Layoffs

[Segwin]

I was looking at the DRF race of the day which was the 8th a Sar yesterday.

Central Banker, the #4, was off, 250 days. He did have recent works that were nothing to write home about but was staying active. I dismissed him because of such a long layoff.

Fast forward a bit and he is in the winners circle (and boy did he look good at the stretch).

Interested in how others approach layoffs. Look for another race, look at the lines from almost a year ago?

Is there a web site where you can go to search the stats on a specific horse (without paying through the nose)? I'd be curious to find out why such a long layoff.

[Johnny V]

I used to rule out horses back in the day off long layoffs but no longer. It cost me too many times. Anything over 90 days and I will take a somewhat longer look. I look at the trainer in those cases. This horse paid $10. He was taking money and was the third choice in the betting so there was something there to recommend him in the public eye in spite of the long layoff. If you are using lines for a pace figure or speed figure I would suggest trying to find one in a similar situation as todays as close as possible, if possible, with regards to layoff, distance, track etc. Go as far back as you can, if need be. Workout patterns may help as well. I will not dismiss a horse out of hand because of a layoff, no matter how long.

[Big Bill]

Cherokee Artist in the 1st race at Charles Town today hasn't raced in more than six months but is top in Prime Power Rating and is 2 to 1 in the M/L.

[DeltaLover]

I was looking at the DRF race of the day which was the 8th a Sar yesterday.

Central Banker, the #4, was off, 250 days. He did have recent works that were nothing to write home about but was staying active. I dismissed him because of such a long layoff.

Fast forward a bit and he is in the winners circle (and boy did he look good at the stretch).

Interested in how others approach layoffs. Look for another race, look at the lines from almost a year ago?

Is there a web site where you can go to search the stats on a specific horse (without paying through the nose)? I'd be curious to find out why such a long layoff.

Layoffs consist one of the three or four most important handicapping factors having the greatest impact to the bottom line of a betting strategy.

I will not get into details about how to use them in your handicapping, this is part of the puzzle that you have to put together by yourself. All I can tell you is that you will need a database, some knowledge of statistics and a lot of work.

[Overlay]

Layoffs are just one element that I look at, and I don't use them (or any of the other factors that I consider) as stand-alone, go/no-go elimination criteria. Although my overall evaluation will generally favor a horse with more recent action, layoffs can be compensated for by considerations of trainer intent; comparative class, speed, or running style; and (especially) the odds at which the horse is going off today versus my assessment of its winning chances.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I had him as my #2 contender in the race.I bet the 8 in whom I saw as the lone pure closer vs a 37 x 1 pace scenario.Central Banker was 2nd tier in speed but as has been noted horses improve between 2 and 3yo seasons and this one projected to run as fast as anybody in the race.Stall at 31% off 180 days had to instill some confidence.As a presser he looked to have an ideal trip.He won 1st out on turf.Had a new pace top last time on turf.Plus a fairly decent turf pedigree for an American horse(C+1*/2**L-sire--B4/2L-damsire).I got busted out of my exacta by the 3 No Distinction,who had speed but a poor turf pedigree(D3/4 sire).

[Robert Goren]

It was off for a reason. As bettor we seldom know what that reason is. I used to give the benefit of the doubt to turf router closers, but seldom to dirt sprinters of any type. But that was just me. When in doubt, pass the race.

[pondman]

I have one group of plays that I love to see a layoff. It's resulted in reoccurring huge tickets. Other than that it's not going to be a factor.

[Midnight Cruiser]

I was looking at the DRF race of the day which was the 8th a Sar yesterday.

Central Banker, the #4, was off, 250 days. He did have recent works that were nothing to write home about but was staying active. I dismissed him because of such a long layoff.

Fast forward a bit and he is in the winners circle (and boy did he look good at the stretch).

Interested in how others approach layoffs. Look for another race, look at the lines from almost a year ago?

Is there a web site where you can go to search the stats on a specific horse (without paying through the nose)? I'd be curious to find out why such a long layoff.

I think layoffs can be ok depending on where in the country the horses are laying off. I seem to think lay off horses in warmer climates tend to take to the layoff better than northern/colder weather lay offs. Also, how does the worktab look and how has a horse performed when coming off a layoff factor in my decision on whether or not to play...

[BIG49010]

I look at the trainer, and Al Stall at Saratoga over the last 4 years was 9 for 25 , 1st race back after 30+ day layoff. He also fit in many other catagories, and I think Maggie W. on NYRA simulcast liked the way the horse looked as an additional kicker.

[nijinski]

I also look at the trainer . Some can trainers have them ready off a layoff
on the grass for a mile comeback .

[PhantomOnTour]

That was a special spot for trainer Al Stall, who has now won with his first starter of the Saratoga meet five of the last six years.

In general, I never play a layoff runner in a turf sprint under 6f. Those races tend to be run balls to the wall from the bell, and you had better be 100% fit to win one of them.

[JohnGalt1]

IMO there are two types of lay offs, 28 days,(4 weeks), and long layoffs of at least 5 months.

In all cases I take the best/fastest race using all pp's.

If the horse's best race is not as fast as another horse's most recent race, it's throw out for me.

I use the book Sire Stats to look up breeding on all first time starters and maidens dropping in class, as that's a first start at that level, I also look up the FTS rating on long lay off horses.

After losing to some horses off long layoffs I tried to figure out why and how I could figure out a method to uncover live horses besides work outs and trainer ability with these types.

I use it as a secondary factor--I won't bet a horse just because it's out of an A rated sire--because how the horse ran is more important.

And I don't look up ratings for horses going into a turf race as I think long layoffs are less of a factor in turf races.

The only race I handicapped for Saturday 7/27 with long lay offs on dirt/fake dirt races is Del Mar race 9 which I will pass as any horse/no horse can win. Three horses are off longer than 5 months. The 3 is out of a C sire, the 7 and 8 horses are out of B sires.

[completebill]

A good set of J/T statistics will tell you how this trainer does with horses coming off a layoff of any given number of days. I'm a devoted user of the HTR computer handicapping program, and these figures are very easy to access. HTR gets all of its data from HDW (Handicappers Data Warehouse) and HDW provides these same stats to others.

Yes, workouts are important, but this factor is, to a large extent, incorporated into the trainer info. If the trainer is a proven success in a given situation, it probably won't be really helpful to be second guessing him/ her on the work patterns.

Finally, there do seem to be some horses with a propensity for racing well off of a freshening, so it's worth looking at the horse's previous success in similar situations.

Handicappers who have "systems", or rules, about throwing out horses coming off of layoffs of 30, 45, or (pick any number) of days are living in the dark ages. Take a look---the better trainers realize the benefits of running fresh, well-rested horses. The evidence is available, and those who don't use it are helping to enrich my bankroll!

[Tom]

Just a layoff stat can be misleading.
What if a trainer is 25% of a layoff?
Then you look closer and see he is 45% with males and 3% with females.
Dirt, grass, class.....general stats can cost you money.

[BIG49010]

Just a layoff stat can be misleading.
What if a trainer is 25% of a layoff?
Then you look closer and see he is 45% with males and 3% with females.
Dirt, grass, class.....general stats can cost you money.


In some cases your correct, but in many cases the law of small numbers takes over. I personally follow "loosely" Ed Bain's 4 + 30% rule, and for many angles it works like dynamite, and with added kickers like grass, poly, etc you have a tough time getting numbers when you go to meeting specific statistics for a Saratoga or Keeneland type meeting.

[eqitec]

I consider a horse's potential for success after layoffs of all kinds to be more of a trainer factor rather than an equine factor. Some trainers are more adept than others at getting their horses in the winners' circle after layoffs than others. The same holds true for 1st time starters. I call the trainer's success in doing so an "attribute".

In which case I do Trainer Attribute Analyses as an influential handicapping element. To do this, I've automated the analyses as depicted below for the first race at Monmouth today. If I see a positive variance for any of the Layoff Atrributes, then I look more closely at the form cycle chart to be sure that the trainer has put enough work into the horse to have it ready today. That is also shown for the #1 horse in this race.

[Segwin]

In some cases your correct, but in many cases the law of small numbers takes over. I personally follow "loosely" Ed Bain's 4 + 30% rule, and for many angles it works like dynamite, and with added kickers like grass, poly, etc you have a tough time getting numbers when you go to meeting specific statistics for a Saratoga or Keeneland type meeting.

What is the 4 + 30 rule?

[Segwin]

Just a layoff stat can be misleading.
What if a trainer is 25% of a layoff?
Then you look closer and see he is 45% with males and 3% with females.
Dirt, grass, class.....general stats can cost you money.

Where do you pickup the stats on the male vs female breakdown Tom?

[therussmeister]

What is the 4 + 30 rule?
Minimum of 4 winners with a minimum 30% win rate. http://www.edbain.com/

[Dave Schwartz]

I actually did a segment on "Days Since Last Race" on my first Handicapping Live Show. (http://thehorsehandicappingauthority.com/handicapping-live-00001-june-27-2013/)

People who watch this show generally come away with one of two attitudes:

1. "I didn't realize that a horse coming off a short layoff (30-60 days) return MORE MONEY and actually WIN MORE races. I will change my handicapping."

or

2. "I just KNOW that can't be true."

The stats are overwhelmingly against the old layoff theories.


All that being said, 250 days is a different deal.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I actually did a segment on "Days Since Last Race" on my first Handicapping Live Show. (http://thehorsehandicappingauthority.com/handicapping-live-00001-june-27-2013/)

People who watch this show generally come away with one of two attitudes:

1. "I didn't realize that a horse coming off a short layoff (30-60 days) return MORE MONEY and actually WIN MORE races. I will change my handicapping."

or

2. "I just KNOW that can't be true."

The stats are overwhelmingly against the old layoff theories.


All that being said, 250 days is a different deal.

Depends on the track too.I don't think twice about betting horses laid off in the 30-60 day range in NY,but at a track like Beulah horses that race in 25 days or less win about 70% of the races or more.Some trainers like to strike while the iron is hot with winners and win again soon but in my experience 5-6 weeks is optimal for repeat winners.It's fairly track and trainer specific.I'm shocked at the generic way of thinking you mention from some players.

[Dave Schwartz]

Local customs are always important.

My stats completely agree with yours.

[Overlay]

The discussion takes me back to when I first started out with handicapping, remembering the activity criteria that Tom Ainslie laid down in The Compleat Horseplayer: eliminate any horse that does not show two races, or two workouts, or one of each, within the past seventeen days. Times (and the breed) have changed.

[raybo]

At most tracks 75 days is where I really get concerned about a layoff (all tracks are different, just as all trainers and horses are different, so a hard and fast rule can't be used). While individual situations exist, ie. some trainers/horses can be successful on 75 day layoffs, the long term tells me that profit is made by not betting these longer layoff horses. Do I throw out these horses out of hand? No. But, I check them very closely, and evaluate the risk/reward ratio for these horses, sometimes the price is just too good to throw them out based strictly on the layoff.

[Tom]

The discussion takes me back to when I first started out with handicapping, remembering the activity criteria that Tom Ainslie laid down in The Compleat Horseplayer: eliminate any horse that does not show two races, or two workouts, or one of each, within the past seventeen days. Times (and the breed) have changed.

Nowadays, I think a lot of horses don't even leave their stalls that often.

[delayjf]

I would not take a short price on a long layoff like that. For me that would be reason to bet against. If I get beat, I get beat.

[Robert Goren]

Cheap horses run more often than better ones. When I see a bottom claimer on the dirt who hasn't raced in 5 week or more, it had better be a shipper or I eliminate it . That said , 6+ month layoffs on the dirt are scary. Something was wrong with the horse, but what. Has it been fixed? Does the trainer even know if it has been fixed? It less scary with a horse that had one losing race as a 2 yo coming back as 3 yo. Turf Routers often take the winter off and win 1st out. I know there are trainers pull 6 month off and no WOs stuff to get a price, but you had better know who they are, if you bet such a horse. I like mares less when they have had a long layoff, but that is just me.

[RaceBookJoe]

Anytime I see a long layoff I check 4 things,

1. Either the comment line or chart of the race to see if something happened in the last race to cause the layoff.
2. How the horse was running the races up until that last race, was he running well or terribly.
3. The trainers record with layoff horses.
4. The workout tab.

I don't worry too much about a couple situations, but still look for resumed workouts before todays race.
1. 2 yr olds taking a couple months off during the winter.
2. Same for some turf horses.
3. Most horses in So Cal that skip the Fairplex meet.

Its not perfect, but it gives me a base to go off of.

[pondman]

It less scary with a horse that had one losing race as a 2 yo coming back as 3 yo.

The bucked shins scenario has been the most financially rewarding bet for me, Keep in mind these horses are retrained with 2 furlong bursts several times a week at the high end. So they are essentially going to be different animals at 5 furlongs. Unfortunately they often don't get much beyond short sprints at the high end. This is an area where only certain trainer will want to handle these. You probably won't see the being done by the high dollar trainers. All of this leads to a value play overtime.