Horse Racing questions and answers

[JBEX]

gotcha thunderground.. feel that coming in from Argentina running as well as he did in allowance races over there gives him some credentials .. how he matches up with competition over here not a certainty.. agreed

[Thunderground]

Str, this is War Acadamy, a horse that once was on the Derby trail and trained by Baffert:

http://www.equibase.com/profiles/Results.cfm?type=Horse&refno=8826051&registry=T

He races today at Aqueduct, which is what brought him back to my attention.

When you see a race history like this, what is your thought process. I'll copy and past it here, and for the detail one would have to click on each race:

Track	Date	Race	Race Type	Finish	Chart	Video
Aqueduct	1/31/2016	7	Claiming	7
Aqueduct	12/27/2015	6	Claiming	2
Del Mar	8/8/2015	9	Claiming	2
Del Mar	7/23/2015	6	Claiming	5
Santa Anita	5/25/2015	3	Los Angeles Stakes - Gr. 3	4
Santa Anita	5/9/2015	8	American Stakes - Gr. 3	7
Santa Anita	4/25/2015	2	Allowance Optional Claiming	1
Los Alamitos Thoroughbred	7/4/2014	7	American Flag Stakes	6
Santa Anita	6/15/2014	8	Allowance Optional Claiming	1
Santa Anita	3/20/2014	6	Allowance Optional Claiming	2
Oaklawn Park	4/13/2013	10	Arkansas Derby - Gr. 1	DNF
Santa Anita	3/15/2013	2	Allowance Optional Claiming	1
Santa Anita	2/17/2013	7	San Vicente Stakes - Gr. 2	4
Betfair Hollywood Park	11/9/2012	2	Maiden Special Weight	1

He seemed like a nice race horse to me early on, on the early Derby trail, but Baffert entered him in several AOC's. I remember Mike Smith pulling him up in the Arkansas Derby, where he went off as the 2-1 favorite, but it was just out of precaution. Or that was the word. He would not return to racing for nearly a year, and kept racing well, finishing 1st and 2nd before a poor race. In his first race off the shelf in 2015, another win, he was claimed, and it seems to me that he hasn't been the same horse since.

[Thunderground]

To follow up on that, War Academy was pulled up early... After stumbling out of the gate in his previous race and finishing 20+ lengths back. I passed on the race, but I might be pretty upset if I had bet on him here. He went off at 5/2.

[str]

Str, this is War Acadamy, a horse that once was on the Derby trail and trained by Baffert:

http://www.equibase.com/profiles/Results.cfm?type=Horse&refno=8826051&registry=T

He races today at Aqueduct, which is what brought him back to my attention.

When you see a race history like this, what is your thought process. I'll copy and past it here, and for the detail one would have to click on each race:



He seemed like a nice race horse to me early on, on the early Derby trail, but Baffert entered him in several AOC's. I remember Mike Smith pulling him up in the Arkansas Derby, where he went off as the 2-1 favorite, but it was just out of precaution. Or that was the word. He would not return to racing for nearly a year, and kept racing well, finishing 1st and 2nd before a poor race. In his first race off the shelf in 2015, another win, he was claimed, and it seems to me that he hasn't been the same horse since.

When you are off for a year, it is a fractured bone or a ruptured tendon. Not just a small one either. That amount of time requires a surgery or two and usually screws.
This is the tough part of the business. My best guess is that he held together well getting up to the races but within a race or two, he kept coming apart. Looks like it happened more than once.
Hindsight is 20/20. Most trainers do respect class in a horse as they get down into the claimers. But... it's a tough business. Your job is to protect the investment of your owner . That's what they expect. Your other job is to protect the horse, rider and all involved. It is a real balancing act. One without a crystal ball. So you are forced to make a decision. Whatever the choice, nobody is always right.

I remember claiming a horse for about 15k. The horses tendon had been bowed for months but he was still running well. The trainer was putting him in even money spots every time. He looked to warm up sound, run sound and pull up sound. My owner said let's claim him, so we did.
After the race, his tendon felt like a rotten banana. Terrible. So I did a scan to see what the tissue inside looked like. Like an ultra sound. The vet looked at me and said, get rid of this horse NOW. One , maybe two races in him, that's it.
Do know that horses do not break down or fall when the tendon becomes too sore. They do pull up and within a week you can retire them and they can live out a happy life. After 3-4 months they can be ridden as a pleasure horse in almost all cases.
So, I run him back 5 weeks later on the drop for 12k. He wins easily and the same trainer I took him from takes him back. That trainer runs him back 3 weeks later for 15k , he wins and another trainer takes him. He goes on from there to run every 3-5 weeks and wins 200k plus including a huge stake race at C.T.

So, did I do the right thing? According to logic, yes.
But did I do the right thing according to the horseman's bookkeeper? No.
Moral of that story is, horses can defy logic. Horses can fool you and seemingly do the impossible. They can make you look real smart one day and really stupid the next.
No trainer knows for sure. So, if the horse trains well enough and the vets concur that they think the horse can run, you run them.
In War Academy's case he just could not hold together though it probably seemed as though he would.

[str]

To follow up on that, War Academy was pulled up early... After stumbling out of the gate in his previous race and finishing 20+ lengths back. I passed on the race, but I might be pretty upset if I had bet on him here. He went off at 5/2.

Just looked at the charts and Jacobson claimed him.

No comment.

[Thunderground]

Thanks for the insight, str. Much appreciated. Yes, Jacobson... *cough*


Another question. When you consider a maiden claiming race, are there specific things you look for? Or do you look at all claiming races in more or less the same way? Mostly wondering if the maiden claiming races could have a greater upside where it comes to identifying hidden longshots.

[str]

Thanks for the insight, str. Much appreciated. Yes, Jacobson... *cough*


Another question. When you consider a maiden claiming race, are there specific things you look for? Or do you look at all claiming races in more or less the same way? Mostly wondering if the maiden claiming races could have a greater upside where it comes to identifying hidden longshots.

Q. Or do you look at all claiming races in more or less the same way?

A. I never look at md. claiming the same as I do claimers.

Q. Mostly wondering if the maiden claiming races could have a greater upside where it comes to identifying hidden long shots.

A. Without a doubt.

Q.Another question. When you consider a maiden claiming race, are there specific things you look for?

A. Any bias will affect cheaper horses more so than nicer horses. While some people may differ me, it was absolutely that way in Maryland IMO.

Without talking biases, and as you know, my experience with it is explained in detail in this thread, Blinkers on can be huge. Breaking from the outside after the horse broke from the rail or 2 hole in it's 1st start or two can be huge. Talked about that and the "box" in here as well for those that have not read all this.
Distance change can be huge. Seeing that after several bad races, a horse improved a little last out with a new rider and the rider is back on today, can be a warning signal. Then checking the workouts to see if the horse has awakened in the morning lately can be a big sign.

Z patterns in the horses running line is usually a tip off that the horse maybe woke up 1/2 way through it's 1st or 2nd race. Or horses that showed brief speed after breaking a bit tardy in it's 1st start, then rated back and made some type of run in it's second is a positive.

Are they difficult to detect? Yes. Can they be detected? Absolutely. Seeing a replay after seeing something like this in the form will usually back up your findings.

And because some md. claimers can be much better races than others as far as quality of horse goes, even if the price stays the same, seeing who they raced against is a key but most know that.

From a betting perspective, I would never bet a large amount on a maiden as having never won does not give me the confidence to think the horse will today, so I would tend to look for prices in these races. I would stay away from the favorite unless I was playing pic3's or whatever and felt the horse was just much better.

Goes without saying to check the double pools on lightly raced horses for any signs of more money than expected. That alone won't make me bet, but it certainly will make me take a second long look.

Sometimes struggling maidens will find a certain rider or bug rider that they quickly become comfortable with. Watch for that. Especially cheaper, nervous types and a girl rider getting the mount from a male rider. You would be amazed at the difference when it occurs. Does not happen that often, maybe 5%-10% of the time but when it does, it really does.

I could go on and on so I will stop there for now.

Probably missed a few solid thoughts as there are many. All big reasons to never treat a maiden race like an open claimer full of heavily raced horses when it comes to subtleties in the form change.

Hope that helps.

[Thunderground]

That's the problem, as well as the beauty. Somebody is going to win by default. Thanks for the insight. That's a lot to look at. My method centers on form of day. But in claiming races, including for maidens, the role of the trainer and how he/she prepared the horse factors in more heavily. So my challenge is to find the simplest, most concentrated, and most integrated manner to look at this. I can't look at 100 different things and still expect to come up with a properly balanced, integrated picture. So if I were to assign weights would it make sense to look at three categories for maiden claimers: form of day, trainer, and 'other'? If so, I could then assign each of the main categories a percentage, and start working from there...

[JBEX]

hey str

rudy won with a firster in mdn claiming race at aqueduct today which is something he's good at.went off 3-1...a string of slow works leading up to the race which is usually what he seems to do with firsters or layoffs.. Horse went right to the front and never looked back.. my question is do you think rudy had some idea this beginner had that kind of speed in spite of the slow moves? can understand more with a horse coming off a layoff who's got proven speed with tepid works but the firster a little more curious.. Don't want to get into some think he cheats and not sure that a horse showing natural speed out of the gate would have anything to do with that anyway .Remember you said you've met him and he was Richard Dutow's assistant for many years

[str]

That's the problem, as well as the beauty. Somebody is going to win by default. Thanks for the insight. That's a lot to look at. My method centers on form of day. But in claiming races, including for maidens, the role of the trainer and how he/she prepared the horse factors in more heavily. So my challenge is to find the simplest, most concentrated, and most integrated manner to look at this. I can't look at 100 different things and still expect to come up with a properly balanced, integrated picture. So if I were to assign weights would it make sense to look at three categories for maiden claimers: form of day, trainer, and 'other'? If so, I could then assign each of the main categories a percentage, and start working from there...

Seems to me that it would make perfect sense. So the question is, are you simply looking for the winner, like in most races, or are you fishing for a horse that is ripe for a form reversal due to something seen between the lines. The latter is what I always went for.

Actually, not always.

When I was a handicapper, which was up until I was an asst. trainer probably, I went for the best horse in my mind. It wasn't until I started understanding the changes in equipment, riders, post position, and all those other things I mentioned and more, that I realized how dramatically a maiden , who is just figuring out the game, can reverse form and mindset so quickly. From that point on, and over the years, it played out waaaay to often to ever look at it the old way again.

So you have to ask yourself, do you want a higher % of winners or a higher ROI. If it's ROI, you will need to incorporate the "other" at a higher % in your breakdown. The harder part though, will be learning to recognize these changes before they occur. That probably starts with looking backwards at charts and replays if they warrant it, to try and see if you can see the reversal in form after the fact. Once you convince yourself that you can, start looking forward and trying it. Yep, it's not easy. But in my life, nothing worth having has been.

Hope that helps.

Keep me posted.

[str]

hey str

rudy won with a firster in mdn claiming race at aqueduct today which is something he's good at.went off 3-1...a string of slow works leading up to the race which is usually what he seems to do with firsters or layoffs.. Horse went right to the front and never looked back.. my question is do you think rudy had some idea this beginner had that kind of speed in spite of the slow moves? can understand more with a horse coming off a layoff who's got proven speed with tepid works but the firster a little more curious.. Don't want to get into some think he cheats and not sure that a horse showing natural speed out of the gate would have anything to do with that anyway .Remember you said you've met him and he was Richard Dutow's assistant for many years

Q. my question is do you think rudy had some idea this beginner had that kind of speed in spite of the slow moves?

A. Absolutely .

Here is why:

This horse had to break many times before it received it's gate card. He knew how the horse broke every time. Probably not a real big horse, probably very athletic, nice and strong behind, and all the things a horse needs to be, to break well.

When a trainer has a reputation of having slower works, it is simply the trainers style. How they were taught. I have spoken about workouts in this thread a lot. But to summarize in terms of trying to find a gate quick speed firster through works, unless the trainer is one that enjoys bullet works, and some do, you can't see it in workouts. Maybe a hint can be a gate work that was better than the other works but if it is not better that can mean nothing.

Here's why.

Clockers will pick up gate works too late to catch the break so they add 7 seconds and start their watch on the next pole in line. They do this because they have to watch multiple horses at the same time. They cannot watch a gate not knowing when the doors will open , for a minute or two, which is very typical, as that will have them missing other horses breaking off the pole. So when they hear the bell, which all horses have to break with in the mornings, it alerts them to look towards the gate and start the watch at the next available pole. But if the trainer said "just pop the horse out and go a 1/4 mile and then get the horse to back off to a gallop for the rest of the work, which I did a million times, and I would think, because of the training tree he is from, he probably does as well, the horse is being asked to slow down so the last 1/16th of the 3 furlong work will be quite slower, and the final time will be not indicative of the horses ability to show speed. Clocker's rarely show 1/4 mile works at race tracks. Two year old sales, yes. Most tracks, no.

Now, was Rudy doing this to fool the public? Well, I can't say for sure, but the million times I did it, the answer was 'Hell No"! Then why did i do it, is what many bettors would probably ask. There could be a hundred different reasons, and I could explain all hundred but most bettors would start to roll their eyes because they would tend to not believe me. Why? Because their sole mission is to cash tickets. That is the only thing they are there for. And when anyone has a sole purpose when it comes to betting anything, they think everyone has the same desires and views. As a trainer, betting was at the bottom of my list. And I would assume Rudy's too. Again, here is why.

As I explained way back in this thread, as a trainer, there will be sooooo many betting opportunities that will come up just in everyday occurrences, when you train a barn full of horses, that you really do not need to " set a bet up". They fall right in to your lap. I can further explain some of those things that I recall fell into my lap if you want in another post.
Now a stable of just a handful of horses? Yep. Some of those types might try to set something up on purpose. That I am sure of, especially at the minor tracks. But when you train 30,40, 60, 70 + horses, you have no time whatsoever to think that way. If you do, you will be out of business in a New York minute and be one of those handful of horse guys and you can starve to death trying to be a wise guy.
Having trained all of those amounts and more, at various times, you will have to trust me on that.

So the morale of the story when it comes to workouts is, they are nice to see in that it tells you the horse is probably right on schedule. But as far as times are concerned, I pay virtually no attention to them. In most cases, workouts are information that confuses players ten times more than they could ever help players.

Hope that helps Chief.

[JBEX]

Q. my question is do you think rudy had some idea this beginner had that kind of speed in spite of the slow moves?

A. Absolutely .

Here is why:

This horse had to break many times before it received it's gate card. He knew how the horse broke every time. Probably not a real big horse, probably very athletic, nice and strong behind, and all the things a horse needs to be, to break well.

When a trainer has a reputation of having slower works, it is simply the trainers style. How they were taught. I have spoken about workouts in this thread a lot. But to summarize in terms of trying to find a gate quick speed firster through works, unless the trainer is one that enjoys bullet works, and some do, you can't see it in workouts. Maybe a hint can be a gate work that was better than the other works but if it is not better that can mean nothing.

Here's why.

Clockers will pick up gate works too late to catch the break so they add 7 seconds and start their watch on the next pole in line. They do this because they have to watch multiple horses at the same time. They cannot watch a gate not knowing when the doors will open , for a minute or two, which is very typical, as that will have them missing other horses breaking off the pole. So when they hear the bell, which all horses have to break with in the mornings, it alerts them to look towards the gate and start the watch at the next available pole. But if the trainer said "just pop the horse out and go a 1/4 mile and then get the horse to back off to a gallop for the rest of the work, which I did a million times, and I would think, because of the training tree he is from, he probably does as well, the horse is being asked to slow down so the last 1/16th of the 3 furlong work will be quite slower, and the final time will be not indicative of the horses ability to show speed. Clocker's rarely show 1/4 mile works at race tracks. Two year old sales, yes. Most tracks, no.

Now, was Rudy doing this to fool the public? Well, I can't say for sure, but the million times I did it, the answer was 'Hell No"! Then why did i do it, is what many bettors would probably ask. There could be a hundred different reasons, and I could explain all hundred but most bettors would start to roll their eyes because they would tend to not believe me. Why? Because their sole mission is to cash tickets. That is the only thing they are there for. And when anyone has a sole purpose when it comes to betting anything, they think everyone has the same desires and views. As a trainer, betting was at the bottom of my list. And I would assume Rudy's too. Again, here is why.

As I explained way back in this thread, as a trainer, there will be sooooo many betting opportunities that will come up just in everyday occurrences, when you train a barn full of horses, that you really do not need to " set a bet up". They fall right in to your lap. I can further explain some of those things that I recall fell into my lap if you want in another post.
Now a stable of just a handful of horses? Yep. Some of those types might try to set something up on purpose. That I am sure of, especially at the minor tracks. But when you train 30,40, 60, 70 + horses, you have no time whatsoever to think that way. If you do, you will be out of business in a New York minute and be one of those handful of horse guys and you can starve to death trying to be a wise guy.
Having trained all of those amounts and more, at various times, you will have to trust me on that.

So the morale of the story when it comes to workouts is, they are nice to see in that it tells you the horse is probably right on schedule. But as far as times are concerned, I pay virtually no attention to them. In most cases, workouts are information that confuses players ten times more than they could ever help players.

Hope that helps Chief.

First off because of you and general observation of horses winning with less than stellar or infrequent works I have deemphasised them in my handicapping.. If a horse has good moves I'll give credit but not take away from them if they don't .The main thing I was interested In was the trainer knowing a horse might have speed out of the gate without seeing quick works and you explained that well so another important thing understood.Amazing how potentially inaccurate timing of workouts can be because of the factors you mentioned.. would never have guessed that

Yeah would love to hear some stories of betting opportunities that came your way over the years when you have the time.. sure that'd be interesting reading..like the youthful jerkens picture.. think it'll be around for awhile!

[pabonaparte]

Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge and experience!

[str]

Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge and experience!

You are welcome.

It's my pleasure.

[Thunderground]

Seems to me that it would make perfect sense. So the question is, are you simply looking for the winner, like in most races, or are you fishing for a horse that is ripe for a form reversal due to something seen between the lines. The latter is what I always went for.

Actually, not always.

When I was a handicapper, which was up until I was an asst. trainer probably, I went for the best horse in my mind. It wasn't until I started understanding the changes in equipment, riders, post position, and all those other things I mentioned and more, that I realized how dramatically a maiden , who is just figuring out the game, can reverse form and mindset so quickly. From that point on, and over the years, it played out waaaay to often to ever look at it the old way again.

So you have to ask yourself, do you want a higher % of winners or a higher ROI. If it's ROI, you will need to incorporate the "other" at a higher % in your breakdown. The harder part though, will be learning to recognize these changes before they occur. That probably starts with looking backwards at charts and replays if they warrant it, to try and see if you can see the reversal in form after the fact. Once you convince yourself that you can, start looking forward and trying it. Yep, it's not easy. But in my life, nothing worth having has been.

Hope that helps.

Keep me posted.

Thanks str. I'm looking mostly for exotic tickets, and I will structure them differently depending on the odds involved. Many of my tickets are structured with a big upside in mind (best case), but in such a way that I won't lose, or won't lose much, if things don't go my way.

Maiden claimers have proved more challenging in this approach. Easier to miss a horse... So I scaled back my betting approach for those races until I have a better grip.

Not to mention the Pick 6. lol

[JBEX]

hey str.. looking at mahoning today and there was a ohio bred (homebred also) 3yo returning from a winter layoff.. Horse broke her maiden in 3rd career start and ran a credible 3rd in a 75k statebed in the race after (both sprints as a 2yo).. Following race did nothing in a two turn statebred stakes (150k purse not bad for ohio) ..The trainer must take a string to tampa bay in the winter time and brought this gal along.. Worked pretty steady down there but never raced.. Have to think he took her down there to get her in shape when they came back north.. What do you think ? Nice purses for ohio breds now with all the casino money

[str]

hey str.. looking at mahoning today and there was a ohio bred (homebred also) 3yo returning from a winter layoff.. Horse broke her maiden in 3rd career start and ran a credible 3rd in a 75k statebed in the race after (both sprints as a 2yo).. Following race did nothing in a two turn statebred stakes (150k purse not bad for ohio) ..The trainer must take a string to tampa bay in the winter time and brought this gal along.. Worked pretty steady down there but never raced.. Have to think he took her down there to get her in shape when they came back north.. What do you think ? Nice purses for ohio breds now with all the casino money

Yep. You are right. He did not want the horse out of his sight and wanted to train her in nicer weather and on a sufrace not dealing with cold weather. This is always a sign that the trainer thinks highly of a horse.

I think you have this deal pegged perfectly.

[JBEX]

Yep. You are right. He did not want the horse out of his sight and wanted to train her in nicer weather and on a sufrace not dealing with cold weather. This is always a sign that the trainer thinks highly of a horse.

I think you have this deal pegged perfectly.

thanks str..won handily yesterday at 6/5 in statebred n1x.. looked the part on paper

[cutchemist42]

Yep. You are right. He did not want the horse out of his sight and wanted to train her in nicer weather and on a sufrace not dealing with cold weather. This is always a sign that the trainer thinks highly of a horse.

I think you have this deal pegged perfectly.

Wow, really interesting to hear this aspect from you guys.

[steve227]

I have horses at mahoning and thistledown, Ohio bred purses are on the rise even for bottom dwelling state breds purses are 15,500 at Cleveland. that trainer that your talking about is going through some tough times right now, worth claiming from pushing alot out of his barn to make room for babies, but pretty strung out on the $$$$$ right now. so some value on his drops both betting and claiming them

[Thunderground]

A question, based on an observation that I'm not sure is accurate.

When reducing a field to four to six horses it is often lucrative to play exotic tickets. Most of mine are structured with two horses on top. For instance 1-2/3-4-5 or 1-2/1-2-3-4-5, and other variations that may add 3-4-5/1-2 and 1-2-3-4-5/1-2 or 1-2/1-2/3-4-5, etc. The point being that it is crucial to have at least one of the two top picks correct. Usually, this is the case, unless I completely misread the race. But I don't care about those type of misses. The miss that does bother me is the near miss where the result is something like 3-4-1... In other words, most of the read of the race was right...; but both of my top horses were beaten; and the second horse can be a real close call... I've noticed that these near misses tend to happen more in the mud. But if that is true, I would like to know the reason for it. Because if that is indeed the reason, then I can just box my contenders in the mud (with one key horse and in three horse combinations), and be done with the problem.

Pace I can account for in this sense. If I misread the pace, I'm at peace with that. So the question is purely about the influence of mud on the top two spots, if indeed such an influence exists. I'm hoping it's the mud, because it would be the easiest explanation... lol

[str]

A question, based on an observation that I'm not sure is accurate.

When reducing a field to four to six horses it is often lucrative to play exotic tickets. Most of mine are structured with two horses on top. For instance 1-2/3-4-5 or 1-2/1-2-3-4-5, and other variations that may add 3-4-5/1-2 and 1-2-3-4-5/1-2 or 1-2/1-2/3-4-5, etc. The point being that it is crucial to have at least one of the two top picks correct. Usually, this is the case, unless I completely misread the race. But I don't care about those type of misses. The miss that does bother me is the near miss where the result is something like 3-4-1... In other words, most of the read of the race was right...; but both of my top horses were beaten; and the second horse can be a real close call... I've noticed that these near misses tend to happen more in the mud. But if that is true, I would like to know the reason for it. Because if that is indeed the reason, then I can just box my contenders in the mud (with one key horse and in three horse combinations), and be done with the problem.

Pace I can account for in this sense. If I misread the pace, I'm at peace with that. So the question is purely about the influence of mud on the top two spots, if indeed such an influence exists. I'm hoping it's the mud, because it would be the easiest explanation... lol

I cannot say for sure and doubt anyone can with total certainty. But mud IS a different animal .

There is no one reason. There are about 20 solid reasons IMO and more subtle ones depending on each individual horse.

Here are several:

Track was graded before the rain creating an inside OR speed bias. That's 2 reasons.

Track was not graded before the rain creating an outside OR closers bias. That's 2 more.

Horse did or did not handle the surface and as a result became tired or excelled. That's 2 more. More on that in a minute.

Jock ran out of goggles while trapped and could not press on until clear. Move was way to late. Yep, happens more than you might think.

Horse had a pad on it's foot or a bar shoe because of foot problems . (Cal. breds and Cal. horses are notorious for bad feet.) Could not handle the surface because of that. Again, this happens way more than people realize. Two months later the bar or pad is removed because the foot is doing better, and the horse can run with much more confidence in the mud, therefore, they run better. They trust their footing so they are more willing to extend on that type surface. This goes with the above reason but with more explanation for you.

The rubber on an old set of reins was worn down and the moisture gave the rider a slippery set of reins to ride with and he kept losing his/her grip. That is the orange rubber on the rein that is sewn on to the leather or nylon where the jocks hands are It's about 2 feet long.This will happen with small outfits that do not have plenty of money to buy reins as often as they should or just shoddy horsemanship. Typically you will see this at minor tracks and or low % trainers.

There are plenty more. These are off the top of my head.

So, all this tells me to try and box on the off track . BUT, and I am sure you will, but for others reading this, check your ROI over some time and compare this with your current method under the same circumstances.

See which one is better. Sometimes, the frustration of a couple of bad beats can linger in your mind but the reality is, the old way might provide a better ROI long term and therefore be frustrating, but the way to go. Also, short fields in mud might not be worth it at all. Again, ROI will dictate that.

If some out there do not keep ROI records on this stuff as well as distance, turf, claimers, stakes, different tracks, etc. and you are looking for a way to improve yourself at the track, this is one way to do it.

It's OK if you don't. If you just want the entertainment value that is fine. But do know the difference. And if you don't, you can't be like so many losing players are, and blame inside info, crooks, takeout, insiders, or whatever. All that is is a smoke screen to hide your own short comings. It makes you feel better to blame things out of your own control.
Just own it , that you don't care enough and just want to play some races. Again, nothing wrong with that . It's your money and your time.

But if you ARE wanting to be a better player at the track, start with yourself. Effort equals results more often than not and it definitely does at the track. It's parimutuel. You against everyone else sitting around or watching a TV. Take a race off and wonder around the grandstand and clubhouse and take a look at the competition. My guess is you will come away from that thinking that you can out perform your opponent enough to show a positive ROI.
At that point all you have to do is be willing to implement a game plan that will include dissecting your plays to see what works best for you. It will show you your strengths and weaknesses. Eliminate those weaknesses and watch the profits increase. Pretty simple when you think about it. As we all know, math never lies.

Hope that helps.

Keep me posted Thuderground.

[Thunderground]

Thanks so much, str. Excellent insight into the things that can change because of the mud. So adding it to my program: Box in the mud. Has a ring to it too. lol

[Thunderground]

str, I'm looking to sharpen my tossout ability. I look for two separators, an inner separator for my top picks, and an outer separator for the other contenders. I'm trying to improve that outer separator, so that I can end up with four or five contenders (for the first three or four spots), and preferably a lean superfecta ticket. Obviously, this requires a somewhat different way of thinking than looking for a winner. So I'm trying to come up with some general rules to toss out 'one more horse'... As this represents big value in exotic tickets.

Pace seems a good place to look for that extra tossout. Let's say a race has three speeds, three stalkers, and three closers. Would it make sense to toss out the worst horse in each of these three layers, so that the worst speed is out, the worst stalker is out, and the worst closer as well? I know that each race is different, but I'm looking for general principles. They don't have to hold true for every single race. If the pace would be very fast, then perhaps two of the speeds could be tossed, and none of the closers. So basically, I'm looking for a recipe to toss out one extra horse, based on the pace (for now). There may be other solutions to this problem, but pace could make the most sense.

[str]

str, I'm looking to sharpen my tossout ability. I look for two separators, an inner separator for my top picks, and an outer separator for the other contenders. I'm trying to improve that outer separator, so that I can end up with four or five contenders (for the first three or four spots), and preferably a lean superfecta ticket. Obviously, this requires a somewhat different way of thinking than looking for a winner. So I'm trying to come up with some general rules to toss out 'one more horse'... As this represents big value in exotic tickets.

Pace seems a good place to look for that extra tossout. Let's say a race has three speeds, three stalkers, and three closers. Would it make sense to toss out the worst horse in each of these three layers, so that the worst speed is out, the worst stalker is out, and the worst closer as well? I know that each race is different, but I'm looking for general principles. They don't have to hold true for every single race. If the pace would be very fast, then perhaps two of the speeds could be tossed, and none of the closers. So basically, I'm looking for a recipe to toss out one extra horse, based on the pace (for now). There may be other solutions to this problem, but pace could make the most sense.

This answer required some time to get it right and my work week was rough. Sorry for the delayed response but here it is.

General Principal for speeds in a race of 3 speeds, 3 stalkers, 3 closers:

IMO, it would be very difficult to throw out the outside speed horse. Even if that is the 3rd best speed, if anything goes wrong at the break with the inside and middle speed, that 3rd best speed , has the outside controlling position ( the box) as discussed in this thread for others, and will typically run a better race than normal because of the clean right eye.(also in this thread). Now if the outside 3rd best speed shows in it's pp's a tendency to break sluggish or just ok, AND the inside and middle speed show that they are consistently breaking very well, then you can gamble on throwing that horse out. But...

As you know, the outside 3rd best speed, will usually be under bet because most players will recognize the horses weaknesses but not consider with the same amount of thought, the trip, or, the box, or the fact that one or both of the other horses might not break so well.

This would apply to one turn type races more so than 2 turn races, especially if it's a short run to the 1st turn. BUT, IMO, it should always be looked at as trying to do all you can to keep the outside speed on the ticket because of the probable great trip, the clean right eye, and the value on the odds board. ( also, this might have to work in reverse on the SA turf course with that odd right hand turn early going 6 1/2F. I don't pay any attention to that type of race so you would know better than I would on that ).

The inside speed MUST break well or have a high very early turn of foot or it will be pinned into the turn which will probably equate to an off the board finish.

The middle speed , with all things being equal, should have the worst trip of them all. As stated before, if slightly outrun inside, say a 1/2 a length, and slightly outrun outside, say a neck, that horse usually packs it in just into the turn in a 6F race. So the 3/8ths pole( green pole) or the 5/16's pole, (the red pole after the green pole on the turn).
They give up before they are out of energy in a lot of cases because of the tough trip which makes them uncomfortable mentally.

The outside speed can last longer and will in most cases with a reasonable pace. They won't typically start to pack it in until a stalker or closer pins their right eye, maybe turning for home. But with a decent pace, they can remain a factor and not be passed until half way through the stretch and from there, they can stay for 3rd often enough at a nice price to be worthwhile.

The inside speed, if they get a clean right eye, can have a big advantage as long as that right eye does not get covered up too early.

So, the simple way IMO to try and figure this out is take the approach of looking to throw the middle first, the inside second and the outside last.

Again, this is in general .

It's the way I looked at a race setup since seemingly forever.

Like anything else, it won't work always, but the reward for the high prices was well worth missing some lower prices. I think the ROI would tell that story.

Hope that helps and let me know how this plays out down the road.

Also happy to talk about the stalkers and closers in general terms but one step at a time, right?

[Thunderground]

Great detailed insight and many thanks!

So this is about the field coming together as a result of the angle towards the rail. Which is different, of course, from the pace scenarios that play out 'lengthwise'. I will have to (back)test this, but would you estimate the effect is comparable if you were to put a number to it? For example, fast pace: speeds -1, stalkers 0, closers +1. Would it make sense to use that same scale for outside speed +1, inside speed 0, and middle speed -1? Or is it closer to, perhaps, half the effect? I will have to backtest and play with it, and that will take some time.

Not a whole lot of speed in the KY Derby this time, by the way.

[Thunderground]

On that note, Danzing Candy recorded a very fast workout. http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...-luis-rey-move

This is after he set a suicidal pace in the Santa Anita Derby; http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...ucky-derby-run

Comment by trainer after that race:

Danzing Candy impressively won the March 12 San Felipe (gr. II) to earn more than enough Road to the Kentucky Derby points to get into the gate on the First Saturday in May, then again set the pace in the April 9 Santa Anita Derby (gr. I), but tired to finish fourth on the sloppy track after setting blazing fractions of :22.15, :45.24, and 1:10.12 through six furlongs. "(Jockey) Mike (Smith) said he didn't like the sloppy track, but at :45 1/5, I don't care, that's too fast," Sise said Friday morning.

Is this horse going to be the key to the Derby? Looks like Mike Smith will be on board, and his mud comment seems to suggest that the horse, in the mud, may have shut out the jockey? What else could it mean, since the mud didn't seem to hold the horse back? Surely, Smith wouldn't have wanted to go that fast. Was it the mud or is this, by now, a horse that can only race one way?

The trainer said he was very impressed with the fast workout, and I don't know his thought process, but is that what you would be looking for after your horse just set a suicidal pace?

Which way are you leaning? If they let him go, he could win the race. More likely, he would set things up perfectly for Nyquist. But if the pace is too fast, that race favorite could easily pay the price in a field with many strong closers.

A couple of Derby's ago we saw the jockey's on the speeds communicate in the first turn, and the projected fast speed never manifested. So I'm wondering about Danzing Candy and his impact on the race. Can Smith relax him, or is that wishful thinking? I think it was Smith who taught Game On Dude to relax and take a breather, and that was always the difference for that horse. But it took Game On Dude, a gelding with a long racing career, a while to learn that. So how likely is it that Danzing Candy can learn it now, for the very next race?

[str]

Great detailed insight and many thanks!

So this is about the field coming together as a result of the angle towards the rail. Which is different, of course, from the pace scenarios that play out 'lengthwise'. I will have to (back)test this, but would you estimate the effect is comparable if you were to put a number to it? For example, fast pace: speeds -1, stalkers 0, closers +1. Would it make sense to use that same scale for outside speed +1, inside speed 0, and middle speed -1? Or is it closer to, perhaps, half the effect? I will have to backtest and play with it, and that will take some time.

Not a whole lot of speed in the KY Derby this time, by the way.

I don't think it can be simplified that easily but I hope it can. For me, it's about the form cycle, how well they break, who is riding each horse, any daily bias, and I could go on for five more minutes. Who knows. Maybe all that does shake out to a simple rule of +1,- or -1. Back testing will show it or not.
Just a quick example though, a rider that is known for allowing even speed horses to settle, gets off one of those speeds and is replaced by a Stewart Elliott. No hate for Stewart. I know him, and I rode him plenty. But you can bet your butt that the horse that he rides today will be more aggressively ridden early for that speed position than it had been by a settling rider in prior races. It is these subtleties that IMO need to be recognized before those numbers can be assessed. And again IMO, I feel that every race has it's own DNA footprint if you will, that makes it unique from every other race. The draw, the particular day, the surface, the position, etc. all make each race it's very own.
That is why I feel it necessary to look at several angles before assigning those numbers. And although the lean is to rate them the way I suggested, it's ultimately up to you to recognize those variables and decide on a race by race basis.
Hope that makes sense.

I have not followed the Derby at all. Can't wait to see the entries. Early thought is , not much speed can equate to slower early and that can stop a freight train coming late. So race shape will be the story ahead of trip in a 20 horse field IMO.

[str]

On that note, Danzing Candy recorded a very fast workout. http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...-luis-rey-move

This is after he set a suicidal pace in the Santa Anita Derby; http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...ucky-derby-run

Comment by trainer after that race:



Is this horse going to be the key to the Derby? Looks like Mike Smith will be on board, and his mud comment seems to suggest that the horse, in the mud, may have shut out the jockey? What else could it mean, since the mud didn't seem to hold the horse back? Surely, Smith wouldn't have wanted to go that fast. Was it the mud or is this, by now, a horse that can only race one way?

The trainer said he was very impressed with the fast workout, and I don't know his thought process, but is that what you would be looking for after your horse just set a suicidal pace?

Which way are you leaning? If they let him go, he could win the race. More likely, he would set things up perfectly for Nyquist. But if the pace is too fast, that race favorite could easily pay the price in a field with many strong closers.

A couple of Derby's ago we saw the jockey's on the speeds communicate in the first turn, and the projected fast speed never manifested. So I'm wondering about Danzing Candy and his impact on the race. Can Smith relax him, or is that wishful thinking? I think it was Smith who taught Game On Dude to relax and take a breather, and that was always the difference for that horse. But it took Game On Dude, a gelding with a long racing career, a while to learn that. So how likely is it that Danzing Candy can learn it now, for the very next race?

Q. Is this horse going to be the key to the Derby? Looks like Mike Smith will be on board, and his mud comment seems to suggest that the horse, in the mud, may have shut out the jockey? What else could it mean, since the mud didn't seem to hold the horse back? Surely, Smith wouldn't have wanted to go that fast.

A. If he is cheap speed... No.
I can't speak to the horses quality because I have not followed it.

Q. Was it the mud or is this, by now, a horse that can only race one way?

A. I would have to see replays to have a solid opinion. Do you remember the grey horse with the painted tail that the knucklehead owner ran. That was a no brainer that he could not rate. Can't say the same without seeing replays.
I will say that it would not be the 1st time that a speed horse ran in slop for the 1st time and the noise of the foot hitting the slop from all the horses made the horse run like the cops were coming. Meaning never relaxed and ran himself into the ground. I don't know if that is the case or not.

Q. The trainer said he was very impressed with the fast workout, and I don't know his thought process, but is that what you would be looking for after your horse just set a suicidal pace?

A. No. not on paper , but... if the horse did this well within himself and looked to be running at 1:01 and collected and went in 1:00 and galloped out fast, it could be a sign that the surface indeed affected his last performance. The difference between 1:01 and 1:00 is HUGE !!
How the horse did it, is just as huge.

Q. Which way are you leaning? If they let him go, he could win the race. More likely, he would set things up perfectly for Nyquist. But if the pace is too fast, that race favorite could easily pay the price in a field with many strong closers.

A. I always lean one way when it comes to the derby. Bombs away !!

Q. A couple of Derby's ago we saw the jockey's on the speeds communicate in the first turn, and the projected fast speed never manifested. So I'm wondering about Danzing Candy and his impact on the race. Can Smith relax him, or is that wishful thinking?

A. Well at least you know with Smith, that indeed that will be the plan.

Q. I think it was Smith who taught Game On Dude to relax and take a breather, and that was always the difference for that horse. But it took Game On Dude, a gelding with a long racing career, a while to learn that. So how likely is it that Danzing Candy can learn it now, for the very next race?

A. You don't learn that overnight, that's for sure. But, this horse might be more relaxed than the form shows. I have never seen him run.
If you can get me a link to his previous races, I can watch them and tell you what I see.

[Thunderground]

There's barely any speed in the KY Derby. DC could be one-dimensional like blue-tailed Hansen; also ridden by Smith in that silly circus and the loss in the WV Derby, all in this thread. But he looked much more in control in the earlier races than in the mud race.

After losing his first race, Danzing Candy won his second time out on 12/26:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/race/USA/SA/2015/12/26/5/race-5-msw-at-sa-on-12-26-15

http://www.equibase.com/premium/chartEmb.cfm?track=SA&raceDate=12/26/2015&cy=USA&rn=5

He followed it up with a AOC win on 2/4/16:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/race/USA/SA/2016/2/4/7/race-7-aoc-at-sa-on-2-4-16

http://www.equibase.com/premium/chartEmb.cfm?track=SA&raceDate=02/04/2016&cy=USA&rn=7

Next time out he won the San Felipe on 3/12/16:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/race/USA/SA/2016/3/12/7/san-felipe-s-gr-ii

http://www.equibase.com/premium/chartEmb.cfm?track=SA&raceDate=03/12/2016&cy=USA&rn=7

And finally that loss in the Santa Anita Derby on 4/9/16:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/race/USA/SA/2016/4/9/8/santa-anita-derby-gr-i

http://www.equibase.com/premium/chartEmb.cfm?track=SA&raceDate=04/09/2016&cy=USA&rn=8

I love the move by Exaggerator in that last race. Maybe his race history should be next? lol I don't think an exacta bettor would have been too happy with that finish by Exaggerator in the San Felipe. Desormeaux saving the horse for bigger and better things?

Just a link for the early Derby odds: http://www.allhorseracing.ag/kentuckyderby-odds
Exaggerator at 9/2 with Danzing Candy at 15/1. A big gap. How much of that is that last mud race (a toss out race for DC?)? DC did beat him in the San Felipe.

[str]

There's barely any speed in the KY Derby. DC could be one-dimensional like blue-tailed Hansen; also ridden by Smith in that silly circus and the loss in the WV Derby, all in this thread. But he looked much more in control in the earlier races than in the mud race.

After losing his first race, Danzing Candy won his second time out on 12/26:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/race/USA/SA/2015/12/26/5/race-5-msw-at-sa-on-12-26-15

http://www.equibase.com/premium/chartEmb.cfm?track=SA&raceDate=12/26/2015&cy=USA&rn=5

He followed it up with a AOC win on 2/4/16:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/race/USA/SA/2016/2/4/7/race-7-aoc-at-sa-on-2-4-16

http://www.equibase.com/premium/chartEmb.cfm?track=SA&raceDate=02/04/2016&cy=USA&rn=7

Next time out he won the San Felipe on 3/12/16:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/race/USA/SA/2016/3/12/7/san-felipe-s-gr-ii

http://www.equibase.com/premium/chartEmb.cfm?track=SA&raceDate=03/12/2016&cy=USA&rn=7

And finally that loss in the Santa Anita Derby on 4/9/16:

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/race/USA/SA/2016/4/9/8/santa-anita-derby-gr-i

http://www.equibase.com/premium/chartEmb.cfm?track=SA&raceDate=04/09/2016&cy=USA&rn=8

I love the move by Exaggerator in that last race. Maybe his race history should be next? lol I don't think an exacta bettor would have been too happy with that finish by Exaggerator in the San Felipe. Desormeaux saving the horse for bigger and better things?

Just a link for the early Derby odds: http://www.allhorseracing.ag/kentuckyderby-odds
Exaggerator at 9/2 with Danzing Candy at 15/1, with that loss in the mud (a toss out race?) after beating him the race before.

Thanks for that !!

Here is what the tape showed.

Danzing Candy was a totally different horse in all of his last races. Something got him ALL fired up prior to the start. Post parade, ? Paddock? Mud? Don't know.
But what was clear in my eyes was that he was rearing up in the gate and very uneasy and very unprofessional. Did not see that in all his previous races while in the gate. He was very professional even when he broke his maiden, but not in his last race. He tried to relax( something he already knows how to do), as they turned down the backside. But it was waaay too late by then. He had nothing in the tank . Unless his breeding suggests otherwise ( dosage, mares ability to go long, etc.) if he stays somewhat relaxed at Churchill, which isn't easy, but again, he knows how to do that, I think he will improve in the Derby.

So what is his mares running style? How about dosage? Can you give me that?

So far, I like where this might be going.

As for Kent . Also know him very well and rode him a lot. He was out of horse before the 1/8th pole when he wrapped up. With bigger fish to fry and pointing for early May, if my brother had done anything differently than Kent did, I would have taken his whip from him upon being unsaddled and used it on Kent. He did the right thing and playing exactas in prep races for a bigger paydays is risky business. Especially underneath favorites.

Exaggerator made a great move . No question. But... the race was set up for a big move due to Danzing Candy's mental behavior. He should get an assist for that.

[Thunderground]

His mare is Talking and Singing:

http://www.equibase.com/profiles/Results.cfm?type=Horse&refno=8048036&registry=T

She liked running towards the front, but, out of nine tries, came no closer than 1/2 length to winning a race.

Dosage index given at 3.80 here: http://www.pedigreequery.com/danzing+candy

[str]

His mare is Talking and Singing:

http://www.equibase.com/profiles/Results.cfm?type=Horse&refno=8048036&registry=T

She liked running towards the front, but, out of nine tries, came no closer than 1/2 length to winning a race.

Dosage index given at 3.80 here: http://www.pedigreequery.com/danzing+candy

So the mare is a 1/2 sister to Better Talk Now.

Tells me all I need to know about her bloodline ability to get a mile and an eighth.

Can't say for sure about a mile and a quarter but probably has as good a chance as most going into the race.

[Thunderground]

As for Kent . Also know him very well and rode him a lot. He was out of horse before the 1/8th pole when he wrapped up. With bigger fish to fry and pointing for early May, if my brother had done anything differently than Kent did, I would have taken his whip from him upon being unsaddled and used it on Kent. He did the right thing and playing exactas in prep races for a bigger paydays is risky business. Especially underneath favorites.

Thanks for emphasizing that. I would have thought the money would have been a motivator, especially for a 400K race, but hadn't realized - until I just looked it up - that the difference between 2nd and 3rd is very little indeed.

[str]

So to answer a question you have not asked yet (lol), if they ran the same SA Derby in 2 weeks with the same field on a dry track, I would play Danzing Candy to win without hesitation.