There is little point trying to oppose Frankel in the Queen Anne Stakes as even the most optimistic punters will find it hard to back against him stretching his 100 per cent winning record to 11 races.
He has already claimed six Group One successes and three career victories at Ascot, which suggests that the course will pose no problems.
However, 1/6 is not much of a price in the Royal Ascot odds even for a horse that looks a dead cert, luckily for punters there is some value to be found elsewhere in the betting.
One of which is in betting in the race without Frankel, or to some effectively betting on which horse will finish second.
Excelebration looks the obvious candidate, as in the ten races since his debut, he has only suffered four defeats and these have all been to Frankel.
He would have certainly been a challenger to be top miler if around in a different generation and should only improve for the recent switch to the yard of Aidan O’Brien.
Excelebration is 4/5 in the market without Frankel and this looks a decent price, given that Strong Suit is the only other horse that looks capable of snatching second.
The problem is that Strong Suit is arguably better over 7f and not a mile, despite the positive vibes coming from the yard of Richard Hannon recently.
The other market worth considering is how far Frankel will win by.
It is 5/4 on both Frankel winning by over five lengths or up to and including five lengths and preference is for the shorter winning margin.
Excelebration lost by exactly five lengths to Frankel in the Lockinge last month and by four lengths in two of his three defeats last season.
Meanwhile, the soft ground at Royal Ascot will be new to Frankel and so there is no guarantee how well he will act on this surface.
Excelebration has won on soft three times and therefore is more trusted on the ground.
Furthermore, the inclusion of another O’Brien horse in Windsor Palace could be a help if he takes over pace-making duties, as he could set the race up more to favour Excelebration than Frankel.
All Odds and Markets are correct as of the date of publishing.