Are you a speed handicapper, or a "closer" handicapper?

[Stillriledup]

I would say that more of my bets (than not) are geared around trying to create speed duels and have my closing horse sweep up for the win. I feel that if you want to beat the favorites, most times, the favorites are speed horses or pace pressers, they are not closers.

You've heard the saying about heat and cold...that there is no such thing as cold, there's heat and lack of heat. So, you can say the same thing about speed horses....there's speed horses and horses who lack speed, a closer essentially is a speed horse without the speed.

You can make an argument that a closer is just a slow horse who only really wins if the 'faster' horses duel themselves into defeat...so, by betting on a closer, you're knowingly betting on a 'slow horse' and just hoping the 'fast horses' do something to compromise their own chances.

I feel that 'lone speed' is overbet for the most part. If you're lone speed, but not good enough to win, the loneness of your speed isnt going to matter, you have to be good enough to win and i love to bet against horses i think can't win when they come up as lone speed types.

Are you a 'speed guy' or a 'closer guy' or some combo of the two?

[pandy]

I think it's getting tougher to find good bets on closers but there is good value if you are patient and pick your spots carefully. However, I think you could make a case that you can win consistently without ever betting on a closer.

If you look at the Triple Crown, Orb, a closer, wins the Derby as the lukewarm favorite. But the next two legs are won by speed horses and both paid big prices. No one closed well in the Triple Crown. Orb came home slow but at least he had something left and in the Preakness and Belmont, no one closed at all. This is becoming more common, speed horses are either setting the pace, or stalking and getting first run, and then hanging on through slow stretch runs because no one is closing, no one has anything left.

Stalkers actually rule the sport, and most stalkers are speed horses who are not the main speed in the race, so they get outrun for the early lead, sit right behind the leader in perfect position. But you have to make sure that you're betting on a stalker that can finish well enough against the pace of the race.

When I study a race, I always look at the speed/stalkers and mark the one that is the best closer of the group. That is often the winner. Looking at jockeys helps too because some jocks make their living stalking. Bejarano and Ramon Dominguez are always stalking, and always winning.

[thaskalos]

You can make an argument that a closer is just a slow horse who only really wins if the 'faster' horses duel themselves into defeat...so, by betting on a closer, you're knowingly betting on a 'slow horse' and just hoping the 'fast horses' do something to compromise their own chances.



It depends on the track...and the make-up of the race, SRU. In my opinion, "formula thinking" doesn't get the money in this game.

A front-running style is not always a virtue...and a stretch-running style is not always a liability.

I, personally, am a pace handicapper...who does not overlook the class factor, as many pace handicappers do. In my own handicapping...I downgrade performances which are "even" in nature...where the horse does not overly exert itself at any point during the race; and I am impressed by horses who show a quick burst of speed in their race...whether this burst comes early or late.

Which running style is preferred depends on how the race shapes up...and that changes from race to race.

[Tom]

Pace handicapping takes care of both.

[Overlay]

Closers do win races, and frontrunners can tire and fade, but, overall, I still favor a horse that figures to be fairly close to the lead in the early going. I don't eliminate any horse from consideration based on running style, but it is one of the weighted factors that goes into my determination of each entrant's chance of winning, with the early speed horse having an edge in that particular respect, as far as I am concerned (although that edge may be lessened by considerations of how the horse compares on factors such as condition, class, and overall speed).

[pandy]

It depends on the track...and the make-up of the race, SRU. In my opinion, "formula thinking" doesn't get the money in this game.

A front-running style is not always a virtue...and a stretch-running style is not always a liability.

I, personally, am a pace handicapper...who does not overlook the class factor, as many pace handicappers do. In my own handicapping...I downgrade performances which are "even" in nature...where the horse does not overly exert itself at any point during the race; and I am impressed by horses who show a quick burst of speed in their race...whether this burst comes early or late.

Which running style is preferred depends on how the race shapes up...and that changes from race to race.

Very similar to what I do. Pace and class. One thing that bugs me is when people only think that early speed counts. Speed is speed. As you say, whether this burst comes early or late, or in the middle of the race, it still counts. I don't over think race shapes, however, unless it's obvious that a race sets up for a closer/stalker because there are several need-to-lead types in the race. But predicting the tempo is tricky. The key for me is to bet on horses that are good enough to overcome whatever happens in the race.

[pandy]

Closers do win races, and frontrunners can tire and fade, but, overall, I still favor a horse that figures to be fairly close to the lead in the early going. I don't eliminate any horse from consideration based on running style, but it is one of the weighted factors that goes into my determination of each entrant's chance of winning, with the early speed horse having an edge in that particular respect, as far as I am concerned (although that edge may be lessened by considerations of how the horse compares on factors such as condition, class, and overall speed).

You definitely cash more tickets that way.

[cordep17]

Generally, I start off by seperating the horses into groups.
Groups:
1 Speed and Pressure
2 Stalkers
3 Mid Packs
4 Closers

After I seperate, I generally decide on how I expect the race to unfold and decide which groups benefit most from that scenario
Ex: a race with a number of speed horses but not too much speed might benefit the mid packs and stalkers

Once I've figured out which groups are benefitted, I look for the standout in each group and compare them to the other standouts from the other groups
(I use the other factors, such as speed, class, form, and secondary factors to figure my choices from each group)
Giving preference to the benefitted running styles---still, I may pick any of my contenders if I don't think the pace advantage is good enough for one horse to beat a horse that is disadvantaged from the start

This systematic approach gets me close about all of the time

[PhantomOnTour]

But what about turf?

Generally it's class and closers that get bet the most in turf routes....but at some distances on some courses, esp in summer when they can get very firm....speed is the value.

[appistappis]

neither matter, if you're not aware of a bias.

[raybo]

Depends on the race makeup, and who is advantaged, as to the contender rankings I get. But, in win betting often I will bet both speed and off the pace horses in the same race, depending on the odds. If the pace holds then the speed wins, if it collapses then an off the pace horse wins. So, I take both scenarios into consideration and use value as the determining factor for betting.

[pandy]

I'm working on a new book about this same subject. My approach in the book will be to introduce a method that analyzes the correlation between early speed and late speed. Horses that can finish well are often the most likely winners but in many races good finishers are somewhat disguised because handicappers look at the obvious horses that show stretch gains, but all you really need is a horse that finishes well against the pace of the race.

[raybo]

I'm working on a new book about this same subject. My approach in the book will be to introduce a method that analyzes the correlation between early speed and late speed. Horses that can finish well are often the most likely winners but in many races good finishers are somewhat disguised because handicappers look at the obvious horses that show stretch gains, but all you really need is a horse that finishes well against the pace of the race.

So, do you look for horses that ran on the lead, or close to the lead, and closed well (by "pace of the race" I assume you're taking about the 2nd call)? If so, and you don't look at gain in the stretch (a positional/lengths thing), how do you determine "finished well"? Are you comparing early and late velocities/energy ratio, or something else?

If this is the crux of your book, then I will understand your not revealing that here. Wouldn't want to undermine your book sales.

[pandy]

Comparing velocities and energy rating. I've been testing different formulas for the past year or so. But I really would like to include some sort of class rating to combine with the sustained rating because I've found that if you identify a horse that has a class advantage in the field, and that horse can finish, the combination of those two factors gives the horse a solid chance to win or finish 2nd. If you find a horse like this that is a nice overlay, or a longshot, these horses are profitable when used properly in exotic combinations in particular.

[raybo]

Comparing velocities and energy rating. I've been testing different formulas for the past year or so. But I really would like to include some sort of class rating to combine with the sustained rating because I've found that if you identify a horse that has a class advantage in the field, and that horse can finish, the combination of those two factors gives the horse a solid chance to win or finish 2nd. If you find a horse like this that is a nice overlay, or a longshot, these horses are profitable when used properly in exotic combinations in particular.

I agree that class is an important consideration and that's why I recently added a class rating to my program. At most tracks, depending on the type of race, class trumps almost everything else, as long as those races run normally and the horses can handle the pace and the distance.

[raybo]

As a side note, class determination is quite tricky. Would be interested in hearing how you determine class and how that then becomes a rating/number.

For example, do you only consider past performances where the horse finished well, or do you look at lifetime earnings, earning per start, recent performances only, etc..

[pandy]

I should add that these class/late speed plays are preferable in routes.

[raybo]

I should add that these class/late speed plays are preferable in routes.

Yeah, more prevalent in routes, both dirt and turf.

[CincyHorseplayer]

As has been said it's all in the context of the individual race pace matchup and if a track is at all biased.I have no preference for what type of running style I bet.Obviously looking for the extreme pace scenarios.I am amazed sometimes how overthought races get.5th race at Belmont Saturday there was a horse who dominated his rivals at every call of his paceline except the first.The final time was 7 points superior than any of his rivals and had but one other speed horse in the race to contend with.He paid 8-1 and won going away.Usually these types are 5/2 or so and represent good value.

Speed IMO is best overlaid on the turf in paceless races.If a horse has the class at the level and isn't completely outgunned in pure late pace ability,they finish ahead at prices.I routinely get 6-1 or better on this type.

My only criteria for a closer is that it have a pace figure that is no worse than 15 points slower than his or her rivals.The 1 run types never get there hardly even against fast paces IMO.

[1st time lasix]

Closers do win races, and frontrunners can tire and fade, but, overall, I still favor a horse that figures to be fairly close to the lead in the early going. I don't eliminate any horse from consideration based on running style, but it is one of the weighted factors that goes into my determination of each entrant's chance of winning, with the early speed horse having an edge in that particular respect, as far as I am concerned (although that edge may be lessened by considerations of how the horse compares on factors such as condition, class, and overall speed). ****** Over time I have found that this type of contender ranking is crucial for those like me that play pick fours, fives and sixes in the Crist method of ticket structure. Identify all win contenders at the class level....rank them A+,A ,B+, B, C using these types of methods. Often when it comes down to ranking scores...speed or stalking style gives one an edge over the other because everything might not have to "perfectly" for the photo to be taken. My goal is always to try to win big...while risking little------ in an effort to overcome the takeout.

[Stillriledup]

I think it's getting tougher to find good bets on closers but there is good value if you are patient and pick your spots carefully. However, I think you could make a case that you can win consistently without ever betting on a closer.

If you look at the Triple Crown, Orb, a closer, wins the Derby as the lukewarm favorite. But the next two legs are won by speed horses and both paid big prices. No one closed well in the Triple Crown. Orb came home slow but at least he had something left and in the Preakness and Belmont, no one closed at all. This is becoming more common, speed horses are either setting the pace, or stalking and getting first run, and then hanging on through slow stretch runs because no one is closing, no one has anything left.

Stalkers actually rule the sport, and most stalkers are speed horses who are not the main speed in the race, so they get outrun for the early lead, sit right behind the leader in perfect position. But you have to make sure that you're betting on a stalker that can finish well enough against the pace of the race.

When I study a race, I always look at the speed/stalkers and mark the one that is the best closer of the group. That is often the winner. Looking at jockeys helps too because some jocks make their living stalking. Bejarano and Ramon Dominguez are always stalking, and always winning.

Those closers not having anything left is really interesting to think about. Maybe it comes down to the idea that nobody has anything left, so, the horses who are physically in front have the best chance of hanging on for board spots.

Excellent post.

[Stillriledup]

It depends on the track...and the make-up of the race, SRU. In my opinion, "formula thinking" doesn't get the money in this game.

A front-running style is not always a virtue...and a stretch-running style is not always a liability.

I, personally, am a pace handicapper...who does not overlook the class factor, as many pace handicappers do. In my own handicapping...I downgrade performances which are "even" in nature...where the horse does not overly exert itself at any point during the race; and I am impressed by horses who show a quick burst of speed in their race...whether this burst comes early or late.

Which running style is preferred depends on how the race shapes up...and that changes from race to race.

I agree, i'm always looking for subtle moves, extended middle moves and anything that resembles that the horse can 'run very fast' for even a short amount of time.

[Stillriledup]

But what about turf?

Generally it's class and closers that get bet the most in turf routes....but at some distances on some courses, esp in summer when they can get very firm....speed is the value.

The key with turf is that there's very little kickback....so, closers can rally from the back better than if they're trying to run thru kickback on the main track.

A horse who loses by 3 lengths in a turf race was more 'badly outrun' than a horse who loses by 3 in a dirt race, at least that's the thinking.

[DRIVEWAY]

Comparing velocities and energy rating. I've been testing different formulas for the past year or so. But I really would like to include some sort of class rating to combine with the sustained rating because I've found that if you identify a horse that has a class advantage in the field, and that horse can finish, the combination of those two factors gives the horse a solid chance to win or finish 2nd. If you find a horse like this that is a nice overlay, or a longshot, these horses are profitable when used properly in exotic combinations in particular.

In todays racing there are so many razor thin class designations, I'm curious how you identify a horse to have a class advantage.

Thanks for your input.

[Robert Goren]

I have found that a lone speed horse that usually quits will quit again unless a track bias give him new found courage. I bet almost exclusively NYRA these days. I have found very few fair (unbias) dirt tracks. Speed is either holding or they are coming from no where to win. When Sterling says the track playing fair after 3 or 4 races, I start looking for short priced closers because that is what usually happens in the next few races. Once it has been discovered that closers have a chance, they seem to keep coming. JMO

[pandy]

In todays racing there are so many razor thin class designations, I'm curious how you identify a horse to have a class advantage.

Thanks for your input.

It's not easy, and in some races almost impossible. But I've gone over hundreds of races where a seemingly inscrutable longshot won and the factor that comes up the most is that the horse faced tougher in its last start. Most handicappers, myself included, are looking for the obvious key drops like MSW to claimer. But many big longshot winners are taking more subtle drops, so there's no question that class is extremely important.

Another thing is that it's not just about the last race. Any horse that has been racing against tougher in the not-to-distant past is eligible to wake up. So the class rating should be an average of some sort based on races within the past few months, plus extra points for last race evaluation.

What I've found fascinating in my research, one-paced horses, or sustained types that rarely go to the lead, seem to need a class edge to do their best, which kind of makes sense because when they're up too high in class they are either too far back or their kick isn't strong enough. Then they get into a weaker field and run by everyone, often without the aid of a fast pace.

[rubicon55]

Class is such a tricky subject to define succinctly for me. IMO with inflated purses at lower level tracks it would be wise not to divide earnings per race since that can give a skewed value. I go back to the basics to categorize the field in a particular race, similar to James Quinn's Handicapping Conditioning Book does. Although an older text in general terms it is still valid for classification into groups. You do not find a whole lot of horses at 4yrs and up easily crossing those established class categories except possibly with trainer "help" - whatever that means to you. I typically throw out horses rising up from one of these lower classifications to a higher class, let's say from maiden up to maiden special weight or claiming up to allowance optional claiming, for most that is a no brainer. I think by the time a horse is 4 yrs it ability to rate in different class levels has been already established. Of course there is always exceptions to every case and experiential judgment and prudence is warranted. Just because a horse ran at a higher level does not establish the class of that horse. The tough part is to determine if a past win or placing is good enough information to classify a horse in a higher class than at lower class levels. I ask myself if that horse should be competing in this class that it is racing in today or just filling out the field. In those cases in question I look at the specific class of the race in question and also look at the pace of that race that was ran in order to see if the horse actually can keep pace with the tougher class level without the benefit of getting "the prefect trip" or a specific track bias - a video replay is the only way to do it IMO. I also like to see the horse finish reasonably well (4th or better or so), I am not too concerned about lengths back at the wire unless it is a ridiculous distance to make up in the future. I also prefer horse running style that is up close or near to the lead and stalking (no more than mid-pack) and most likely ended up tiring in the stretch. Granted you can find value plays on horses moving up in class but I prefer to use that tactic on 3 yrs olds who have not fully reached their potential yet. Seasoned cappers of course already know this. I rely a bit more on observations and past experience than using a particular formula for defining what I think class is. Feel free comment since the subject of class certainly has lots of opinions.

[burnsy]

Closers do win races, and frontrunners can tire and fade, but, overall, I still favor a horse that figures to be fairly close to the lead in the early going. I don't eliminate any horse from consideration based on running style, but it is one of the weighted factors that goes into my determination of each entrant's chance of winning, with the early speed horse having an edge in that particular respect, as far as I am concerned (although that edge may be lessened by considerations of how the horse compares on factors such as condition, class, and overall speed).

Totally agree on the dirt surface with this. If you don't have speed in this game on the real dirt.....you are at times stuck. The longer the race, the more likely the closer will be at the mercy of pace. The front runners and stalkers have an advantage in many route races, the derby is usually the exception because its balls to the wall at the bell. This is the theory i use to get many winners at any price...its why i liked Oxbow and Palace Malice. Until i see different i could never use a horse like Revolutionary or Overanalyze in the Belmont on top. If you play Gulfstream or Saratoga you have to play this way. But it works at almost every dirt track when the pace is normal or slow. The closer has to be really good and really sharp to win consistantly.....only the REALLY good ones win often this way. Its the reason some of these horses can't win diddley until they hit the poly surface. Figuring out the pace scenario is key but i do favor speed going long on the dirt....its the way these horses are bred, its the way the dirt game is played. Its also the reason i thought so much of Zenyatta, you have to be really, really exceptional to win alot running that way. And when the jocks are sleeping, its even easier....Angel Cordero made the hall of fame riding this way.

[jasperson]

I have started printing out a rating that is bris's early pace rating +2 times the late pace rating for use with turf races. I have that it is all so useful in the longer sprint races. I am doing like Quirin said about his speed point anrunning style I just look at it.

[pandy]

The Bris class ratings and the Eponies class ratings are both pretty good. In the 9th race at Belmont today, Bris has the 1 Imperial Bluegrazz as the top ranked on class 109.6 over Restore The Shore's 109.4. Eponies has the 9, Uwhippersnapper as clear top class at 34.3 and almost a 5 point advantage. It seems to me that they both may be wrong and maybe Scandalo should get the top class rating since he raced at Gulfstream this winter, but it's close. Scandalo also has the top Prime Power by over 6 points.

[raybo]

Personally, I think class is, primarily, a combination of early and late speed, in other words, total speed. Of course, other factors must also be included in order to use that class. And those other factors must be in context to the race in question; track, surface, distance, pace pressure, running style, temperament, form, etc.. However, the best classes possess the ability to overcome all those other factors. Will those horses always win, of course not, but they have more potential than lesser class horses. But, then there are very few of those horses around so we have to decide who has the best class in today's race. And, we're right back at square one, who is advantaged in today's race? So, class alone, is not the answer, but it is a very good start!

[RaceBookJoe]

As a side note, class determination is quite tricky. Would be interested in hearing how you determine class and how that then becomes a rating/number.

For example, do you only consider past performances where the horse finished well, or do you look at lifetime earnings, earning per start, recent performances only, etc..

Back in the 70's when I started, I used class more than I do today. I would only use races where the horse was competitive. Now I use it mainly as a secondary factor at most. Having said that, if I am comparing 2 horses with identical pp's except for the class level, my money leans toward the one in the higher class bracket. For example : same track,surface,age,fractions but one did it in $30K claimer and the other did it in $20K claimer...my bet would lean towards the $30K claimer. Really hard to put it into exactness though.

[raybo]

Whatever method you use, whether it be early speed, late speed, speed figs, class, form, visual analysis, pedigree, or combinations of all those, your hit rate versus average payout must be able to overcome the randomness in racing, and the public.

[BlueShoe]

But many big longshot winners are taking more subtle drops, so there's no question that class is extremely important.
Seem to recall reading some years ago (Mark Cramer?) that horses dropping in class in their next race almost always ran an improved speed figure, often much better, even when their form in the tougher races was just so so, or even poor.

[pandy]

The Bris class ratings and the Eponies class ratings are both pretty good. In the 9th race at Belmont today, Bris has the 1 Imperial Bluegrazz as the top ranked on class 109.6 over Restore The Shore's 109.4. Eponies has the 9, Uwhippersnapper as clear top class at 34.3 and almost a 5 point advantage. It seems to me that they both may be wrong and maybe Scandalo should get the top class rating since he raced at Gulfstream this winter, but it's close. Scandalo also has the top Prime Power by over 6 points.

Scandalo won easily. I've always thought that Prime Power was a better class rating than Bris class anyway.

[DRIVEWAY]

Scandalo won easily. I've always thought that Prime Power was a better class rating than Bris class anyway.

Prime Power is some magic formula that includes CR(Class/Condition Rating) and RR(Race Rating) plus several other variables.

Ironically, RR is more of a class indicator than CR. There is a writeup that tries to explain these variables which I haven't seen for some time. If you contact BRIS maybe they can steer you in the right direction.

Incidentally, when PP has a gap of 6pts the horse wins 46% of the time on dirt and rarely pays more than $4.00. If PP has a gap of 10pts on dirt look for a 55% win rate and a parimutuel of $2.40-$3.40 most of the time.

I've used BRIS data for several years now. If you average CR and RR you come up with a composite number that shows both horse competiton class and horse condition class. The top number can be helpful when it disagrees with Prime Power rankings. When this happens it's time to look under the hood at the raw running lines.

Sometimes it helps identify a value play opportunity while other times it just makes you shake your head.

I truly believe that a strong class rating number that takes into account the following factors of Track Class, Race Condition Class, Purse Class, Race Performance Class, Race Participant Class, Earnings-At-Distance Class and Subsequent Performance Class(key race thru horror show etc.) would lead to success at the windows.

Good luck finding all the data and back fitting processes necessary to arrive at such a number.

This is a tough game but if you can use computers to create and massage racing data into meaningful information than you may attain that winning edge.

Good Luck with your efforts in this regard.

[pandy]

Thanks for the input Driveway. I do like RR better than CR.

[Robert Fischer]

Classy horses are talented, and they have the qualities that are required to run the race on their own terms.

[JohnGalt1]

Since most dirt tracks favor E and EP styles, those are what I look to play even if they are closely rated to P's and S's.

I'm not fond of fake dirt but my least hated is Tapeta. I find that my top rated horse, regardless of running style, does well.