[Thunderground]

Thanks for clearing that up, str. You're right. It wasn't related to Saratoga, but to something I noticed at Del Mar. I'll keep an eye on those condition books.

Seems like a nice enough forum. Bookmarking this thread is a no-brainer.

[JBEX]

hey str.. when trainers for big bucks clients help pick out horses at the auctions do they get compensated for their time or just reap the rewards of training big time horses ? If I had to guess it's something they do gratis outside of travel and lodging expenses but wouldn't be surprised if they get something extra

[str]

hey str.. when trainers for big bucks clients help pick out horses at the auctions do they get compensated for their time or just reap the rewards of training big time horses ? If I had to guess it's something they do gratis outside of travel and lodging expenses but wouldn't be surprised if they get something extra

Obviously several scenarios like multiple owners buying, etc. But you have a handle on it. A trainer is asked to leave the stable for 2-3 days and travel to buy for one client, typically the client will pick up the air fare and hotel. That was my experience when I did it.
Maybe a new client for the flavor of the year trainer might throw 5k on top of that, but that is only a top of the heap trainers. Maybe just won the Derby or whatever the year before.
The back end comp if you buy a baby colt and it turns out to be G1 material, is a breeding right each year after retirement, after training it and making money that way to say nothing of the new clientele it usually attracts . So getting paid for the opportunity to have that is only for special circumstances or like I said, a huge name off big wins.

[JBEX]

Obviously several scenarios like multiple owners buying, etc. But you have a handle on it. A trainer is asked to leave the stable for 2-3 days and travel to buy for one client, typically the client will pick up the air fare and hotel. That was my experience when I did it.
Maybe a new client for the flavor of the year trainer might throw 5k on top of that, but that is only a top of the heap trainers. Maybe just won the Derby or whatever the year before.
The back end comp if you buy a baby colt and it turns out to be G1 material, is a breeding right each year after retirement, after training it and making money that way to say nothing of the new clientele it usually attracts . So getting paid for the opportunity to have that is only for special circumstances or like I said, a huge name off big wins.

yeah can understand that.. just to have an opportunity to train horses with that kind of potential is a reward enough.. when you say a breeding right each year if horse winds up being a stallion, what exactly is that..trainer has a right to breed a mare at no cost or maybe sell his share at a discount to someone else who wants to use that stallion ?? that could be pretty lucrative if you have a real good one who also pans out as a productive stallion.. or maybe I'm totally off with my guess but figured I'd take a stab

[str]

yeah can understand that.. just to have an opportunity to train horses with that kind of potential is a reward enough.. when you say a breeding right each year if horse winds up being a stallion, what exactly is that..trainer has a right to breed a mare at no cost or maybe sell his share at a discount to someone else who wants to use that stallion ?? that could be pretty lucrative if you have a real good one who also pans out as a productive stallion.. or maybe I'm totally off with my guess but figured I'd take a stab

Yes. Your stab was a bulls eye.

[Thunderground]

Str, I have a question about the three stewards. I bet a lot of exotic tickets that include longshots. Often when those longshots come in it's a close call, and there may be some bumping involved.

I have no problem with unanimous decisions by the stewards, but when the votes are 1-1 and the decision is on the shoulders of one steward I can't help but question the integrity of the man. Almost every single time such a decision goes against the longshot, where the same bump by a favorite would almost certainly have been ignored. My impression is that the steward in this position is inclined to take the road of least resistance. A quick glance at the toteboard will tell him what that road is. If it's between a 20/1 longshot and a 1/1 favorite, why would he not keep the majority of people happy?

Consistency does not exist here. How else could we get opposite decisions for the exact same infractions? Again, I have no problem with unanimous decisions at all. My solution would simply be to discard the 2-1 decisions, as they represent nothing more than 'anyone's guess'. I talked to one steward who assured me that the stewards have no idea what the odds are. Are they staring into thin air while the odds are visible to everybody else? As a trainer what were your experiences with stewards and their amazing lack of consistency? There's a lot of money on the line, and these guys just create their own reality of the race without anybody holding them accountable for decisions that are all over the place. Where is the accountability? (the larger question would be why horse racing can't get its act together like other sports, in this case by coming up with a better, more consistent decision model)

[Thunderground]

Another question, if I may. What are your views towards foreign horses, Ireland etc, that fly over for US turf races.

I do a lot with form-of-day, and it seems that those horses don't quite need the same top performance to shine in such races. Is that accurate?

[str]

Str, I have a question about the three stewards. I bet a lot of exotic tickets that include longshots. Often when those longshots come in it's a close call, and there may be some bumping involved.

I have no problem with unanimous decisions by the stewards, but when the votes are 1-1 and the decision is on the shoulders of one steward I can't help but question the integrity of the man. Almost every single time such a decision goes against the longshot, where the same bump by a favorite would almost certainly have been ignored. My impression is that the steward in this position is inclined to take the road of least resistance. A quick glance at the toteboard will tell him what that road is. If it's between a 20/1 longshot and a 1/1 favorite, why would he not keep the majority of people happy?

Consistency does not exist here. How else could we get opposite decisions for the exact same infractions? Again, I have no problem with unanimous decisions at all. My solution would simply be to discard the 2-1 decisions, as they represent nothing more than 'anyone's guess'. I talked to one steward who assured me that the stewards have no idea what the odds are. Are they staring into thin air while the odds are visible to everybody else? As a trainer what were your experiences with stewards and their amazing lack of consistency? There's a lot of money on the line, and these guys just create their own reality of the race without anybody holding them accountable for decisions that are all over the place. Where is the accountability? (the larger question would be why horse racing can't get its act together like other sports, in this case by coming up with a better, more consistent decision model)

I will answer these comments as they appear. Maybe a little hard to follow but here goes.

Knowing the 3-0 or 2-1 voting is new to me. That NEVER was divulged when I trained.

As for giving the favorite a break over the long shot, no. That's not it but I can see why it looks that way. The break, or benefit of the doubt is the veteran rider that is a big name vs. the lesser rider and more so the big name rider vs. a bug rider. A bug rider rarely gets the nod over a veteran that is a top rider. Top riders don't ride a lot of long shots so that is whats happening. You follow football. You think Ed Hochuli did NOT say you are too young to Cam Newton? Of course he did. And he is. That's the way it is on the track as well. Yes, different rules for Rodgers and Brady and different rules for top top riders as well. It's human nature and or, just the way it is. Same with trainers. I sure as hell paid my dues to the good ole boys from Bowie when I ran my mouth and paid that price as well. Until I realized that time would work it all out. And it did. Guess who explained it too me. Yep, a few veteran riders, several of which went on to become Stewards. Lol.
Can't disgard the 2-1 decisions. The head steward has more experience than the others. A Steward with 20 years experience would be negated by a 1st year Steward. Same thing is happening here as it did to me and to young players.
Of course they know the odds, but they don't care about favorites winning. It's about the riders and their experience or lack of it. Remember, most Steward stands have at least one rider in them.
I have long been a fan of making the results official for the customers no matter what happened, simply as they actually finished and any DQ's only effecting the purse money.
As you watch moving forward, see if this pans out as I have explained. Not 100% of the time maybe, but way more often than not.

[str]

Another question, if I may. What are your views towards foreign horses, Ireland etc, that fly over for US turf races.

I do a lot with form-of-day, and it seems that those horses don't quite need the same top performance to shine in such races. Is that accurate?

The European horses are so far superior to U.S. turf horses they don't need to throw a best race at them to beat them. Travel can be tough but climate and the course are things to watch for. The hot weather kills them as do hard surfaces. Seems they do better for the B.,C. cup when it's at Churchill than they do in Calif.
So, yes, you are accurate.

[Thunderground]

Great insight, str. The riders! Of course it's the riders.

The track announcer (perhaps not all, but they do in Cal) announces it when a decision is unanimous. And those are typically the obvious decisions. When the decision is more of a coin flip they will rarely if ever add that unanimous comment, so I'm assuming they would if it were unanimous. That leaves me with the 2-1 decisions. They don't announce those as such.

Thanks as well for the turf insight. I asked because of the upcoming Breeders Cup. The grass at Keeneland should be right up the alley of those Irish. I'm not sure if this has been asked already, but why are those turf horses so superior? Breeding? Training?

[str]

Great insight, str. The riders! Of course it's the riders.

The track announcer (perhaps not all, but they do in Cal) announces it when a decision is unanimous. And those are typically the obvious decisions. When the decision is more of a coin flip they will rarely if ever add that unanimous comment, so I'm assuming they would if it were unanimous. That leaves me with the 2-1 decisions. They don't announce those as such.

Thanks as well for the turf insight. I asked because of the upcoming Breeders Cup. The grass at Keeneland should be right up the alley of those Irish. I'm not sure if this has been asked already, but why are those turf horses so superior? Breeding? Training?

Both.

[JBEX]

In the 10th at Belmont today there is a horse that I'm having a tough time understanding why they're running her on the turf..
I realize that we can't know everything from PP's in the drf but here goes

2yo filly
425k kee sept yearling
running line first out

6-2 6-2 8-7 9-12 ...10 horse field at 7f breaking from 2 post
bump break, 3 wide both turns, 5 wide quarter pole
33-1 odds ... raced 34 days ago

below average turf sire
all 3 siblings won over 300k but two tried turf and didn't win

just think its odd with pedigree information they'd try the turf in her 2nd start..like your thoughts giving you as much as I can which still probably isn't enough

[str]

In the 10th at Belmont today there is a horse that I'm having a tough time understanding why they're running her on the turf..
I realize that we can't know everything from PP's in the drf but here goes

2yo filly
425k kee sept yearling
running line first out

6-2 6-2 8-7 9-12 ...10 horse field at 7f breaking from 2 post
bump break, 3 wide both turns, 5 wide quarter pole
33-1 odds ... raced 34 days ago

below average turf sire
all 3 siblings won over 300k but two tried turf and didn't win

just think its odd with pedigree information they'd try the turf in her 2nd start..like your thoughts giving you as much as I can which still probably isn't enough

No idea but a few comments might help. In no particular order:

7/8's for a firster always catches my eye. Simply put, it is an odd distance. There are typically plenty of chances to run 6F if that is what you really want. Usually a race every 2 weeks at least. So if they choose 7/8's is it because the horse is slow in the morning? Well we know the horse is not quick off it's feet and real fast. If so, they wait 2 weeks right? So maybe the horse if real long or tall or clumsy or a combo of those. That assumption is right way more than it is wrong.
Breeding will hint as to wanting a distance. Seeing the horse is very helpful and watching the horse warm up more helpful still, but I realize that is not available for many that play multiple tracks.
Tote board always comes into play on firsters , so 33-1 suggests the slow, clumsy, whatever angle I spoke too. That does not mean that they cannot win, they certainly can, but need distance to get in stride, get comfortable and find a rhythm.
The turf thing is odd given what you provided so I looked up the result. I assume it's the horse that ran on Sept. 6? I noticed the turf race was 7/8's so my first thought is that the trainer wants to run 2 turns but needed another race to be fit enough because the horse does not get as much out of the morning works as some others might. That is not a knock, it is the individuality of that horse, that is all. So maybe running 7/8's was the ideal scenario in the trainers mind and he figured running it on the turf was better than opting for a shorter distance.
Just guessing , but I am probably close, having had horses like I just described before.
So if he runs back at a mile or more next out, which I assume he will do, we are starting to figure it out.

Just going to have to wait and see.

Hope that helps.

Keep me posted or follow up JBEX.

[JBEX]

No idea but a few comments might help. In no particular order:

7/8's for a firster always catches my eye. Simply put, it is an odd distance. There are typically plenty of chances to run 6F if that is what you really want. Usually a race every 2 weeks at least. So if they choose 7/8's is it because the horse is slow in the morning? Well we know the horse is not quick off it's feet and real fast. If so, they wait 2 weeks right? So maybe the horse if real long or tall or clumsy or a combo of those. That assumption is right way more than it is wrong.
Breeding will hint as to wanting a distance. Seeing the horse is very helpful and watching the horse warm up more helpful still, but I realize that is not available for many that play multiple tracks.
Tote board always comes into play on firsters , so 33-1 suggests the slow, clumsy, whatever angle I spoke too. That does not mean that they cannot win, they certainly can, but need distance to get in stride, get comfortable and find a rhythm.
The turf thing is odd given what you provided so I looked up the result. I assume it's the horse that ran on Sept. 6? I noticed the turf race was 7/8's so my first thought is that the trainer wants to run 2 turns but needed another race to be fit enough because the horse does not get as much out of the morning works as some others might. That is not a knock, it is the individuality of that horse, that is all. So maybe running 7/8's was the ideal scenario in the trainers mind and he figured running it on the turf was better than opting for a shorter distance.
Just guessing , but I am probably close, having had horses like I just described before.
So if he runs back at a mile or more next out, which I assume he will do, we are starting to figure it out.

Just going to have to wait and see.

Hope that helps.

Keep me posted or follow up JBEX.

I can understand getting a couple of races in a horse like that to get some foundation in her..I was more curious about the turf rather than that they ran her at 7f.. Just wanted to give you as much information as I could in case it mattered for your answer..
It just seems to me generally speaking that when you spend that much on a horse with the pedigree lean towards dirt why play around on the turf this early in her career.. maybe conditioning prior to running her 2 turns on the dirt ? some turf success further back in the female family although I doubt that would make them try it this early.. realize no way to know for sure and sure Ribaudo had something in mind putting her on the green..yes you were looking at the right past performance line ...9/6 @ 7f saratoga,zondaq the horse.. thanks for the reply and I'll put her in the stable

[str]

I can understand getting a couple of races in a horse like that to get some foundation in her..I was more curious about the turf rather than that they ran her at 7f.. Just wanted to give you as much information as I could in case it mattered for your answer..
It just seems to me generally speaking that when you spend that much on a horse with the pedigree lean towards dirt why play around on the turf this early in her career.. maybe conditioning prior to running her 2 turns on the dirt ? some turf success further back in the female family although I doubt that would make them try it this early.. realize no way to know for sure and sure Ribaudo had something in mind putting her on the green..yes you were looking at the right past performance line ...9/6 @ 7f saratoga,zondaq the horse.. thanks for the reply and I'll put her in the stable

Yes, what I was trying to say was that the trainer settled for the turf, not worrying about surface, to get the ideal distance to help the horse next time going further. Like the best of two not perfect options and he chose this one.
It will be interesting to see the horse go further . 2 turns at Belmont though? Maybe the 2 turns is only available on turf for now in NY and that is a factor?

[JBEX]

Yes, what I was trying to say was that the trainer settled for the turf, not worrying about surface, to get the ideal distance to help the horse next time going further. Like the best of two not perfect options and he chose this one.
It will be interesting to see the horse go further . 2 turns at Belmont though? Maybe the 2 turns is only available on turf for now in NY and that is a factor?

got you.. the distance more important than the surface might explain it.. wasn't thinking about belmont being a one turn route track but only 3 weeks left there anyway.. sure they'll card at least one possibly two 9f races on the aqu main track or maybe they'll choose a one turn mile there..would think they wouldn't want to run her on the inner in the cold weather but the prize money is big up north so that's some incentive to try that.

pretty much an even run around last time so sure she got something out of that.. If she's sound I'm guessing a 9f maiden on the aqu main or we'll see her at GP during the winter months

[JBEX]

2/1 2/half 2/half 3/1.5 5/5.5

not a bad tuneup for better things down the road..she's bred to run all day top and bottom according to my sire stats book.. If she came out of the race OK could see her improving nicely
next out at belmont.. her name is laquesta and I'll put her in the stable to follow..keep you posted and thanks for the feedback

actually slipped by me .. she came back to run one month later 9/24 and finished 2nd by a neck breaking from the rail in an 11 horse field 8.5f MSW on the turf..went off 12-1..same owner trainer combo as the horse we discussed last time zondaq ..have a hunch the latter will run on the dirt next time.. I'll keep an eye out

[JBEX]

actually slipped by me .. she came back to run one month later 9/24 and finished 2nd by a neck breaking from the rail in an 11 horse field 8.5 MSW on the turf..went off 12-1..same owner trainer combo as the horse we discussed last time zondaq ..have a hunch the latter will run on the dirt next time.. I'll keep an eye out

laquesta on the AE list in the 2nd at belmont tomorrow.. inner turf at 8.5f will mean she'll have a horrible post if she does draw in ...cats out of the bag anyway with her last performance

[Thunderground]

Str, do you have any words of wisdom for the upcoming Breeders Cup at Keeneland? I hardly ever play at that track, so I don't know anything about biases etc. I suppose it wouldn't hurt to start watching the races there for the next couple of weeks.

[sshz]

Words of Wisdom.......don't bet American Pharoah at 8/5 or 9/5 odds to win against this group of horses, it's way too short of odds. He lost a lot of weight after his last race and took time off from training, and as they are training him up again, it will be hard to be at peak form first time back out. Others come into the race in much better shape.....

[str]

Str, do you have any words of wisdom for the upcoming Breeders Cup at Keeneland? I hardly ever play at that track, so I don't know anything about biases etc. I suppose it wouldn't hurt to start watching the races there for the next couple of weeks.

Wish I did. When they went to poly years ago, they lost me. Back in the day, it seemed to favor speed. But because I never followed it , that could be off as well. I do think that Mike and some of the other guys in here, who are IMO solid cappers might have some insight. I hope they read this and contribute.
Yes, I would read the charts carefully. Watch replays if you can, especially Friday's and Saturdays leading up to it. Maintenance crews have routines also. Make sure they rally both outside and inside. Look at posts and 1st 1/4 positions and see if anything jumps out. About 10 minutes a day from here out is all it will take.
Wish I could help more. GL.

[JBEX]

hey str..figure I'd let you know laquesta (#6 ..7-2) is running in bel R9 today.. MSW 8.5 turf..has the 5 post in a 9 horse field thats loaded with expensive well bred horses..anthony dutrow has a firster #5 reef point (15-1)..great betting race

[str]

hey str..figure I'd let you know laquesta (#6 ..7-2) is running in bel R9 today.. MSW 8.5 turf..has the 5 post in a 9 horse field thats loaded with expensive well bred horses..anthony dutrow has a firster #5 reef point (15-1)..great betting race

Sorry I did not answer until now. Just saw this .

Saw she ran a decent race to be 3rd. No value though. She will win one of these but as the favorite it looks like.
Tony's firster did not run well. As stated many times in here, when you see a firster going that distance, trained by a guy that does extremely well with firsters going short, well, it is a clue for sure.
Nice catch on Laquesta from her 1st start. Sometimes it's a home run, and sometimes just a deep fly out. But that is how you find nice prices. Thanks for keeping me posted. Keep up the good work JBEX.

[JBEX]

Sorry I did not answer until now. Just saw this .

Saw she ran a decent race to be 3rd. No value though. She will win one of these but as the favorite it looks like.
Tony's firster did not run well. As stated many times in here, when you see a firster going that distance, trained by a guy that does extremely well with firsters going short, well, it is a clue for sure.
Nice catch on Laquesta from her 1st start. Sometimes it's a home run, and sometimes just a deep fly out. But that is how you find nice prices. Thanks for keeping me posted. Keep up the good work JBEX.

no problem.. the time to catch her was obviously the 2nd start for value as she was an obvious play yesterday..have a hunch she might be better coming off the pace than running on the lead but obviously small sample to go by..on another note AD had a nice winner in the 250k sleepy hollow stakes at belmont.. for 2yo ny bred colts...he was even money and looked it on paper..owned by "team D" so maybe he has a piece..cost 300k at april obs this year

[str]

no problem.. the time to catch her was obviously the 2nd start for value as she was an obvious play yesterday..have a hunch she might be better coming off the pace than running on the lead but obviously small sample to go by..on another note AD had a nice winner in the 250k sleepy hollow stakes at belmont.. for 2yo ny bred colts...he was even money and looked it on paper..owned by "team D" so maybe he has a piece..cost 300k at april obs this year

AD is so good with young horses. He has such a talented eye for a horse in the sales ring. He and I went to Keenland and Ocala several years in a row back when I was still doing that. We had a great time together every year. We remain very close friends and talk frequently.
That owner is a syndicate group put together every year. Mostly the same people every year but some new ones every now and then. Some are old friends of T's or old owners . Each year is it's own entity. A nice chance to own pieces of very nice horses. He does a super job with that. I was aware that he had won that race.
Thanks JBEX.

[JBEX]

AD is so good with young horses. He has such a talented eye for a horse in the sales ring. He and I went to Keenland and Ocala several years in a row back when I was still doing that. We had a great time together every year. We remain very close friends and talk frequently.
That owner is a syndicate group put together every year. Mostly the same people every year but some new ones every now and then. Some are old friends of T's or old owners . Each year is it's own entity. A nice chance to own pieces of very nice horses. He does a super job with that. I was aware that he had won that race.
Thanks JBEX.

no problem str..good to know that about him

[JBEX]

If a trainer is going to use a surface switch to get a horse into condition for a race which way is more effective turf/dirt or vice versa ? For reasons I can't explain dirt/turf has always meant nothing to me while turf/dirt carries weight when I'm capping..any thoughts on this and do trainers run horses on the turf as a conditioner for dirt races ?

[cutchemist42]

Wish I did. When they went to poly years ago, they lost me. Back in the day, it seemed to favor speed. But because I never followed it , that could be off as well. I do think that Mike and some of the other guys in here, who are IMO solid cappers might have some insight. I hope they read this and contribute.
Yes, I would read the charts carefully. Watch replays if you can, especially Friday's and Saturdays leading up to it. Maintenance crews have routines also. Make sure they rally both outside and inside. Look at posts and 1st 1/4 positions and see if anything jumps out. About 10 minutes a day from here out is all it will take.
Wish I could help more. GL.

As a trainer, were you reading charts regularly?

[str]

As a trainer, were you reading charts regularly?

Yes I did, but I was at the track I raced at every day and watched every race live and then both replays if possible. That was mainly for future claims I might make.
What I meant in your quote was , if you do not have access to replays or don't have the time, you can read the charts and understand the positions of the finishers DURING the running of the race. Like, saved ground from the gate to the 1/4 pole, then swung out. That is a rail trip for 3/4's of the race +/-. You can get a sense of if the rail is great, even, or terrible if you read all the races. Maybe the outside is great. Or maybe it is even. Or closers, or whatever. On bias days, you will see a repeat of WHERE the top finishers were for the majority or all of the race. Then, see where the faltering favorites or 5-1 or less horses were and you can detect if there is a pattern. Then see where any longshots that ran well were.
Most people see speed as a bias but unless it is speed from all parts of the track, it is probably really more of a rail bias. The charts can clearly settle the question for you.
Hope that helps.

[str]

If a trainer is going to use a surface switch to get a horse into condition for a race which way is more effective turf/dirt or vice versa ? For reasons I can't explain dirt/turf has always meant nothing to me while turf/dirt carries weight when I'm capping..any thoughts on this and do trainers run horses on the turf as a conditioner for dirt races ?

Most trainers do not want to use a surface switch to condition a horse. If they are forced to by the races offered, they take what they can get. I understand that sometimes a horse might need a race or two after a long layoff, but honestly I rarely needed to condition a horse with a race other than a long layoff with a horse that just doesn't get much out of workouts. And that is not the norm. I do think that players see a dull effort and assume they bet on a horse that the trainer was just "giving" a race, but that is way overblown. Most times, the horse simply ran poorly. Soooo many things can happen in a race to make a horse run a subpar performance.
I read where players say the trainer told them not to try and it makes me laugh. Sure, some idiot that wins at 5% might do that somewhere, but in most cases, it is an easy excuse for the customer to right off what was really a bad or unlucky bet . Kind of like when the favorite bounces and that's why it lost. Nope. 95% of the time, that is truly not the case but the excuse makes the player feel better.
The surface change move up has everything to do with the confidence or lack thereof of the surface. Simply put, if the horse does not trust the surface, they will only stride out about 80% and be very careful switching leads. Like walking on half frozen slush or possibly black ice, you cut your stride down. 80% equals a poor effort every time.
Turf horses might have a flat foot that can easily handle the turf but the dirt is like loose sand to them and they have less traction. Or they don't like the sand spray in their face. No spray on the turf.
I would have to say the dirt to turf is more effective but every horse is different so it really is an individual thing.

[mrginandtonic]

Hi Mr. G and T.

Wanted to help out with this one.
You know how I talk about the right eye and being pinned once you are solo on the lead? I have spoken about it a lot.
Well, had Frosted wanted to go on around the clubhouse turn or even JUST as they started down the backside, he probably would have let him . I am sure he would have. But, as a rider you reach a point of no return in 2 turn races when you have been on the lead early. That point of no return is about the 5/8' pole. ( that's 5/8's before the finish or roughly a third of the way down the backside.)
That is exactly where Frosted went after AP. That was no accident. All trainers and jocks think alike when it comes to this in the USA. Not in Europe where the unwritten rule I am speaking to does not apply in the same fashion.
So when Frosted started to want to put on the pressure it was a steady build of pressure from the 5/8's pole to the 3/8's pole. By the time they got to the 3/8's pole, those 2 were flying around the turn. It was incredible too me how fast they were going at that stage.
But AP's rider had committed to the lead by then and that unwritten rule of keeping AP's right eye clean was in play. So that is why he did what he did. In my eyes, it was the correct move, and the only choice he had at the time. Had he sat, Frosted could have gotten 3/4's of a length on him and started leaning in on him going into the far turn. When the horses switched leads to their left leg, going into the far turn, AP would have had to check out of the spot and would have been 2 lengths minimum behind with 5/16's to go.
So I think the jock did the only thing he could have done at the time and remember, it was a slow steady build to an all out duel . It didn't just go full on right away.
Hope that helps explain the jocks mind set and thought process.

Good morning sir, now that the breeders cup is over and we saw how AP ran. How do you see and what do you see differently in terms of how this race vs AP's last race?? Would like your analysis on his last two races, thanks in advance.

[Thunderground]

str, what is the effect of a short stretch run, such as at Keeneland? Does it make the turn time more important? I saw a number of BC races where I thought it could have been more interesting with a longer stretch run, especially for closers. Are jockeys who fly into Keeneland for a couple of days of racing, from a track with a longer stretch run, at a disadvantage? Wouldn't it take a little longer to get a good feel for the track? Or do the top riders have such a good feel for distance that it makes no difference?

[JBEX]

Most trainers do not want to use a surface switch to condition a horse. If they are forced to by the races offered, they take what they can get. I understand that sometimes a horse might need a race or two after a long layoff, but honestly I rarely needed to condition a horse with a race other than a long layoff with a horse that just doesn't get much out of workouts. And that is not the norm. I do think that players see a dull effort and assume they bet on a horse that the trainer was just "giving" a race, but that is way overblown. Most times, the horse simply ran poorly. Soooo many things can happen in a race to make a horse run a subpar performance.
I read where players say the trainer told them not to try and it makes me laugh. Sure, some idiot that wins at 5% might do that somewhere, but in most cases, it is an easy excuse for the customer to right off what was really a bad or unlucky bet . Kind of like when the favorite bounces and that's why it lost. Nope. 95% of the time, that is truly not the case but the excuse makes the player feel better.
The surface change move up has everything to do with the confidence or lack thereof of the surface. Simply put, if the horse does not trust the surface, they will only stride out about 80% and be very careful switching leads. Like walking on half frozen slush or possibly black ice, you cut your stride down. 80% equals a poor effort every time.
Turf horses might have a flat foot that can easily handle the turf but the dirt is like loose sand to them and they have less traction. Or they don't like the sand spray in their face. No spray on the turf.
I would have to say the dirt to turf is more effective but every horse is different so it really is an individual thing.

so you would say for {he most part the only significance of the turf/dirt stat is a trainer taking a shot with a turf horse on the dirt..only exception would be a turf race at the right distance and time where the horse needs the work..there is no plan that the turf race will somehow benefit the horse next time out on the dirt..maybe like a shock to the system so that when the horse hits the dirt in his following start after the turf race he might react positively cause dirt is his preferred surface.would have guessed that might be a tactic but good to know that it's probably not

on another note I'm a little surprised that some trainers don't go in with the idea that a horse off a modest layoff (say 3 months)
might need a race to get in shape..guess it couldn't hurt to have a race under the belt .. but I think what you mean is that if you wanted to have him ready off gallops and works you could..realize we're talking in general here and each situation is different..these are both important handicapping points for me so definetly something I'd like to understand better

[str]

Good morning sir, now that the breeders cup is over and we saw how AP ran. How do you see and what do you see differently in terms of how this race vs AP's last race?? Would like your analysis on his last two races, thanks in advance.

Sorry for the delay Mr. G and T.
His last race I went through in my response to you. I think that pretty much sums it up but please let me know if any detail of the race is something you want me to discuss.
As for the Classic, it was exactly what they were looking for. Broke fine, found a nice gear early, and was left alone to set fractions that were within his comfort zone. He was not run at in suicidal fashion down the back side like he was in the previous race. ( Doing that might have make for a different story, who knows, but it would have been death valley for anyone to try it. AP would have easily out finished whoever might have tried such a tactic.)
When he was turning for home, the jock, who had sat fairly still to that point, really roused AP and he responded as expected. As soon as he responded, which was the only question left as to who would win, the race was over. Nobody was going to get him at that point.
I think that going in, with the race set up, everyone racing against AP knew that their biggest chance to win was if AP was a little flat going in. Maybe break a step slow, or just not be himself, or something. But at full strength, it would be a mountain to climb, and it was.
AP ran great. The way champions run. I was not a believer early on. And still not in the Belmont because he seemed to get a perfect trip every time. A trainers dream.
Probably sounds crazy, but in my eyes, he showed me more when Frosted ran at him, and he lost, then he did winning those previous races.
So, incredibly to most I assume, the Classic was the 1st time I was actually a believer in him. And holy crap what a race he ran.
I stand corrected, and those that saw true greatness in him early on, I applaud you because I did not. I was envious of every trip he had and had only wished my horses could have gotten more of those trips. Too me, his pedestrian fractions AND nice trips were very possibly a disguise for a very nice horse that was deemed great. It was not the Seattle Slew type races where he flies around the track running insane fractions and nobody can get close because he just doesn't stop.
So needless to say, he ran a great race in the Classic and in my mind, vaults into the all time greats list. Not sure where in my mind yet, probably around 7-10 all time. But I will need to see the other names together to see where I would put him. Of course, that is my list in my mind. Everyone is entitled to their own list and who am I to say where they place him. That is the fun of having those lists.
Hope that explains what I saw and think. Please follow up if you have any other thought Mr. G and T. Always a pleasure talking to you. Now follow that pick 6 dream ! I'm rooting for you.

[str]

str, what is the effect of a short stretch run, such as at Keeneland? Does it make the turn time more important? I saw a number of BC races where I thought it could have been more interesting with a longer stretch run, especially for closers. Are jockeys who fly into Keeneland for a couple of days of racing, from a track with a longer stretch run, at a disadvantage? Wouldn't it take a little longer to get a good feel for the track? Or do the top riders have such a good feel for distance that it makes no difference?

Q. str, what is the effect of a short stretch run, such as at Keeneland? Does it make the turn time more important? I saw a number of BC races where I thought it could have been more interesting with a longer stretch run, especially for closers.

A. A short stretch can help speed but all that depends on the riders behind them IMO.

Q. Are jockeys who fly into Keeneland for a couple of days of racing, from a track with a longer stretch run, at a disadvantage? Wouldn't it take a little longer to get a good feel for the track?

A. If they never rode there before they certainly could be at a disadvantage. It goes to the preparation for the rider and the willingness of the horse to respond exactly when asked. That asking will be earlier on the track from the horses vantage point and they might be a bit slower to respond from habit if nothing else. Having to be asked into the turn can and will present a problem for a small % of horses, those that don't necessarily feel as comfortable around the turn as they might through the lane but again, that is a small % and other than seeing it happen and knowing the particular horse, there is no way to identify who that might be in the post parade.

Q. Or do the top riders have such a good feel for distance that it makes no difference?

A. Well, they should. But they do not always , at least that is the way it looks. Think of it as the opposite of Belmont going a mile and a half. Jocks struggle with that until they have done it in most cases. The true students of the game type jocks would understand all this. Most top riders I always found were these types. Not every one but most. Just like any sport, you will have your tremendously gifted under achievers that get away with it on sheer talent but it does cost them sometimes.

Lastly, I know I spoke waaay back in this thread about Timonium and how it goes downhill down the backside and starts back up the hill before the far turn. Phil Grove, one of the best bull ring riders of his day, explained to me that it was very important to get a closer moving on the down hill portion prior to the uphill portion even if it seemed a bit premature. At the least, he said, their momentum needs to be shifting towards forward and making that move. If you don't, you are asking for a horse to level off and climb a hill at the same time. That does not work out very well. I don't know about Keenlend and if it has any small adjustments that a rider should use like a Timonium would, and I realize it is not a bull ring, but subtle little things like that can and are the difference between winning and losing often enough that it was essential knowledge when I ran there. Phil and I won a ton of races there with that kind of info working for us instead of against us. Not only when we were closing, but when we were on the lead and others waited a bit too late to make their move.
Hope that helps.