what does this mean?

[andicap]

If most of a field's best races shown -- speed figure rating wise, but it could also be pace too -- are on the bottom of the PPs instead of me the top (last 3-5 say), does that tell you anything about the race?

You know the race is full of horses on the decline who have seen better days. Do you handicap these races differently than those where most horses top figures have occurred in the last 3 months, say?

Is class a bigger factor for you, or recent form (since so many horses seem on the way does the horse with good recent form cycle/conditioning take on extra weight?). Trainer more important in these races?
Would you call them in Cramer's words, "lesser of all evils" races where you get higher prices?



cheers,

[B. Comin']

If I remember right, Cramer alludes to 'lesser of all evils' races having some big payoffs at times. So I would look to a backclass horse to jump up outta' nowhere to bite form players in their back ass (oops, I mean backside).

[raybo]

In all instances of horse's on the decline recently,whether it seems to be many in a particular field or just 1 horse in a race, I first look at the early, mid, and late pace figures to try to find a sign of returning to form, then I check recent workouts, especially after his last race for improving condition, and finally, trainer moves to see if he has done what the horse needs to improve a particular area of the horse's form, like short workouts and short races to improve early speed or longer ones for stamina. If I can discern a signal from these studies, then back "class" (performance) can be more readily expected to show. This is not the whole picture but a basic approach that I use for horses out of form.

[Tom]

Andy,
I use the Fig2 screen in HTR (their version of the Sheets)
I note each horse's top of all races showing, and then look at how each graoh is going-towards or away from the best. Once I have isolate improving horses, I then look to see which ones are the fastes of those and check out their pace figs to see if there are advantages amoung closely matched horses.

I love those back numbers when a horse is cycling to the left and is maybe 4-8 points away fom his best.
I let class take care of itself generally-unles I am playing cheap tracks, like FL, Penn, Delta, etc.
A little trick I use is one Tom Brohamer taught me-draw line thorugh al l the races not like today's and then look at wha tis left. Wtih all the noise gone, you might find that the back number ends up froma race just like today's - for the first time in a long time.
The worst race I find are those where everyone's curent form is goo, closely mathced and right out there for everyone to see.

[raybo]

RE:<The worst race I find are those where everyone's curent form is goo, closely mathced and right out there for everyone to see.>

Yep, closely matched healthy horses are a crap shoot, unless there is a pace advantage somewhere or a significant jockey change or the like.

[so.cal.fan]

That's an interesting question, Andy
We do see fields like that, even in So. Cal. and more often than we would hope to.
I tend to favor older back class horses, 6 yrs or older.
They will all look pretty bad in the paddock, but if one of the old back class ones looks at least as good as the rest of the field or better yet, better than the rest of the field....that's the one for me.
That said, I have a friend who will argue, find the speed and go with who will get the best jump at the first call.
Another friend who will argue, go with the best current form.
Probably all of us are right equally.
Someone once said "THE KEY TO KNOWLEDGE ALWAYS HAS A QUESTION MARK AT THE END OF IT"
:confused:

[andicap]

I think you're right.
Looking at these horese in the paddock and the on-track warmups are likely the key to success here since you're looking for the one who has gotten rid of whatever was aching them and at least for one day is able to return to some semblence of their past class.

[so.cal.fan]

Another horrible field of horses is the maiden claiming race with 10, 11, 12 horses who have all proven they CAN'T RUN!

Anybody have any insights to share with us on this mess?

Gosh, thanks anyway, didn't think you did! LOL

[Tom]

Originally posted by so.cal.fan
Another horrible field of horses is the maiden claiming race with 10, 11, 12 horses who have all proven they CAN'T RUN!

Anybody have any insights to share with us on this mess?

Gosh, thanks anyway, didn't think you did! LOL


Bet the underlays. They are getting the money so someone must know something. :p

[so.cal.fan]

I usually agree with you Tom, but not on this one......
NO ONE KNOWS ANYTHING IN THESE RACES. I suppose if you really dug and got lucky you may come up with the dog that is just a shade better than the rest.....but it's really a stretch in my opinion........I stay out of these.
My husband just opined on this:
He claims you can look at the field in the paddock and if one or two look a lot better than the rest.......they will win and run second. He thinks these are easy races in this instance......I'm still not convinced.
Good luck to you and my husband cashing a ticket here, Tom.....

[Tom]

SoCal.......:p was meant to be tounge in cheek. :D

[Jaguar]

So.Cal.Fan, in response to your question, these races are usually highly problematic- I call them "GGF" races, (Golden Gate Fields) because they are populated by can't win, won't win animals.

Each day that I handicap I use 2 computer programs to analyze the card. One of these programs is an "expert system" disc which uses linear regression to analyze the impact of 25 different algorithms- or strategies- on each entrant's past performances.

The program then makes track specific models, using the statistical "weight", or impact of those algorithms.

Also, the software analyzes the basic predictability or "consistency" of the race in question. Maiden Claimers usually receive a rating of between 40-60% consistency. Well below my benchmark of 72% for choosing a race to bet on.

As the late, great Ray Taulbot states in his excellent little booklet, "Positive Factor Handicapping", "These races feature alot of cripples or partial cripples". (Not an exact quote).

All The Best,

Jaguar

[JustMissed]

With a scratch or two, these races when the trifecta is offered present a pretty good opportunity to play a Jerry Stokes' 4 or 5 horse combo for as little as $20 bucks.

If you can get down to an 8 or 9 horse field you don't even need to study too damn much, just kicked out 3 or 4 pigs and plug in the numbers.

My experience has been that you need a betting angle to make any money on these type races, a selection angle just want cut it.

Same it true for those final race of the day with first time starters/two yos. If you are blessed with some scratches you best reach into both pockets.

JustMissed
:)

[JustMissed]

HERE'S WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. 4YO & UP GALS NW2L. ONLY AN 8 HORSE FIELD. YOU COULD'VE PLAYED 5 IN THE TRIFECTA FOR $36 AND COLLECTED $291. I DIDN'T FIGURE THE SUPER TICKETS BUT WITH AN OVER 3 GRAND PAYOFF YOU COULD SPLIT IT WITH A BUDDY FOR LESS THAN $100 OUT OF POCKET.

ANYWAY, THAT'S MY TAKE ON THESE TYPE RACES. NOBODY OR NO COMPUTER IS GOOD ENOUGH TO PICK THE WINNER'S WITH THESE KINDA RACES.

JUSTMISSED





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5th Race - Tampa Bay Downs - Thursday, March 25th, 2004
Conditions: 5 1/2F Dirt. FOR FILLIES AND MARES FOUR YEARS OLD AND UPWARD WHICH HAVE NEVER WON A RACE OTHER THAN MAIDEN, CLAIMING, OR STARTER OR WHICH HAVE NEVER WON TWO RACES. Weight, 122 lbs. Non-winners Of A Race Since January 25 Allowed 2 lbs. A Race Since December 25 Allowed 4 lbs. (Races where entered for $10,000 or less not considered in weight allowances).
Value of Race: $13,000 ($2,500 reverts) 1st $7,800 2nd $2,470 3rd $1,560 4th $650 5th $130 6th $130 7th $130 8th $130 Mutuel Pool: $88,980


# Horse A/S M/E Wgt PP St 1/4 3/8 Str Fin Jockey Odds
5 Polish Baby 4 F L 122 5 2 21 21/2 21/2 1nk Castanon Jesus Lopez *2.70
8 Lady Greystoke 4 F L 118 8 5 61 41/2 41 21 Umana Juan 22.40
4 Gold Run Type 4 F L 122 4 1 11 1/2 11/2 1hd 33/4 Houghton T. D. 2.70
1 Imperial Wager 6 M L b 118 1 3 31 51/2 51 1/2 41 1/2 Castillo Oliver 4.30
2 Perfect Ten 6 M L f 118 2 4 4hd 31/2 31/2 53/4 Escobar Martin 6.80
7 Games of Chance 6 M L f 108 7 6 8 8 8 61 1/2 Hernandez Rafael Manuel 12.20
6 Kingstown 4 F L 122 6 7 74 74 72 73 1/2 Judice Joseph C. 4.60
3 Lovely Fortune 4 F L bf 113 3 8 51/2 62 61/2 8 Cosme Emanuel 10.60
Off Time: 2:18 Start: 8 went. Good for all but 2. Track: Fast Weather: Cloudy 77o
Fractions: :23, :47, 1:064 (:23.06, :47.15, 1:06.81)


# Horse Win Place Show
5 Polish Baby 7.40 5.20 3.00
8 Lady Greystoke 22.20 6.40
4 Gold Run Type 3.00
Pedigree: 5 - Polish Baby, Chestnut Filly, 4, by Pollock's Luck - Aloha Baby by W. D. Jacks


Wager Type Payoff Winning Numbers Pool
$2 Exacta $124.80 5-8 $82,123
$2 Quinella $113.80 5-8 $5,000
$2 Superfecta $3,171.80 5-8-4-1 $21,403
$2 Trifecta $582.00 5-8-4 $69,123


Race Summary
POLISH BABY chased the early leader, bid after three furlongs, gained a short lead in the furlong grounds then was all out late. LADY GREYSTOKE fanned five wide out of the turn then was gaining late outside. GOLD RUN TYPE sprinted clear early, resisted the winner when challenged to late then just hung. IMPERIAL WAGER raced close up early, dropped back in traffic in the turn then angled outside and came again late. PERFECT TEN hopped at the break, rushed up inside to be a threat past the furlong marker then weakened. GAMES OF CHANCE failed to menace. KINGSTOWN showed no speed and was no factor. LOVELY FORTUNE stopped.

Owners: 5 - Rognon, Charles T. and Adams, Robert A.; 8 - Hoey, Peter and Shaw, Jay; 4 - Goldish, Marc D. and Savoy Stable; 1 - Nicola Cianci; 2 - Alexander C. Seltrecht; 7 - Patricia A. Mann; 6 - David Speers; 3 - Joel W. Sainer
Trainers: 5 - Cliff Haydel; 8 - Duane Knipe; 4 - Kathleen O'Connell; 1 - Deborah M. Simpson; 2 - Judy Seltrecht; 7 - Steven Dye; 6 - Charles Simon; 3 - Ramon Perez
Breeders: 5 - Charles T. Rognon & Robert A.Adams (TX); 8 - Jay Shaw & Peter E. Hoey (FL); 4 - John D. Santina (FL); 1 - Mockingbird Farm, Inc. (FL); 2 - Judith A. Seltrecht (FL); 7 - Everest Stables Inc. (KY); 6 - Highclere, Inc. (KY); 3 - A. Clare Silva, Jr. (FL)


:)

[GameTheory]

I think Just Missed is on the right track and most of the rest of you have it backwards. Remember we are playing against the other bettors, and they're all in the same boat. So if the race doesn't offer much handicapping information, does that make it unplayable? Heck no! It just means there is less to analyze, and we can figure out what to do quicker. The public tends to be real confused by these races (this thread is evidence of that) so that means it is a good opportunity to make money. Any scrap of information can be used to separate the horses -- they've all still got trainers & jockeys, right? Maybe some have equipment changes, or are trying a new distance? Layoff, anyone?

It may sound weird until you think about it, but any time you get a chance to bet on an animal(s) that looks like crap on paper that has a decent chance to win or fill out your exotic tickets (because they all look like crap and someone's got to be in the money) that is a chance to make a big score.

If the public is confused, you should be thinking how to exploit the situation.

[so.cal.fan]

Game Theory makes a great point, here.
When a race is tough for you, it's probably tough for everyone....so do a bit of extra effort before you decide to pass and you just may come up with a good one.
When you stop and think about it, races that look easy are probably nearly always heavy favorites that everyone else finds.
Maybe these are the ones we should always pass?