Another 100-1 winner would not be such a grand shock
Can lightning strike twice? Twelve months ago the applause that rang out from the stands after Mon Mome had won the John Smith’s Grand National at Aintree was all but drowned out by a bout of mass head-scratching.
It came from countless form students and backers who were trying to work out just how a 100-1 shot had won the race. The Grand National has had its fair share of long-priced winners but that three-figure mark had only been hit four times previously since the aptly-named Lottery won the first running of the race in 1839.
Of those other shock results Tipperary Tim in 1928 and Foinavon in 1967 were both the only horses to complete the course without parting company with their jockey, and it was not that dissimilar a tale with Gregalach in 1929 who managed to weave his way through a record field of 66 from which only 10 actually finished. As for Caughoo in 1947 there was plenty of cover in terms of 56 rivals but driving rain reduced visibility to such an extent that a few conspiracy theorists even hinted that Caughoo’s jockey, Eddie Dempsey, had kept the horse off the track for a circuit and only rejoined the race a mile from the winning post.
However, there could be no such suggestions about Mon Mome’s victory and it was in fact the completion of a journey that has taken the Grand National full circle. Those other 100-1 winners had helped cement the public perception that any horse could win the race. That was based on the lottery element but now, through a variety of factors, the victory of Mon Mome proves that to be very much the case.
The race often painted an ugly scene for jump racing during the 1970s and ‘80s where a mixture of a course that required a redesign and horses who were just not good enough produced a compelling argument for change.
Some of the fences, most notably Becher’s Brook after two horses died in the 1989, have been modified and the conditions of the race have also been altered, with the introduction of a minimum rating band, to prevent horses who would not be considered good enough from taking part.
These two measures, along with a healthy increase in prize-money, have had a galvanising effect on the race. Although the handicap for this race is not produced specifically from official British Horseracing Authority ratings (BHA head of handicapping, Phil Smith, produces bespoke ratings for this race) it is clear to see that the deadwood runners of previous years are nowhere to be found.
In 1999 Back Bar ran in the race from 32lbs out of the handicap, last year the bottom-weighted horses had to be rated 5lbs above the minimum threshold to even get a run in the race and the same is likely this year. The positive effect on the race has been that no-hopers, who posed a genuine risk to themselves and others, have been replaced with horses who are real contenders.
Fifteen years ago many form students felt that the National field could easily be whittled down to a little more than a dozen contenders by two relatively simple processes. Firstly disregard horses carrying more than 11st and then all those running from outside the handicap or those whose winning form was so old it probably dated back to when the formbook was still handwritten.
If the changes to the race conditions have cut out the deadwood, then Smith deserves credit for the way in which he has been prepared to give the top-rated runners a lower weight then they would be allotted on their normal rating. The sight of a topweight winning the race may still go back to the days of Red Rum but it is worth noting that the first four horses to finish last year all carried in excess of 11st.
Now the National, as a betting medium, represents a field where every competitor has some sort of realistic chance much like one of golf’s majors, which brings together the world’s best talent. The betting market will always have favourites and outsiders but these outsiders can, on their best form, legitimately, upset the odds.
Another 100-1 one winner may not be such a bolt from the blue.
Tags: