That points to a coverage gap, not a rare event. A scan should count non-null and positive values of last_eased, last_never_involved and last_one_paced within last_beaten_lengths >= 20 AND last_field_size >= 14, by region and month.
Answer: Yes. In the big-field heavy-beating set, last_never_involved splits 1215 flagged against 863 unflagged, about the whole 2097-bet parent. It is well populated and usable where last_eased (18 bets) was not.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held upstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the information-gap cut keep winning at short prices while the festival system wins only at long prices, as the two price-band splits suggest?
answered0.50The sharpen had 6 winners from 20 up to 14/1 and 0 from 18 at 16/1 or bigger. The festival-course slice under 10/1 scored 0.83 on 32. Split both rules by `sp_decimal` bands and `sp_rank` on a widened window. A short-price lift backs a mechanism; a long-price lift backs variance.
Answer: No. The short-price profile of the information-gap cut (1.89 up to 14/1 on 24 bets in the generalise) did not survive: the full vault sample scored 0.99 on 340, so the cut does not keep winning at short prices.
Thread: H228: dual purpose horse in an irish summer flat handicapseason-irelandraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the published system's column `prior_hurdle_runs` exist and match `hurdle_runs`, given the system shows 'not measured'?
answered0.50The parent rule used `hurdle_runs`; the system rule uses `prior_hurdle_runs`. If that column is missing or differently defined, the live system selects nothing or something else. Check in `query_catalog`.
Answer: Yes. `prior_hurdle_runs` is in the catalogue as a pre-off column ('record before today: hurdle runs'), available from 2020-08 like `hurdle_runs`, and rules using it returned 107 and 32 bets. 'Not measured' reflects the system's 2026-10-13 go-live date, not a missing column.
Thread: H228: dual purpose horse in an irish summer flat handicapseason-irelandraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the unseat bounce-back strongest when the race comment records no jumping error, so the unseat looks like rider error rather than a blunder by the horse?
answered0.50If the market over-punishes the UR letter, the mispricing should be largest where the horse did nothing wrong. Columns: last_non_finish_code, last_jumping_error, jumping_errors_last3, race_type.
Answer: No. Unseaters with no jumping error recorded scored 1.41 on 110, the same as all chase unseaters at 1.40 on 213, so a clean-jumping comment adds no lift.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Sharpen: chase unseaters with no jumping error recorded last timetrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the hurdle-to-chase lift about the pull-up hiding a horse's ability, or does any heavily beaten last hurdle run before a first chase beat its price, pulled up or not?
answered0.50H-fbabeb50 scored 1.50 on 76 against a same-race control of 0.96. Chasing debutants are often under-rated after poor hurdle form whatever the reason for it. If debutants beaten 20 lengths or more over hurdles also score around 1.3, the pull-up is not the essential ingredient. Columns: last_race_type, race_type, chase_runs, last_beaten_lengths, last_pulled_up, last_run_style.
Answer: The evidence leans towards the broader effect: chase debutants after any hurdle beating of 20 lengths or more, pull-ups excluded, scored 1.24 on 335 (control 0.97). The pull-up is not needed, though the pull-up cut ran higher (1.50 on 76) and neither is conclusive.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: chase debutants after any heavy hurdle beating beat their pricestoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the edge concentrated in horses whose fall was a one-off, rather than horses with repeated jumping errors?
answered0.50The market prices a known habit. It should not price a single error made while travelling well. Columns: jumping_errors_last3, f3_fell, last_fell_going_well, chase_runs.
Answer: No. Restricting to horses with at most one jumping error in the last three runs lowered A/E to 1.22 on 139, against 1.30 for the parent on 165, so a one-off fall does not concentrate the edge.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Sharpen: fell-going-well chasers with no other recent jumping errorstrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does a last-time chase non-completion after two clean-jumping runs beat its price whether or not the remark records a jumping error?
answered0.50If error-free non-finishers (mostly pulled up) score as well as error non-finishers, the edge is the market's general overreaction to a missing figure. That would tie in with the held-up pull-up thread (1.2 to 1.3), and the error remark would be incidental. Columns: last_position, last_pulled_up, last_fell_or_unseated, jumping_errors_last3, remarked_last3, last_run_style.
Answer: No. Error-free last-time chase non-finishers after two clean runs scored A/E 0.71 on 208 (GB 0.81, IRE 0.50), against 1.39 on 97 for error non-finishers. The edge needs the jumping-error excuse; it is not a general overreaction to a missing figure.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Rival: last-time chase non-finishers with clean jumping remarks beat their price toostoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the changed-going lift directional: strongest when the pull-up came on soft or heavy and today is on better ground, and absent when the move is towards softer ground?
answered0.50The ground mechanism (the horse was bogged down, so the cause has gone) predicts direction. A lift for any change, whichever way, would point to a general 'different conditions' or season effect instead. H101 found no edge for soft-to-good across all pull-ups (1.02 on 3100), so the held-up condition must do the work. Columns: last_going_group, going_group, last_run_style, race_type.
Answer: No. Mud to better ground scored only 1.05 on 377 (p 0.44), and moves onto softer ground scored 0.92 on 149. The directional ground move does not carry the changed-going lift of 1.296.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Sharpen: held-up pull-up in the mud, back on better groundtested by Rival: held-up pull-ups moving onto softer ground show the same liftstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the lift strongest when the last race was attritional, with many runners not finishing, so the PU says little about this horse?
answered0.50When a large share of the field pulled up, the P is a property of the race (ground, pace, trip), not the horse, yet the form figure looks the same. Columns: last_race_dnf_share, last_field_size, last_pulled_up, last_run_style.
Answer: No. The attritional cut (dnf_share >= 0.25) scored 1.145 on 921, below the 1.198 parent, which implies lone pull-ups (dnf_share < 0.25) carry more of the lift, at roughly 1.3.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Sharpen: held-up PU in an attritional race where many failed to finishstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the one-off chase-error edge fade after April 2026 the way the hurdle replicate did (1.28 before, 0.92 after)?
answered0.50If the chase lift is also concentrated in the winter 2025-26 period, every frozen chase subset shares a seasonal or period confound. Split the H24 chase pool by period and by going. Columns: race date period, going_group, field_size, race_type, last_jumping_error.
Answer: No fade seen. The drifted chase pool scored 1.56 before and 1.45 after April 2026; finishers scored 1.07 then 1.28; non-finishers 1.35 in both periods. The chase pool does not share the hurdle replicate's period collapse.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatenstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the one-off chase-error edge concentrated in runners whose price lengthened from last time (sp_decimal > last_sp_decimal), where the market has visibly marked them down for the bad run?
answered0.50If the edge is a market overreaction to one bad run, it should sit where the price drifted, not where the market kept faith. The 1.40 mid-price band and the weak 7/1-or-shorter band in IRE hint at this. Columns: sp_decimal, last_sp_decimal, sp_rank.
Answer: Yes. Drifted runners scored A/E 1.50 on 263 (p 0.02, periods 1.56/1.45), against 1.08 on 273 for runners whose price shortened or held. Most of the edge sits where the price lengthened, though mostly in GB (1.64 vs IRE 1.11).
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Test-mechanism: one-off chase error, well beaten, price drifted from last runstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the close-earlier-run chase edge (1.30 on 234) real hidden form, or class relief, where the close run came in lower grade than the error run and today's race?
answered0.50Class relief is the main confounder named in H-48da1bb8's spec. The close run may have come in an easier race, and the horse may be dropping again today. Test by comparing race_class with last_race_class, GB only, because IRE race_class starts in July 2026. Hidden form predicts the lift holds when race_class <= last_race_class. If it disappears there, the edge is a class drop that the remark story only labels. Columns: race_class, last_race_class, best_last3_beaten, region.
Answer: Class relief does not carry the close-run chase edge. GB non-droppers scored 1.41 on 120 (periods 1.30 and 1.55, control 0.96), while class droppers in the same pool scored 0.997 on 40. This is discovery-level and thin, and it compares today with the error run only.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Rival: close-earlier-run chase edge is class relief, tested on GB runners not dropping in classstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the one-off error edge need the earlier clean runs to have shown real form (a close finish), or is a clean jumping record alone enough?
answered0.50H-4eed61bb shows the clean jumping record matters (1.04 vs 1.22). If the mechanism is form hidden by one mistake, the lift should be largest where an earlier run was close: best_last3_beaten < 5, with last_beaten_lengths > 10 or a non-finish last time. The letters-family test of 'hidden form where the book looks worst' (H-e7675af7) was killed, which points the same way. Columns: best_last3_beaten, last_beaten_lengths, last_position, remarked_last3, jumping_errors_last3.
Answer: A clean record alone is not enough. Chasers with a close earlier run scored 1.304 on 234 (BSP +50%), against 1.092 on 293 (BSP −24%) for those without one. Shown form is what pays, though the subset is still thin (p 0.057).
Among quick-returning last-time winners at 9/1+, is the shortfall concentrated in horses whose previous win came at a long price, a surprise win the market now over-trusts?
answered0.50The thread has ruled out the mark rise and the quick return as separate causes, which leaves over-reaction to a fresh win. If so, the deficit should be largest where the win was least expected and most likely flattered by circumstance. A descriptive scan should split the H-9e92ea71 pool by last_sp_decimal (e.g. up to 4, 4 to 9, over 9), using last_position, days_since_last_run and sp_decimal, and could also check l_time_index or l_fsp_pct for how strong the winning run really was.
Answer: No. Quick-returning winners whose last win came at 7/1+ scored 0.94 on 228, near par and much shallower than the 0.62 parent, so the shortfall is not concentrated in surprise winners.
Thread: Raised handicap winners sent off at 9/1+ are over-bet, at any gap since the wintested by Test-mechanism: quick-returning winners at 9/1+ whose last win came at 7/1+ are over-betnegativeraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the quick-return winner deficit a dose effect of cumulative racing load, deeper when the winning run itself also came soon after the run before it?
answered0.50If the cause is a physical bounce after a fresh win, the deficit should be largest for horses with two short gaps in a row. That is a different consequence of the same cause, not a re-cut of the price or days thresholds, which the neighbour test shows only moves the bar. Columns: last_days_since_last_run, days_before_last, days_since_last_run, last_position, sp_decimal.
Answer: No. Winners whose winning run also followed a short gap scored 0.70 on 328 (p 0.92), shallower than the parent's 0.62, so there is no dose effect from cumulative racing load.
Thread: Raised handicap winners sent off at 9/1+ are over-bet, at any gap since the wintested by Test-mechanism: winners turned out quickly after a quick win at 9/1+ are over-betnegativeraised 17 Oct 2026
Do all last-time winners running in a handicap at 9/1+ (raised, unraised, or coming from a maiden/novice win) share the same ~0.83 deficit, so the effect belongs to the winner tag rather than the mark?
answered0.50Unraised winners (0.82 on 144) matched raised winners (0.84 on 1,561), so the mark explains nothing that can be seen. A pooled winner-tag population, including first-time handicappers after a non-handicap win, is the only way to get a sample big enough to tell. Columns: last_position, last_is_handicap, is_handicap, rating_change, sp_decimal, region.
Answer: No. The pooled winner-tag population scored 0.88 on 2,634 (p 0.084), weaker than the raised-winner pool's 0.84. The non-handicap and unraised additions dilute the deficit, so the tag alone does not carry the full ~0.83 effect.
Thread: Raised handicap winners sent off at 9/1+ are over-bet, at any gap since the wintested by Generalise: last-time winners of any race type running in a handicap at 9/1+ are over-bet (winner-tag money)negativeraised 16 Oct 2026
Do last-time winners with a bottom-third Jump Index also run below their price over hurdles, which would give a larger pool to test the hidden-poor-jumping idea?
answered0.50The chase-only pool gave 240 bets, which is too few to pass. If poor jumping that a win hides is mispriced, a weaker version should show over hurdles. Read race_type = 'Hurdle', last_position, last_race_type and last_jump_index_pct. A clear par result there would point to the chase result being noise.
Answer: No. Hurdle runners that won last time with a bottom-third Jump Index scored A/E 1.074 on 396, the opposite of the prediction, and steady across both periods and both countries.
Thread: Chase-bound winners that jumped poorly when winning are over-bettested by Generalise: hurdle runners that won last time with a bottom-third Jump Index are over-betnegativeraised 16 Oct 2026
Among easy handicap winners back within 14 days, does the lift rise with the size of the official rating rise (6 lb or more versus 1 to 5 lb)?
answered0.50The small-rise slice (1.12 on 100) came in under the raised parent (1.334 on 231), so the remaining roughly 131 bets on bigger rises must score about 1.5. This turns the well-in story upside down, and it decides whether the frozen rule should be read as backing improvers. Columns: rating_change, last_won_easily, days_since_last_run, is_handicap, last_is_handicap, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: Yes. The lift rises with the size of the rise. Easy winners raised 6 lb or more score 1.47 on 131 (p 0.008, periods 1.37 and 1.56, control 0.85). The 1 to 5 lb slice scores 1.12 on 100, and its lift fades to 0.91 after April 2026.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Test-mechanism: easy handicap winners raised 6 lb or more and back within 14 days beat their pricestoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Within the handicap-to-handicap fortnight rule, is the lift larger when the official rating has not yet gone up (rating_change <= 0), meaning the horse runs under a fixed penalty rather than a reassessed mark?
answered0.50A fixed penalty is set by rule, not by how easily the horse won, so it should understate an easy winner most. Reassessed runners should show less lift. Columns: rating_change, official_rating, last_official_rating (from 2025-11). The sample will be small.
Answer: No, and the opposite looks true. Runners with no rating rise scored 1.096 on 247, below the parent's 1.188 on 478. That implies about 1.28 for raised or missing-rating runners, so the fixed-penalty mechanism is not where the lift lives.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Sharpen: easy handicap winners back within 14 days with no rise in the official rating yetstoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Do third favourites at 5/1 to 10/1 in 14+ runner handicaps also beat their price, which would confirm a short-end cluster rather than something special about the top two?
answered0.50Second favourites matched the favourite (1.16 vs 1.11 to 1.14). A third rank would show how deep the effect runs and whether it fades down the betting. Columns: sp_rank, sp_decimal, field_size, is_handicap.
Answer: No. Third favourites at 5/1 to 10/1 in 14+ runner handicaps scored 1.011 on 1,246 bets against a same-race control of 1.008, so the lift does not reach the third choice.
Thread: H199: favourite at a big price in a big handicaptested by Test-mechanism: third favourites at 5/1 to 10/1 in big handicaps also beat their pricerace-bettingraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the market-consensus effect also hold for favourites at 5/1+ in big-field non-handicaps (maidens, novice races)?
answered0.50If being the one horse the market settled on is informative in itself, it should not need a handicap. Columns: is_handicap, is_favourite, sp_decimal, field_size, is_maiden, is_novice, race_type.
Answer: It cannot be tested in this window: big-field non-handicaps with a 5/1+ favourite gave only 6 bets since October 2025 (H-0bc150c2), so the idea is unmeasurable here rather than refuted.
Thread: H199: favourite at a big price in a big handicaptested by Generalise: favourites at 5/1+ in big-field non-handicaps beat their pricerace-bettingraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the H19 lift concentrated in handicaps, where a troubled narrow defeat earns little or no rise in the mark, so the horse runs off a rating below its true level?
answered0.50If the cause is ability hidden from the assessors, the handicapper is the main assessor. In non-handicaps no mark is involved and the market alone has to read the run. A handicap-only lift would explain why the edge exists and fits the cliff: beyond 2 lengths, the hidden ability would not have won anyway. Columns: is_handicap, last_is_handicap, last_official_rating, last_momentum_interrupted, last_beaten_lengths, last_position.
Answer: No. Handicap-only H19 scored A/E 1.145 on 190 (control 0.98), below the parent's 1.28 on 218, so the lift is not concentrated where the handicap mark could hide ability.
Are long-priced (16/1+) early-spring Flat handicap returners over-bet beyond the general longshot shortfall, while 16/1+ returners later in the year are not?
answered0.50The 16/1+ band of the calendar rule scored 0.742 on 563 (0.612 on 337 at 180+ days). All March-April 16/1+ handicap runners scored 0.91 on 2211, and year-round 16/1+ returners scored 1.118 on 1821. If the shortfall is specific to early spring, it is a negative-direction edge (lay or avoid). It also explains why every positive rule in this thread needed a price cap. Columns: sp_decimal, days_since_last_run, month, race_type, is_handicap, field_size, region.
Answer: Not established. The 16/1+ early-spring returners scored 0.742 on 563 (p 0.86, re-tested on the same data), and AW 16/1+ returners year-round scored 1.28 on 626, so there is no general longshot-returner over-bet.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Long-priced early-spring handicap returners are over-bet: the 16/1+ tail needs the runseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the young-horse shortfall at 3m to 3m3f (A/E 0.92) concentrated in lightly raced chasers bought as progressive handicappers?
answered0.50A reversal at 3m to 3m3f is a discovery in its own right. Young horses with few chase runs are the classic 'well-handicapped improver' story the market buys, and they make up most of the young runners at 3m to 3m3f. Columns: chase_runs, prior_runs, age, distance_yards, last_official_rating, sp_rank.
Answer: No. Young handicap chasers at 3m to 3m3f with three or fewer chase runs score 0.95 on 472, no lower than the 0.92 for all young runners there. The shortfall is not carried by the lightly raced 'progressive improver' group, and if anything sits slightly more in the experienced young chasers.
Thread: H175: young horse in a marathon chasetested by Lightly raced young chasers at 3m to 3m3f in handicaps are over-bet as progressive improversage-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Are jumps runners that fell, unseated or were brought down last time over-bet in the 8/1 to 14/1 band, while those up to 7/1 match or beat their price?
answered0.50Two rules show the 8/1 to 14/1 band well below 1: fallers at 0.395 on 148 and quick-return BD/UR at 0.579 on 76. A third rule, going-well departures, relied on its up-to-7/1 band. If the mid-price band is reliably over-bet, it is a negative edge and explains why every capped rule ends near 1.0. Columns: last_fell_or_unseated, last_non_finish_code, sp_decimal, sp_rank, race_type, region.
Answer: Not supported. Pooled jumps departures at 8/1 to 14/1 scored A/E 0.82 on 280 bets (CI 0.47 to 1.34, p 0.81, control 1.02). The earlier 0.395 and 0.579 band figures were small segments chosen because they looked extreme, and they shrank toward 1 when pooled.
Does the edge fall away as the trip shortens (a dose-response from 3m to 3m4f+), as a stamina-doubt mechanism predicts?
answered0.50If the market's error is doubt about whether a young horse stays, the error should shrink at shorter trips where staying is less in question. Columns: distance_yards, age, race_type, is_handicap.
Answer: No. There is no gradient. Young handicap chasers at 3m to 3m3f score A/E 0.92 on 971 (same-race control 1.10), against 1.18 at 3m4f+, so the lift is a step at marathon trips, not a shrinking dose-response.
Thread: H175: young horse in a marathon chasetested by Dose-response: young handicap chasers at 3m to 3m3f show a smaller liftage-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Within the same 3/1–7/1 price band, do spring handicap returners that are not four-year-olds score at or below their prices, so that age four carries the all-age 1.08?
answered0.50H-12ef9cb4 mixes ages. If age-four maturation is the cause, the other ages in the same band should score about 1.0. If they score 1.08 or more, the age story collapses into a mild general returner lift. Columns: age, sp_decimal, days_since_last_run, is_handicap, month, region.
Answer: No. Within the 3/1 to 7/1 band, non-four-year-old spring returners scored 1.17 on 333 against a 0.967 control, so the second-tier lift does not need a four-year-old. The four-year-olds in that band are, if anything, the weaker part.
Do unseated runners that were in contention when they departed beat their price at under 16/1, where the plain BD/UR rule does not?
answered0.50The 'form hidden by the result' mechanism should be strongest where the horse was going well when it departed. last_fell_going_well (from 2025-11) and last_position or in-running columns can isolate this. If it holds at sp_decimal <= 15, there is an edge that does not depend on longshot variance.
Answer: Not robustly. Going-well departures at 14/1 or shorter scored 1.099 on 245 but were falsified (second period 0.96, Ireland 0.80), and the not-going-well complement did as well.
Thread: H98: brought down or unseatedtested by Fell or unseated while going well: hidden form at normal pricestested by Going-well departure with weak visible form: the hidden form is largest where the form book looks worstlettersraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the edge strongest when the handicapper has left the mark unchanged since the three-year-old evidence, as a lagging-mark mechanism requires?
answered0.50The fewest-runs cut (1.18 on 218) points to information scarcity as the cause. If the mark lag is real, horses whose rating has not been raised should carry the lift, and horses already raised should not. A test reads rating_change, official_rating, last_official_rating and prior_runs.
Answer: No. Returners whose mark has not been raised scored A/E 0.95 on 151 bets, against a same-race control of 1.01 (Ireland 0 wins from 42). The edge does not sit with unchanged marks, so a simple lagging-mark mechanism is not supported.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Lightly raced four-year-old returns whose mark has not been raisedseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the wide-trip edge survive outside the 16/1+ band, or is it mostly the longshot lift seen in every beaten-last-time rule?
answered0.50The low-draw rule's 16/1+ band scored A/E 2.57 on 6 wins, and the sharp-track rule's 1.97 on 6 wins. Below 16/1 the edge may be close to 1.0. If so, the published system is fragile. Columns: sp_decimal, sp_rank, last_raced_wide, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: Yes. At SP 14/1 or shorter the wide-trip rule scores A/E 1.21 on 974 bets (p 0.004, CI 1.05 to 1.39), against a same-race control of 0.95. The edge is not mainly the 16/1+ longshot lift.
Thread: IQ140a: wide trip with figurestested by Wide-trip edge outside the longshot bandoverlayraised 16 Oct 2026
Are recruits to a strong new yard, after a heavy beating for their old trainer, over-bet when they go off short-priced? In other words, does the market price the yard's name rather than the horse?
answered0.45The reversal (0.93 on 422, GB 0.81) together with 1.42 at 16/1+ on few wins suggests the market overreacts at short prices. A negative edge from fading these runners would be a different kind of bet for this family. A test would read sp_decimal, trainer_id, last_trainer_id, tx_new_yard_runs, tx_new_yard_wins, tx_new_yard_exp, last_position and last_field_size.
Answer: No. The strong-yard subset (0.81 on 84) is nested inside the general rule, and the vault puts the general rule at 1.02 on 1793. Nothing is left to support a strong-yard-specific over-betting effect.
Thread: Recruit to a yard good with new arrivals, after a heavy beating for its old trainertested by Negative: short-priced recruits to a strong new yard after a heavy beating are over-bet on the yard's nameyard-planned-moveraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the wide-trip lift grow with the number of bends in the last run (10f+ against 7 to 9f), or on sharper turning tracks?
answered0.45If ground lost on turns is the cause, longer round-course trips and sharp tracks should cost more ground and show more lift. This is a dose-response check that the mechanism predicts in advance. Columns: last_distance_yards, last_track_sharpness, last_track_character, last_raced_wide.
Answer: No dose-response on trip. Wide-trip narrow defeats over 10f+ score 1.17 on 206 (p 0.17), below the 7f+ cut's 1.26, so more bends do not mean more lift. The sharp-track half of the question is still untested.
Thread: H20: wide early and got back into ittested by Test-mechanism: more bends, more lift; wide-trip narrow defeats over 10f+ last timestoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the wide-trip lift confined to last runs over trips with bends (7f+), where racing wide really costs ground, rather than straight sprints where 'wide' just means the far side?
answered0.45This tests the mechanism directly. The ground lost from racing wide happens on turns. If sprint last runs (mostly on straight courses) score as well as round-course trips, the flag is picking up something other than ground lost. Columns: last_distance_yards, last_track_character, last_track_sharpness, last_raced_wide.
Answer: Yes, provisionally. The 7f+ cut is 1.259 on 643 against 1.178 for the full ≤14/1 rule, which puts the sprint last runs at about 0.99. The lift sits where bends make a wide trip cost ground.
Thread: H20: wide early and got back into ittested by Test-mechanism: the wide-trip lift needs a last run with bends (7f+)storyraised 17 Oct 2026
Within the recent-winner jumps rebound, is the lift largest when the heavy beating came at a short last price, i.e. a fancied winner that flopped?
answered0.45If the market overreacts to one bad number, a fancied flop (low last_sp_decimal) should mislead the most: the horse was expected to run well and the result hides that. If the lift is flat across last_sp_decimal, the edge is in recent winners being underbet in general. Columns: last_sp_decimal, last_beaten_lengths, best_last3_beaten, days_since_win, sp_decimal.
Answer: No. Recent jumps winners whose heavy beating came at a short last price scored 1.18 on 226 (p 0.199), below the full recent-winner rule (1.336 on 669). A fancied flop does not mislead more, and what lift there is sits in 6 winners at 16/1+ (4.83 on 44).
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Sharpen: recent jumps winners whose 20+ length beating came at a short last pricestoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is there a dose-response in the margin: do recent winners beaten 8 to 19 lengths show a smaller lift than those beaten 20+?
answered0.45If the market is misled by the size of the beating, a moderate beating should mislead less. If moderately beaten winners score as high, the edge is in recent winners being underbet in general, not in the beating. Columns: best_last3_beaten, last_beaten_lengths, days_since_win.
Answer: Yes, weakly. Recent winners beaten 8 to 19 lengths score 1.12 on 828 (p 0.12) against 1.34 on 669 for those beaten 20+. That fits the size of the beating misleading the market, though the CIs overlap.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Test-mechanism: recent winners beaten only 8 to 19 lengths should show a smaller reboundstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the one-bad-run rebound strongest when the heavy beating came on different ground or at a different trip from today, as a temporary-cause mechanism predicts?
answered0.45The mechanism names trip and ground as temporary causes. If they are real, runners whose last run was on a different going_group or distance should score above those on the same conditions. Columns: last_going_group, going_group, last_distance_yards, distance_yards.
Answer: Mostly no. Runners whose beating came on different ground or at a different trip score 1.26 on 917 against the parent's 1.23, which leaves about 1.19 for unchanged conditions. A change adds little, so the rebound does not depend on the beating having an obvious temporary cause.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Test-mechanism: the heavy beating misleads most when ground or trip changed sincestoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the market actually downgrade chase unseaters? Is today's SP longer than their last SP more often than for other chasers, and is the lift concentrated in those that drift?
answered0.45The mechanism says the 'U' in the form figures makes the market discount a horse whose ability is unchanged. If so, the discount should show up as a price drift (sp_decimal against last_sp_decimal), and the lift should sit in the drifters. This tests the market-miss channel directly instead of slicing by rider or jump error. Columns: sp_decimal, last_sp_decimal, last_non_finish_code, race_type, sp_rank.
Answer: Yes. In discovery, the chase unseater lift sits entirely in horses that drift from their last SP: 2.10 on 110 (17 wins against 8.1 expected), against 0.95 on 103 for those that shortened or held. Generic chase drifters score 0.995 on 6218, so drift alone carries nothing.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Test-mechanism: chase unseaters that drift from their last SP carry the unseat lifttrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Do chase unseaters ridden again by the same jockey beat their price more than those with a jockey change?
answered0.45By subtraction, the changed-jockey pool scores 1.36 on 116 and the rest about 1.45 on about 97. If the market blames the rider and fades the rebooked pairing, the same-jockey group should carry the lift. Columns: jockey_id, last_jockey_id, last_non_finish_code, race_type.
Answer: No meaningful difference: same jockey A/E 1.45 on 97 against changed jockey about 1.36 on 116, both inside each other's noise and close to the pool's 1.40.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Test-mechanism: chase unseaters rebooked with the same jockey beat their pricetrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Among handicap chase debutants beaten heavily over hurdles, does the lift sit with horses whose official rating fell since the last run?
answered0.45The lenient-mark mechanism makes a direct prediction about the mark, but no rule has read the rating change yet. If the lift is no higher where official_rating < last_official_rating than where the mark held, the mark story is dead and the lift is something else, for example how well the horse jumps fences. Columns: official_rating, last_official_rating (from 2025-11), chase_runs, last_beaten_lengths, is_handicap.
Answer: No. The mark-drop debutant cut was killed at IRE A/E 0.425 (GB 1.50, a single-country effect). The broader mark test found cut and uncut marks level (1.069 vs 1.075), so the rating change is not the mechanism.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Test-mechanism: handicap chase debutants whose mark dropped after a heavy hurdle beatingtested by Test-mechanism: heavily beaten jumps handicappers whose mark has droppedstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the festival effect really a trainer effect (a few yards aiming dual-purpose horses at these meetings) or a large-field effect?
answered0.45Check how concentrated the 544 festival bets are by `trainer`, and by `field_size`. If two yards carry it, the edge is about where those yards aim their horses, not about the Flat mark lagging.
Answer: It is not a large-field effect. Dual-purpose runners in 14+ runner fields at other Irish courses scored A/E 0.79 on 107 bets against a same-race control of 1.097. The trainer half of the question is still open and is re-asked separately.
Thread: H228: dual purpose horse in an irish summer flat handicaptested by Rival: the festival lift is a large-field effect, not a course effectseason-irelandraised 17 Oct 2026
Are horses that unseated last time and run in a hurdle today over-bet? H-9f59a0ed's neighbour without the chase condition implies roughly A/E 0.6 on about 184 hurdle-race unseaters.
answered0.45If the UR letter is priced the same in both codes but bounces back only in chases, the mechanism is chase-specific (fence incidents with the rider coming off). The hurdle side could then be a negative edge. The 0.6 figure is derived by subtraction, so it is only a lead. Columns: race_type, last_race_type, last_non_finish_code.
Answer: No over-bet effect is shown. Hurdle unseaters scored A/E 0.91 on 223 (CI 0.52 to 1.48, p 0.68), and 2.38 on 126 at 16/1+. The implied 0.6 figure did not replicate.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Test-mechanism: last-time unseaters running in a hurdle are over-bettrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Do chase fallers proper (F) that were not going well sit at or below par, completing the picture that a plain fall carries no bounce-back?
answered0.45So far this has only been inferred by subtraction (1.085 on 270 for all non-going-well F/U against 1.26 for non-going-well UR). Measuring it directly decides whether the going-well flag matters only for fallers. Columns: last_non_finish_code, last_fell_going_well, race_type.
Answer: Yes. Chase fallers proper that were not going well scored A/E 1.04 on 167 (CI 0.63 to 1.60), GB 0.85, and 0 wins from 53 at 16/1 or bigger. That is par, so a plain fall carries no bounce-back.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Test-mechanism: chase fallers that were not going well are at or below par
Is the small general lift on non-going-well chase F/U carried by unseated riders (often rider error) rather than fallers (horse error)?
answered0.45An unseat says less about the horse than a fall, so the market may over-punish the UR more. That would explain a 1.085 lift that is not tied to travelling well. Columns: last_non_finish_code (F vs UR, from 2025-01), last_fell_going_well, race_type.
Answer: Yes, tentatively. Unseaters that were not going well score 1.263 on 190 (control 0.97) against 1.085 for all non-going-well F/U on 270, which leaves non-going-well fallers near or below par. The general lift is carried by unseats. It is still thin (p 0.157).
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Test-mechanism: unseated (not fell) chasers not going well carry the general F/U lifttrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Within the GB one-off chase-error pool, do class droppers score at or below 1.0, so that the class choice, not the region, separates the pool?
answered0.45The GB full pool scored 1.24 on 347 and the no-drop subset 1.36 on 253, which by subtraction puts droppers at about 0.9 on about 94. A direct measurement would confirm or kill the trainer-intent reading. Columns: region, race_type, race_class, last_race_class, last_jumping_error, jumping_errors_last3, remarked_last3, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: Measured directly by H-3f87586e: GB class droppers scored 1.015 on 83. That is near par, not clearly below it. The no-drop vs drop gap (1.36 against 1.02) points the expected way but rests on too few droppers to prove class choice separates the pool.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Test-mechanism: GB one-off chase-error horses dropped in class are fairly pricedstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Do lone held-up pull-ups (few other non-finishers in the race) beat their price more than pull-ups in attritional races?
answered0.45The attritional cut came in below its parent (1.145 vs 1.198), implying about 1.3 for dnf_share below 0.25. A lone P looks equally bad in the form book, but it may mean a specific, fixable problem that the trainer then addresses. Columns: last_race_dnf_share, last_field_size, last_pulled_up, last_run_style, days_since_last_run.
Answer: Not reliably. The lone-PU cut scored 1.28 on 530 (p 0.106) against the attritional cut's 1.145 on 921, the intervals overlap, and the lone-PU lift sits wholly after April 2026 (0.94 before).
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: the held-up PU lift sits in lone pull-ups, not attritional racesstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does the hurdle part of H24 also carry an edge once runners at 16/1+ are removed, as the chase part does?
answered0.45The broad rule held at 1.17 on 1,570, so hurdles alone ran around 1.14 on about 1,030. The chase under-16/1 cut lifted A/E. If the price-respect pattern is general, hurdles under 16/1 should hold too, which would widen the live system. Columns: race_type, sp_decimal, remarked_last3, jumping_errors_last3, last_jumping_error, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: Only weakly. Hurdles under 16/1 scored 1.078 on 524 (p 0.27, CI 0.85–1.35), with IRE at 0.94 and the up-to-14/1 band at 0.947. The price pattern from chases does not carry over to hurdles.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Replicate: one-off jumping error, well beaten, in hurdles under 16/1storyraised 17 Oct 2026
Inside the H24 chase pool, is the whole lift below 16/1, as in the other story pools?
answered0.45The 16/1+ band went 1 from 77 (A/E 0.509) in the costly-ground subset and 2 from 100 (0.732) in the finishers subset. That matches the lab-wide pattern where long-priced story runners fail. If it holds on the full pool, the live system should carry a price cap. Columns: sp_decimal, sp_rank, field_size.
Answer: Mostly yes. The under-16/1 pool scored 1.256 on 386 against 1.224 on all 536, which implies the roughly 150 runners at 16/1+ sit near or below 1.0. The gain is smaller than the 1.30 to 1.45 predicted.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Sharpen: H24 chase pool priced under 16/1storyraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the long-price winner deficit concentrated in quick returners (days_since_last_run <= 14), across every type of previous race, as the 0.57-on-255 near miss suggested?
answered0.45The original 14-day near miss (0.57) was far stronger than any gap-agnostic pool (0.84–0.88). Whether the deficit sits only in quick returners was the spec's own falsifier and has never been reported. Columns: days_since_last_run, days_since_win, last_position, is_handicap, sp_decimal, last_is_handicap.
Answer: Yes, as far as the data can show. Quick-returning last-time winners of any previous race type scored 0.651 on 424 at 9/1+, against 0.879 for all gaps, in both GB and IRE. It is still not significant (p 0.051).
Thread: Raised handicap winners sent off at 9/1+ are over-bet, at any gap since the win
Is the poor-jumper deficit stronger for horses whose last run was over hurdles (first chase or early chase career) than for those already chasing?
answered0.45Fences punish poor jumping more than hurdles do, so a poor hurdle jumper stepping up to fences should be the most exposed. Read last_race_type, chase_runs, last_jump_index_pct and jumping_errors_last3. It may be too thin to test, but it is the place the mechanism itself says the effect should be strongest.
Answer: No. Poor hurdle jumpers stepping up to fences scored 0.83 on 150, no stronger than the parent's 0.78. The deficit sits entirely in Ireland (0.44 on 57), while GB was at par (1.03 on 93).
Thread: Chase-bound winners that jumped poorly when winning are over-bettested by Sharpen: poor hurdle jumpers placed last time, now running over fences, are over-betnegativeraised 16 Oct 2026
Within raised easy handicap winners back inside 14 days, is the lift largest when the rise is small (1 to 5 lb), as 'the handicapper can only react to the margin' predicts?
answered0.45H-528222df (1.334 on 231) puts the edge in raised runners. If the cause is a rise sized to a margin that undersold the horse, a small rise should leave it most well-in. A large rise means the handicapper already saw through the margin. Columns: rating_change, last_official_rating, official_rating, last_won_easily, days_since_last_run, is_handicap, last_is_handicap.
Answer: No. Small rises of 1 to 5 lb scored 1.12 on 100, below the raised parent's 1.334 on 231, and faded to 0.91 after April 2026. On an approximate split, rises of 6 lb or more carry the lift at roughly 1.5 on about 131 bets.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Sharpen: easy handicap winners back within 14 days after a small rise (1 to 5 lb)storyraised 16 Oct 2026
Among H19 runners, do those noted as recovering or finishing strongly after the check beat their price by more than those that were not?
answered0.45A horse that was checked, recovered and still finished within 2 lengths is the clearest case of hidden ability. If the cause is real, this group should carry the lift; if it is no stronger, the 2-length cut is more likely fitted noise. Columns: last_recovered, last_strong_finish, last_momentum_interrupted, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: The data can't answer this yet. Checked-and-recovered runners scored 1.59 on 31 bets (control 0.87) but were killed when 1 of 1 attacks broke them, with too few bets per period and country, so they can't be told apart from the parent.
Thread: H19: momentum interrupted beaten narrowlytested by Test-mechanism: checked, recovered and still within 2 lengths carries the H19 liftstoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the higher-weight lift rest on a handful of 16/1+ winners (4 wins from 125 bets at 1.28)?
answered0.45A lift built from 4 longshot wins would not survive forward. The mechanism (the market is too wary of big weights) should show at every price, not only among outsiders. A test would read sp_decimal, sp_rank and weight_lbs.
Answer: Settled: the higher-weight marathon lift does not survive at all. The vault contradicted it at 0.981 on 1378 bets, and the under-16/1 slice was carried only by the up-to-7/1 band.
Thread: H175: young horse in a marathon chasetested by The higher-weight marathon lift holds at prices under 16/1age-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Where does the lift stop with age: do 8 and 9 year olds in 3m4f+ handicap chases also beat their price, or is the lift limited to age seven or under?
answered0.45The 10+ mirror came out at 0.97 on 148 bets, which neither confirms nor rules out older horses being over-bet. The age boundary tells apart 'youth is underrated' from 'only the very old are overrated'. Columns: age, distance_yards, is_handicap, race_type.
Answer: Mostly limited to 7 or under: 8 and 9 year olds scored 0.97 on 229 (CI 0.56 to 1.55) against 1.18 for the young band. The sample is too thin to fix the boundary exactly.
Thread: H175: young horse in a marathon chasetested by Age boundary: 8 and 9 year olds in marathon handicap chases sit near parage-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the after-April lift in trip-drop rules missing on Flat all-weather, which would confirm it is a turf-season effect rather than timing noise?
answered0.45The non-stiff broad rule (1.14 against 0.98) and the non-stiff sprint rule (1.41 against 0.77) both lift only after 27 April, and the Flat turf rule faded to 1.05 in the vault. An all-weather comparison separates surface from calendar. Columns: surface, race_type, going_group, last_win_yards, distance_yards.
Answer: Yes. On Flat all-weather the trip drop scored 0.96 on 1,058 bets (CI 0.77 to 1.18; GB 0.94), so the surface pattern fits a turf effect. But the turf rule itself fell to 1.05 in the vault, so there is little to explain.
Thread: H181: proven over further at a stiff tracktested by Test: the trip-drop lift is absent on Flat all-weather
Do lightly raced three-year-olds on their first handicap run after the winter show the same lift, given their marks rest on even thinner juvenile form?
answered0.45If the cause is a young horse maturing faster than a mark set on early form, three-year-olds coming back off juvenile marks should show it at least as strongly. The five-year-old test was too thin (89 bets) to settle the age question; a younger-age comparison has far more runners. A test reads age, prior_runs, days_since_last_run, is_handicap and month.
Answer: No. Lightly raced three-year-olds back from the winter scored A/E 1.04 on 568 bets (16/1 or bigger at 0.58) and failed the bar, so the effect does not extend one year younger.
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by Lightly raced three-year-olds on their first run after the winter in handicapsseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
In jump races on soft or heavy ground, is a wide trip a deliberate route to better ground, and does the edge shrink there?
answered0.45Jumps jockeys often go wide on purpose for fresher ground, so 'raced wide' there may cost little or nothing. That would make the tag a rival explanation for part of the population. Columns: last_going_group, last_race_type, last_raced_wide, race_type. If the edge is the same on soft, the ground-lost reading is not being diluted.
Answer: That subset is too small to matter: jump runners wide on soft or heavy ground last time number only 41 bets, at A/E 0.97. Whether the tag means deliberate routing there or not, it cannot explain the system's edge.
Thread: IQ140a: wide trip with figurestested by Wide on soft ground over jumps may be a chosen route, not lost groundoverlayraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the edge bigger when the wide trip cost more ground, for example in a big field last time or on a round course with tight bends?
answered0.40This is a dose-response test of the mechanism: a larger field puts the horse wider, and a sharp track adds more ground on the bends. Columns: last_field_size, last_track_character, last_ground_gained_pct, last_raced_wide, last_recovered.
Answer: Not by field size. The 12+ field sharpen scored 1.296 on 75 bets (p 0.19), below the parent's ~1.35 to 1.45, which meets its own falsification condition. The track-character part of the question is untested, and should not be sliced further off this near miss.
Thread: H20: wide early and got back into ittested by Sharpen: wide early and recovered from a big field last time, where the wide trip costs moststoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the chase unseat lift carried by runs where the rider has changed since the unseat, rather than by the horse's hidden ability?
answered0.40Trainers often replace the rider after an unseat. If the lift sits only in jockey switches, the edge is about the jockey, not about the form book misreading the UR letter. Columns: jockey_id, last_jockey_id, last_non_finish_code, race_type.
Answer: No. The lift is present with and without a rider change (1.36 changed, 1.45 same), so it is not a jockey-switch effect.
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Rival: the chase unseat lift is a jockey-change effecttrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Do smaller fields in the summer jumps season carry the late-period lift for held-up pull-ups?
answered0.40The late-period concentration (1.69 against 0.94) needs a race-level explanation before any PU story is trusted. Smaller summer fields make win chances less spread out and SP less efficient. Columns: field_size, last_field_size, race_type, region.
Answer: No. Held-up pull-ups in fields of 9 or fewer scored 1.09 on 595, below the parent's 1.198, and 0.36 on 294 at 16/1 or bigger. Small summer fields do not carry the lift, so the larger fields must.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held upstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does a trainer keeping a horse at the same or a higher class after a jumping-error defeat signal a blip in hurdles too, in GB where class data exists?
answered0.40If the class choice reveals the trainer's view of the run, it should not depend on the code. GB hurdles under 16/1 scored 1.16 before the IRE kill. Columns: race_type, region, race_class, last_race_class, last_jumping_error, jumping_errors_last3, remarked_last3.
Answer: No. In GB hurdles, keeping class after a jumping-error defeat scored 1.13 on 422 (p 0.24). The lift was all from 8 wins at 16/1+, runners up to 14/1 scored 0.56, and the result faded to 0.92 after April 2026, so the class signal does not carry over to hurdles.
Thread: H24: one off jumping error well beatentested by Replicate: trainer keeps class after a one-off jumping error, GB hurdlesstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Does pooling all quick-returning last-time winners at 9/1+ across handicaps and non-handicaps give a consistent deficit in both periods and both countries, or does the non-handicap part only add noise?
answered0.40The non-handicap replicate (106 bets, 2 wins) is too thin on its own, and its price-band pattern is the reverse of the handicap pool's. A split by is_handicap, region, race_type and period over last_position, days_since_last_run and sp_decimal would show whether one rule covers both race types.
Answer: Pooling across race types gives a consistent deficit: GB 0.611 on 410, IRE 0.649 on 120, periods 0.36 and 0.80, control 1.03. The non-handicap part (0.457 on 106) points the same way and does not dilute the handicap pool (0.651 on 424).
Thread: Raised handicap winners sent off at 9/1+ are over-bet, at any gap since the winnegativeraised 16 Oct 2026
Does a big handicap rise after any quick win make the market over-fade the weight, whether or not the horse won easily?
answered0.40If raised non-easy winners with rises of 6 lb or more also beat their price, the active ingredient is the market's reaction to big rises, not the easy-win flag. Columns: rating_change, last_won_easily, last_position, days_since_last_run, is_handicap.
Answer: Partly yes. Big-rise quick winners of any manner survived 5 of 6 attacks (H-d9dabea2 frozen), but the non-easy half alone is only 1.13 on 318 against 1.47 for easy winners, so the rise contributes and the easy win adds to it.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Rival: big-rise quick-returning handicap winners beat their price without an easy winstoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the broad easy-winner lift decaying over time (1.08 then 1.02), and does the 14-day subset show the same decay?
answered0.40The period split for the broad rule is falling. If the fortnight system falls the same way, the live system may be living on an earlier regime. Columns: days_since_last_run, last_won_easily, region, race_type, split by period.
Answer: In the fortnight handicap subset the decay is mild and both periods are well above 1 (1.21 then 1.17), so it is not following the broad rule's slide from 1.08 to 1.02.
Thread: H34: won easily last timestoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the edge fade as the gap since the troubled run grows, as it should if the run shows current form that the market misses?
answered0.40A troubled run is evidence of current ability. After a long break that evidence goes stale, and the market's view of the horse resets anyway. Columns: days_since_last_run, last_momentum_interrupted, last_beaten_lengths.
Answer: Not detectably. Runners back within 35 days scored 1.19 on 200, no stronger than the parent's 1.28, so the edge shows no fade with time since the troubled run.
Thread: H19: momentum interrupted beaten narrowlytested by Sharpen: troubled narrow loser back within 35 daysstoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the edge biggest when the market ignores the excuse, i.e. when today's SP is no shorter than the last SP?
answered0.40If the market reads the trouble comment, it will shorten these horses, and the value should sit with those that did not shorten. Columns: sp_decimal, last_sp_decimal, sp_rank.
Answer: No. Runners whose SP did not shorten scored 1.236 on 104 bets, which puts the shortened runners at about 1.3 on the rest of the parent's 218. The edge is not concentrated where the market ignored the excuse.
Thread: H19: momentum interrupted beaten narrowlytested by Test-mechanism: the edge sits with horses the market did not shorten after the excusestoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the hill's extra lift real once the general trip-drop effect is taken out? Last-run-over-further sprinters at 14/1 or shorter scored 1.54 at stiff tracks against 1.13 on 217 at non-stiff tracks, and the non-stiff periods split 1.38 and 0.96.
answered0.40If non-stiff sprint trip-droppers carry a real 1.10, the stiff-track claim is an increment over that, not an edge built from nothing. This changes how we size the expected forward A/E. Columns: track_stiff_finish, race_type, distance_yards, last_distance_yards, sp_decimal, surface.
Answer: Not shown yet. In the sealed vault the stiff-track last-run-over-further rule fell to 1.17 on 415 (p 0.12), close to the non-stiff 1.13 on 217, so any extra lift from the hill is small or absent beyond the general trip-drop effect.
Thread: H181: proven over further at a stiff tracktrack-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the small-field edge carried by all-weather winter racing or by class, where small fields cluster?
answered0.40Small fields gather on the all-weather in winter and in better-class races. The all-weather wide test (H-5b9fa0d3) passed in GB at 1.26. A turf-only or jumps-only small-field check tells code mix apart from field size. A test would read last_surface, last_race_type, race_type, race_class, last_race_class.
Answer: Partly. Outside the all-weather the small-field wide edge falls to 1.27 on 207 (p 0.07), and that rests on the period after April 2026 (1.47, against 0.92 before). So the all-weather bets and the timing carry much of the 1.39 small-field figure.
Thread: IQ140a: wide trip with figurestested by Small-field wide trips outside the all-weatheroverlayraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the wide-trip edge grow with last time's field size, where a wide trip usually means being forced further out and losing more ground?
answered0.40The track-shape version of lost ground failed (galloping 1.23 vs sharp 1.18), and the no-bends sprint test gave no answer. Field size is a different measure of how much ground was lost: in big fields horses go three or four wide, while in small fields 'wide' may cost little. If the edge does not scale with last_field_size, the tag is probably marking something other than ground lost. Columns: last_raced_wide, last_field_size, last_position, last_beaten_lengths, field_size. Use the full parent base including the last_race_tilt exclusion.
Answer: No, it runs the other way. Wide after a last-time field of 8 or fewer scored 1.39 on 349 (1.35 at 14/1 or shorter), 6 or fewer scored 1.56 on 112, and 12 or more scored only 1.135 on 391 (p 0.17). The edge shrinks as the field and the likely ground lost grow.
Thread: IQ140a: wide trip with figurestested by Wide trip in a big field last time loses more ground, so pays moretested by Wide trip in a small field last time should pay less if lost ground is the cause
Is the lift larger when the last run had a big field, where a wide horse must cover more extra ground round the bends?
answered0.35The H-244b221b sharpen only had 75 bets. The broader 7f+ wide-trip rule gives a sample big enough to test this field-size consequence of the mechanism. A test would read last_field_size, last_distance_yards and last_raced_wide.
Answer: Not in GB. Big-field last runs score 1.216 on 142 and small-field ones 1.218 on 381. The headline gap (1.35 vs 1.21) comes from IRE runners, who are mostly in the big-field half (85 of 227 bets, against 35 of 416).
Thread: H20: wide early and got back into ittested by Test-mechanism: the 7f+ wide-trip lift is larger after a big-field last runstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
In Irish summer staying Flat handicaps, does a runner whose last run was over hurdles beat its price, because the Flat mark has not yet caught up with that most recent hurdle form?
answered0.35The information-gap reading (career counts: flat_runs, hurdle_wins) failed in the vault (O-af584569). Career counts are a weak proxy for a mark that lags. A run over hurdles in the last few weeks is the direct case: new form the Flat handicapper has not yet acted on. Columns: last_race_type, days_since_last_run, last_position, last_beaten_lengths, sp_decimal. This is a cheap, distinct test; if it fails too, the thread should rest until the forward record arrives.
Answer: No. Runners straight from hurdles into Irish summer staying Flat handicaps scored A/E 0.86 on 130 bets (CI 0.35 to 1.78), with 1 winner from 70 at 16/1 or bigger, so a recent hurdle run shows no lift (O-470480d3).
Thread: H228: dual purpose horse in an irish summer flat handicap
Are big beaten distances in large fields less informative, so that the lift concentrates where last_field_size was big?
answered0.35In big jumps fields, horses far down the order are often eased once beaten, so their beaten lengths overstate how bad they are. This is the same 'looked after' logic as H36. A test would split last_field_size and last_eased.
Answer: Largely yes. Heavy beatings in last fields of 14 or more scored 1.187 on 2097, fields of 11 to 13 scored 1.116 on 1509, and fields of 10 or fewer scored 1.022 on 3281. The lift rises with field size and held in both countries and both periods.
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Sharpen: heavily beaten held-up handicappers, nothing taken out of themtested by Rival: big-field beatings, not the heavy beating itself, carry the liftstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the A/E lift a spring/summer artefact, given the periods went 1.07 then 1.41?
answered0.35The second period (from about April 2026) carries most of the lift. Smaller summer jumps fields and better ground could explain it rather than the PU story. Columns: race_date, field_size, going_group, race_type. Forward bets on the live system from October 2026 will partly answer it.
Answer: Partly. The late skew is not field size (the small-field cut failed), and the changed-going cut beat par before late April too (1.17 on 635). The lift is not purely a spring/summer artefact, though the later period is still stronger (1.63).
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: held-up PU lift is a small-field summer artefactstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Is the raised easy-winner lift really lightly raced improvers, the horses that tend to win easily and get big rises?
answered0.35Big rises and easy wins both cluster in unexposed horses. If lightly raced quick-returning handicap winners beat their price without the easy win, the flag is a proxy. Columns: prior_runs, age, rating_change, last_won_easily, days_since_last_run.
Answer: No. Lightly raced (8 or fewer runs) non-easy quick-returning handicap winners score 0.96 on 334, flat in both periods, below a same-race control of 1.02. Inexperience does not stand in for the easy-win lift.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Rival: lightly raced quick-returning handicap winners beat their price whatever the manner of the winstoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the easy-winner handicap lift stronger at 7 days or fewer than at 8 to 14, as a form-peak cause would predict?
answered0.35The lift is gone by 15 to 35 days (1.013), which fits a form cycle that fades. A gradient inside the fortnight would support that cause. Columns: days_since_last_run, last_won_easily, is_handicap, last_is_handicap.
Answer: Not within raised easy winners. Seven days or fewer scored 1.28 on 43, no better than 1.334 for the full fortnight, so there is no sign of a strengthening gradient inside 14 days, although 43 bets is thin.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Sharpen: raised easy handicap winners back within 7 daysstoryraised 16 Oct 2026
If the edge comes from the 'wide' comment rather than lost ground, is it larger when the horse's price has drifted since last time (the market marked the run down)?
answered0.35Two failed physical tests point to a reading or flag effect. That mechanism implies the edge should sit where the market downgraded the horse from its last run. A test would read sp_decimal, last_sp_decimal, last_beaten_lengths, last_field_size.
Answer: In discovery, yes. Drifters score 1.47 on 260 against 1.165 on 614 for shorteners in the same capped base, and the edge rises with the size of the drift (1.38, 1.47, 1.58). The vault read is still pending.
Thread: IQ140a: wide trip with figurestested by Wide trip and the price drifted since last time: the market marked the run downoverlayraised 16 Oct 2026
On the Flat, does a low draw today (unlikely to be forced wide again) carry more of the edge than a high draw?
answered0.35The edge is that a past disadvantage won't repeat. A horse drawn wide again may lose the same ground and justify its price. Columns: draw, field_size, race_type, track_draw_bias, last_raced_wide.
Answer: No. Wide-last-time Flat runners drawn in the lower half scored A/E 1.12 on 456 bets, below the 1.15 kill line and below the parent rule. Most of the lift came from 16/1+ shots and the period after April 2026, not from the draw.
Thread: IQ140a: wide trip with figurestested by Wide last time, drawn low today on the Flatoverlayraised 16 Oct 2026
Do big-rise quick-returning handicap winners at long prices fail because they step up markedly in trip, a real obstacle the market reads correctly?
answered0.30A class step-up did not explain the longshot failures. The class group still had 0 winners from 15 at 16/1 or bigger, and the broader groups had 0 from 32. A trip change is the next visible obstacle to check. Columns: distance_yards, last_distance_yards, sp_decimal, rating_change, days_since_last_run, last_race_type, race_type.
Answer: No. Big-rise quick-return winners stepping up 15%+ in trip scored 0.67 on 50 (p 0.879, CI 0.25 to 1.47), and only 5 of them were 16/1+. So a trip step-up cannot explain the 0-from-32 longshot failures.
Thread: H34: won easily last timestoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the big-rise lift strongest when the rise also forces a step up in class, which doubles the visible deterrent?
answered0.30If the market fades what it can see, a horse that is both raised 6 lb or more and stepping up in class should be faded hardest. The rival reading is that the class rise is a real obstacle and those runners fail. GB only, since IRE race_class starts in July 2026. Columns: race_class, last_race_class, rating_change, days_since_last_run, last_won_easily.
Answer: No. Big-rise quick-returning winners stepping up in class scored 1.16 on 138, about the same as the 1.13 for big-rise winners overall. The class rise is neither a real obstacle nor a deeper fade, though the CI of 0.79 to 1.65 is wide.
Thread: H34: won easily last timetested by Rival: big-rise quick-returning handicap winners stepping up in class are a real obstacle, not an over-fadestoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Does the March-April returner lift sit in all-weather races rather than turf, contrary to the turf-season mechanism?
answered0.30Turf-only scored 1.027 on 944 against 1.09 pooled on 1424, so roughly 480 non-turf returners must score about 1.2. The mechanism predicted turf. An opposite result is a discovery: returners from the turf season may be under-rated on the all-weather against rivals that have run all winter. Columns: surface, last_surface, days_since_last_run, month, sp_decimal.
Answer: Mostly yes at discovery: AW spring returners 1.195 on 480 against turf 1.027 on 944. Dropping the month still gives 1.138 on 1213, so it is not a start-of-turf-season effect, though it is not validated (p 0.11).
Thread: H126: lightly raced four year old returnstested by All-weather spring returners carry the calendar lift, not turf returnersseasonalraised 16 Oct 2026
On the Flat, is the wide-trip edge a turf-season effect, absent on winter all-weather racing?
answered0.30The low-draw rule scored A/E 1.0 on 199 bets before 2026-04-27 and 1.2 afterwards. The split lines up with the switch from all-weather to turf, where bends and wide routes differ. This is a lead from a concentration scan, not a finding. Columns: last_surface, surface/going_group, race_type, last_track_sharpness.
Answer: No. Winter all-weather racing carries the edge: all-weather to all-weather wide runners scored 1.21 on 318 bets before 27 April 2026, and the whole all-weather set scored 1.14 on 350 in that period.
Thread: IQ140a: wide trip with figuresoverlayraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the 7-day sharpen of raised easy winners worth tracking separately from the 14-day rule, given that it adds no lift?
answered0.15H-ed1a0f17 survived 3 of 3 attacks but only on thin periods and with IRE untested. At 1.28 on 43 it is no stronger than its 1.334 parent, so its forward record will overlap almost entirely with H-528222df. Columns: days_since_last_run, rating_change.
Answer: No. The 7-day slice (1.28 on 43) is a thin subset of the frozen 14-day rule, adds no lift and cannot be judged by period or country, so tracking it separately adds no information.
Thread: H34: won easily last timestoryraised 16 Oct 2026
Does a good last-time result (first to third) that hid poor jumping lead to chase runners running below their price?
answeredraised with hypothesis 'Generalise: chasers who finished in the first three last time despite a bottom-t'
Answer: No. Chase runners that finished in the first three last time with a bottom-third Jump Index scored A/E 1.013 on 921, about par with the same-race control, so poor jumping hidden by a good placing is not over-bet.
Thread: Chase-bound winners that jumped poorly when winning are over-bettested by Generalise: chasers who finished in the first three last time despite a bottom-third Jump Index are over-betnegativeraised 16 Oct 2026
Is the sprint edge stronger where the track also tends to ride testing, adding to the stamina demand?
answeredraised with hypothesis 'Stiff sprint stayers on testing-ground tracks: more stamina demand should help m'
Answer: It cannot be tested as written. No Flat sprint at a track that is both stiff and testing-ground matched the rule (0 bets), so the idea needs a different measure of stamina demand.
Thread: H181: proven over further at a stiff tracktested by Stiff sprint stayers on testing-ground tracks: more stamina demand should help moretrack-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Thread: H36: pulled up after being held uptested by Rival: the debutant lift is handicap marks after heavy hurdle beatings, in both countriesstoryraised 17 Oct 2026
Thread: H175: young horse in a marathon chasetested by Rival: light weight, not youth, carries the marathon handicap chase liftage-staminaraised 16 Oct 2026
Thread: H85: fell when going welltested by Test-mechanism: chase unseaters that were well fancied last time beat their pricetrajectoryraised 17 Oct 2026