Why trends-based thinking is wrong about Continuous in the Arc

Get more big-race insight in the Racing Post Weekender, out every Wednesday and available from all good newsagents or via the Racing Post digital newspaper. Read more here.

The Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe (3.05 Longchamp, Sunday) isn't a race I have too much time for and it certainly won't take up too much of my thinking time this week, especially with one of my favourite races, the Cambridgeshire, taking place the day before.

However, one thing I've noticed in the run-up to the Arc is how negative most racing fans are about Continuous and it seems entirely down to the fact that he ran in the St Leger.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not sure Continuous is good enough to beat Ace Impact, Hukum or Westover at Longchamp on Sunday, but his appearance in the Leger certainly won't stop him winning.

If there's one thing that annoys me more than anything in racing it's trends thinking because to me each horse is different and each race is different. Just because horses have been beaten in the Arc having run in the Leger, that's not always down to their schedule but much more likely down to the fact that they weren't good enough.

The argument is that Nijinsky, Sun Princess and User Friendly, to name but three, would have won in Paris if they hadn't run at Doncaster. That might be true but the latter pair probably put up career-best performances in Arc defeat, while Nijinsky had already won the Triple Crown and had been on the go for an awfully long time.

Continuous and Ryan Moore gallop clear to claim St Leger gloryCredit: Edward Whitaker

Continuous hasn't had a long, hard season. He has got better with each run and he won the Leger on the bridle without turning a hair. To my way of thinking, the fact that he ran at Doncaster is a positive because it suggested he's still improving and won't mind what the ground conditions are, rather than being any sort of negative.

He reminds me quite a lot of Kingston Hill, who went on from Doncaster to run in the Arc in 2014. He was beaten four lengths into fourth but two of those ahead of him were Treve and Taghrooda, and he was drawn in the coffin box on the outside of the field. By no means am I saying Kingston Hill should have won the Arc but Racing Post Ratings suggest he put up a better performance than when he won the Leger – he was just beaten by better horses under mitigating circumstances.

So while Continuous may well find Ace Impact too fast or Hukum too strong on Sunday, the fact he ran at Doncaster certainly shouldn't be considered any sort of negative. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Overthinking can cloud judgement

When it comes to winner-finding, I sometimes think trying to be too clever is a downright hindrance.

Some of the best punters I know wouldn't have excelled at school exams, but what they do have is clarity of thought and an advantage of not overcomplicating things.

To put it simply, horseraces are more often than not won by the horse with the most ability; the one who can run the fastest. Of course there are times when other factors like pace, draw or ground conditions can decide races, but it often annoys me that I overuse those factors when they're nowhere near as important as ability.

For example, the number of hours I spend looking at weather forecasts is absurd. There are people paid to tell us the weather that can't do it with any certainty, yet I spend hours trying to work out how much rain is going to fall at a certain track and I often tailor my bets to that.

How stupid can I be? I'm sure those clear-thinking punters wouldn't even consider doing that.

Read these next:

2023 Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe at Longchamp: assessing the top contenders for Sunday's big race 

Coolmore sweep to more Classic glory - here's why their domination will only increase 

Racing Post Members' Club: subscribe for just £9.99 

Do you want £400+ of free bets? Racing Post have got the best offers, all in one place. Visit racingpost.com/freebets to find out more.