PDA

View Full Version : Facts about "new" gelding information


cj
12-28-2014, 02:32 PM
http://timeformusblog.com/2014/12/28/when-does-a-gelding-become-a-gelding/

Dave Schwartz
12-28-2014, 03:40 PM
Excellent article. Love the title.

chadk66
12-28-2014, 03:56 PM
trainers don't "not report" this info for handicapping reasons. I would guess the overwhelming reasons it isn't made immediately public is because trainers are extremely busy and have an enormous amount on their plate. remembering to state the horse is now a gelding is rather trivial in their world. Some remember to state it the next time they enter, some don't. That being said, if the handicappers really want that info they need to squeeze the racing office. The paddock just keeps records of all equipment used and if you show up with the wrong blinkers he will provide that for you. He should also be the one to verify whether the horse has his luggage or not. very easy to do in the paddock.

Tom
12-28-2014, 04:07 PM
A small percent of the bettors are in the paddocks.
The stewards should suspend a trainer for showing up to a race with an unreported gelding.

That would ease up their "busy" schedules for them.

Just on more really simple thing that racing cannot seem to do right.
Is everyone in the game an idiot?

Because it sure looks like it.

They don't know how far or how fast a horse ran and have no clue if he was gelded or not.

Boy, impressive industry. :rolleyes:

Robert Fischer
12-28-2014, 04:10 PM
A small percent of the bettors are in the paddocks.
The stewards should suspend a trainer for showing up to a race with an unreported gelding.

That would ease up their "busy" schedules for them.

There's really no excuse for Geldings, Shoe Work, Vet Work, etc... not being entered electronically in a database as soon as it's done.

'Busy' certainly isn't valid.

cj
12-28-2014, 04:14 PM
trainers don't "not report" this info for handicapping reasons. I would guess the overwhelming reasons it isn't made immediately public is because trainers are extremely busy and have an enormous amount on their plate. remembering to state the horse is now a gelding is rather trivial in their world. Some remember to state it the next time they enter, some don't. That being said, if the handicappers really want that info they need to squeeze the racing office. The paddock just keeps records of all equipment used and if you show up with the wrong blinkers he will provide that for you. He should also be the one to verify whether the horse has his luggage or not. very easy to do in the paddock.

Oh come on Chad, it is 2014. You could do this in about 5 seconds on your phone today.

Ruffian1
12-28-2014, 04:37 PM
For as many years as I trained and at every track I ever made an entry , a trainer WAS REQUIRED BY RULE to "CIRCLE" the G on the entry slip under sex if it was a change, so , the first time entered after being gelded. A circle on the entry slip means a CHANGE. That brings it to the attention of everyone from that point forward. This includes the racing form or whatever publication is printing that track.

No excuses, no B.S. THAT was the rule . Period.

I Voided a claim I had made because some clown did not make the change on the entry slip. Not because I wanted him to be a colt, but because he ran terribly and I did not want him afterwards.

It has been a rule since at least 1976 and until at least 2001.

If the trainer fails to do so, they can be fined and or suspended. That is up to the Stewards.

But if the trainer DID circle the entry, it is on the racing office or publication person that takes down the info to report it.

I can't believe they make it sound like it's some kind of TASK. Lol. What a joke.

Someone simply needs to get off their ass and get it done !

Hope that clears it up somewhat.

JustRalph
12-28-2014, 05:39 PM
There's really no excuse for Geldings, Shoe Work, Vet Work, etc... not being entered electronically in a database as soon as it's done.

'Busy' certainly isn't valid.

From where? The backside? No Habla english

Tom
12-28-2014, 06:21 PM
There's an app for that.

chadk66
12-28-2014, 07:02 PM
Oh come on Chad, it is 2014. You could do this in about 5 seconds on your phone today.you could for sure. get on the racing offices to allow trainers to do that. Or better yet the vet that cut him. But what if the horse is sent to the farm after his last race and is cut while there. then a month later is sent to a different trainer. In reality the industry doesn't really care. that's what your up against.

chadk66
12-28-2014, 07:03 PM
For as many years as I trained and at every track I ever made an entry , a trainer WAS REQUIRED BY RULE to "CIRCLE" the G on the entry slip under sex if it was a change, so , the first time entered after being gelded. A circle on the entry slip means a CHANGE. That brings it to the attention of everyone from that point forward. This includes the racing form or whatever publication is printing that track.

No excuses, no B.S. THAT was the rule . Period.

I Voided a claim I had made because some clown did not make the change on the entry slip. Not because I wanted him to be a colt, but because he ran terribly and I did not want him afterwards.

It has been a rule since at least 1976 and until at least 2001.

If the trainer fails to do so, they can be fined and or suspended. That is up to the Stewards.

But if the trainer DID circle the entry, it is on the racing office or publication person that takes down the info to report it.

I can't believe they make it sound like it's some kind of TASK. Lol. What a joke.

Someone simply needs to get off their ass and get it done !

Hope that clears it up somewhat.I've never raced at a track where the trainer filled out the entry form.

Ruffian1
12-28-2014, 08:05 PM
I've never raced at a track where the trainer filled out the entry form.


I have never raced at a track where they did not.

Even an entry over the phone, the clerk is filling out an entry sheet.

I find this INCREDIBLE. I mean , what do they do, just try and remember what you said over the phone about the lasix, bute, owner, trainer, sex, age, gets "X " amount of pounds off of 122 so it is "X" amount of pounds and the jocks name and if it's a bug??? WTF!! And if the horse runs with the wrong weight, where is the paper trail?? Is it your fault, their fault, whose fault ??

Do they even ask you if the "cut" is good, meaning the program type out of the last time the horse was entered?

Chad, I totally believe you, but because of what you say, what does this say about whats going on in the racing offices?? It must be like a friggin clown car ? Where is the professionalism??

The rules of racing are clear. And it's clear that the rules are not being followed.

I am shocked honestly.

I left the game for several reasons and it was a game I truly loved. I had such a deep passion and respect for the game itself . It was the hardest thing I had ever done at the time.

But in hind sight, I am so glad I did. I have a very successful business today in real estate, so no regrets, but it's the lack of respect for the game and the way you are supposed to play the game that makes me sick today, and made me sick back then. Plenty of blame to go around I guess .

The game and all the nonsense, just like this crap, could be fixed in a blink. All it takes is the willingness to lay the law down and see it through. But who cares?? Clearly, it's not whoever is taking entries in the racing office.

chadk66
12-28-2014, 09:16 PM
I have never raced at a track where they did not.

Even an entry over the phone, the clerk is filling out an entry sheet.

I find this INCREDIBLE. I mean , what do they do, just try and remember what you said over the phone about the lasix, bute, owner, trainer, sex, age, gets "X " amount of pounds off of 122 so it is "X" amount of pounds and the jocks name and if it's a bug??? WTF!! And if the horse runs with the wrong weight, where is the paper trail?? Is it your fault, their fault, whose fault ??

Do they even ask you if the "cut" is good, meaning the program type out of the last time the horse was entered?

Chad, I totally believe you, but because of what you say, what does this say about whats going on in the racing offices?? It must be like a friggin clown car ? Where is the professionalism??

The rules of racing are clear. And it's clear that the rules are not being followed.

I am shocked honestly.

I left the game for several reasons and it was a game I truly loved. I had such a deep passion and respect for the game itself . It was the hardest thing I had ever done at the time.

But in hind sight, I am so glad I did. I have a very successful business today in real estate, so no regrets, but it's the lack of respect for the game and the way you are supposed to play the game that makes me sick today, and made me sick back then. Plenty of blame to go around I guess .

The game and all the nonsense, just like this crap, could be fixed in a blink. All it takes is the willingness to lay the law down and see it through. But who cares?? Clearly, it's not whoever is taking entries in the racing office.right the entry clerk fills it out. I took you saying the trainer filled it out in the literal sense. sorry. I totally agree this should be policed very hard and made available as soon as possible. I'm just pointing out why that doesn't happen.

chadk66
12-28-2014, 09:18 PM
I left the game in 91' vowing to return after my kids were grown up and out of the house. I'm not sure I could do it now. I have a good job and financial security. Why would I want to put myself in a profession where I have to compete on an unlevel playing field with advanced chemists. Very few actually put the horse first and that's the only way I'll operate. Many owners don't even care, they just want the pay day.

Stillriledup
12-28-2014, 09:24 PM
I left the game in 91' vowing to return after my kids were grown up and out of the house. I'm not sure I could do it now. I have a good job and financial security. Why would I want to put myself in a profession where I have to compete on an unlevel playing field with advanced chemists. Very few actually put the horse first and that's the only way I'll operate. Many owners don't even care, they just want the pay day.

You're right, most owners don't care, if cheating was morally wrong to them, they would change trainers if their guy or girl was one of the "usual suspects" and very few of them do.

chadk66
12-28-2014, 09:58 PM
You're right, most owners don't care, if cheating was morally wrong to them, they would change trainers if their guy or girl was one of the "usual suspects" and very few of them do.:ThmbUp: And it's not hip to have an unknown or less touted/known trainer.

Milkshaker
12-28-2014, 10:42 PM
As of the past several days, DRF .pdf past performances have been reporting FTG's with a circled G (next to Lasix).

And in the breeding line at top of pedigree there is (what appears to be) a reported gelding date next to the sex (g) of the horse.

Just noticed this a week ago--assuming it was/is in beta mode, because they have been changing the format of how the date reads over the last several days.

cj
12-28-2014, 11:16 PM
As of the past several days, DRF .pdf past performances have been reporting FTG's with a circled G (next to Lasix).

And in the breeding line at top of pedigree there is (what appears to be) a reported gelding date next to the sex (g) of the horse.

Just noticed this a week ago--assuming it was/is in beta mode, because they have been changing the format of how the date reads over the last several days.

The article is about how TimeformUS is handling the information and why, I have no idea what DRF is doing.

biggestal99
12-29-2014, 06:53 AM
trainers don't "not report" this info for handicapping reasons. I would guess the overwhelming reasons it isn't made immediately public is because trainers are extremely busy and have an enormous amount on their plate. remembering to state the horse is now a gelding is rather trivial in their world. Some remember to state it the next time they enter, some don't. That being said, if the handicappers really want that info they need to squeeze the racing office. The paddock just keeps records of all equipment used and if you show up with the wrong blinkers he will provide that for you. He should also be the one to verify whether the horse has his luggage or not. very easy to do in the paddock.

We practically had to beg the trainer to inform the?powers that bewhen our horses were gelded, never got a steaight answer why.

Allan

Ruffian1
12-29-2014, 07:44 AM
I left the game in 91' vowing to return after my kids were grown up and out of the house. I'm not sure I could do it now. I have a good job and financial security. Why would I want to put myself in a profession where I have to compete on an unlevel playing field with advanced chemists. Very few actually put the horse first and that's the only way I'll operate. Many owners don't even care, they just want the pay day.

Chad, I left in 2001. I would never go back for the exact reasons you stated.

I was fired once by a prominent owner, with many political ties, and positions for, ready, wait for it, " not spending ENOUGH for drugs with the vet" .

Up until then, owners would bitch about vet bills all the time. Then, a guy comes from nowhere and starts winning at 30%, has 6, yes 6 positives racked up at once within a year, gets stays on all of them , keeps winning, finally has a commission hearing, they consolidate them into 2, and he takes his I think , 30 days, not much more if any, at his convenience and he is back. Meanwhile, his barn grows from 20 to probably 70 horses.

Prominent owner goes to positive boy and that's that.

That was the beginning of the end for me. It just took a few more episodes of nonsense to force me to make it official.

Like you, my kids were getting older and I was starting to miss things that would only come around once. That was certainly a contributing and probably a driving factor.

As hard as it was to leave the game, it was a no brainer for me.

There were 3 horses and a handful of people that got me hooked on the game. One of them was Ruffian, who I watched destroy Hot and Nasty at Monmouth Park as a 2 yr. old. It was her eyes that did it. I had seen a ton of horses run up close before but I was up close for her going down the backside and her eyes were just on fire.The intensity was breath taking. When I saw that, I was hooked but did not yet know it.

Fast forward to the 90's and over several years,when I would see the drugs and a minority of people ( trainers and vets as well as owners that turned a blind eye when they HAD to know better) willfully and knowingly cheat and by doing so, put riders and horses at risk. Riders with wives and kids and horses that ran through anything to compete for you.

The game had changed but I was who I was.

The game was on the level, it was some of the people in it that were not.

As I said, and out of respect to my family and respect for the game, that was that.

Stillriledup
12-29-2014, 08:31 AM
Chad, I left in 2001. I would never go back for the exact reasons you stated.

I was fired once by a prominent owner, with many political ties, and positions for, ready, wait for it, " not spending ENOUGH for drugs with the vet" .

Up until then, owners would bitch about vet bills all the time. Then, a guy comes from nowhere and starts winning at 30%, has 6, yes 6 positives racked up at once within a year, gets stays on all of them , keeps winning, finally has a commission hearing, they consolidate them into 2, and he takes his I think , 30 days, not much more if any, at his convenience and he is back. Meanwhile, his barn grows from 20 to probably 70 horses.

Prominent owner goes to positive boy and that's that.

That was the beginning of the end for me. It just took a few more episodes of nonsense to force me to make it official.

Like you, my kids were getting older and I was starting to miss things that would only come around once. That was certainly a contributing and probably a driving factor.

As hard as it was to leave the game, it was a no brainer for me.

There were 3 horses and a handful of people that got me hooked on the game. One of them was Ruffian, who I watched destroy Hot and Nasty at Monmouth Park as a 2 yr. old. It was her eyes that did it. I had seen a ton of horses run up close before but I was up close for her going down the backside and her eyes were just on fire.The intensity was breath taking. When I saw that, I was hooked but did not yet know it.

Fast forward to the 90's and over several years,when I would see the drugs and a minority of people ( trainers and vets as well as owners that turned a blind eye when they HAD to know better) willfully and knowingly cheat and by doing so, put riders and horses at risk. Riders with wives and kids and horses that ran through anything to compete for you.

The game had changed but I was who I was.

The game was on the level, it was some of the people in it that were not.

As I said, and out of respect to my family and respect for the game, that was that.

This is a great post, i was right in there with you down at the fence, watching the horses run. Same for what Chad was talking about, a lot of this stuff hits home a lot more when you hear things from people who lived it, the insiders who were in the trenches.

It really hurts me to read this because your love of the animal and the game really shines thru...and 'they' essentially took that from you. Or, if they didn't take it from you, they put you in a position to not really want to go back. Same for Chad.

What a shame. The game needs people who care and who want to do it the right way, and we have too many who aren't playing by the rules, or they're playing by the rules, sort of, you know, to keep up with the joneses so they can keep their livelihood in tact and pay their bills, but that's not good enough and never will be.

The "Game" has a long and storied history of cheating, the modern guys aren't the only ones who are trying for edges and to not get caught, but for every David Wells that gets caught and in big trouble, or a Dutrow who gets basically kicked out of the game, what about all these other guys? What's really the difference between Dutrow and Doug O'Neill? If there is a difference, its really not all that much and yet, one guy is out for 10 years and the other guy is out for a month.

The keepers of the game have convinced themselves that they're trying and that the effort is there to clean this game up and get it on the right track, but unfortunately, they're not doing enough. The punishments are not strong enough and since handle and field size go hand in hand, there's a conflict of interest within the game to get as many horses on the track as possible, no matter what it takes, each extra betting interest is more money in their pockets...they're not going to jeopardize that so they can "do the right thing"

Milkshaker
12-29-2014, 10:19 AM
The article is about how TimeformUS is handling the information and why, I have no idea what DRF is doing.

It was not my intent to address the article you posted.

Simply trying to further the thread on gelding info, like others are doing in this discussion by expanding upon your original post.

Jeff P
12-29-2014, 11:38 AM
Chad, I left in 2001...

Ahhh.

The body of your posts make sense to me now.

In some of the other threads I quoted you and disagreed (vehemently) with what you had posted. (For instance, your contention that horsemen have nothing to do with ever higher takeout.)

I'm a 360+ day a year bettor and have been involved in horseplayer advocacy through HANA (http://horseplayersassociation.org/) since 2008.

Countless meetings and conversations with track management, state regulators, and horsemen have made it clear to me that up until about 2004 the industry was still doing a fairly good job (relative to itself) of satisfying customer needs and wants.

The rash of anti-player policies put in place by the industry that have caused handle and public interest in horse racing to plummet: ever higher signal fees, source market fee in state after state, denying track signals as a negotiating ploy, denying track signals as a means of eliminating competition, UIGEA, the three takeout increases (that I know about) in California, outright refusal to allow exchange wagering, outright refusal to deal harshly with those who cheat through the use of drugs, and the more recent takeout increase at Churchill...

The bulk of that (at least the things of that nature that I know about) has been backed by horsemen alphabet groups and started happening with ever increasing frequency in 2005.

Knowing that you left the game in 2001 helps me put many of your previous posts in context.



-jp

.

classhandicapper
12-29-2014, 12:11 PM
Has anyone ever seen a study on whether FTGs win more than their fair share of races (controlling for their PPs), jump up more often than the average horse, and what the ROI is?

I never pay any attention to this info. I've been hearing horse players say it's a positive for as long as I've been going to the races, but I've never seen anyone actually document it. You are certainly going to find horses that jump up and win at big prices as FTGs, but you'll find horses like that when the jockey is wearing pink for the first time too. It's hard to know how much is cause and effect and if there is any value in it without a real study. That goes double given the reporting issues being discussed in this thread and now that it will be widely available.

(milkshaker, your note early in the thread is correct)

ReplayRandall
12-29-2014, 12:23 PM
Has anyone ever seen a study on whether FTGs win more than their fair share of races (controlling for their PPs), jump up more often than the average horse, and what the ROI is?

I've been hearing horse players say it's a positive for as long as I've been going to the races, but I've never seen anyone document it. You are certainly going to find horses that jump up and win at big prices as FTGs, but you'll find horses like that when the jockey is wearing pink for the first time too. It's hard to know how much is cause and effect and if there is any value without a real study. That goes double given the reporting issues being discussed here.
My records show that since 1994, Fillies/Mares who race in foal show a positive ROI with no odds requirements. Consider this info as a New Year's gift for those who believe I don't BS......BTW, finding that info does take work.

cj
12-29-2014, 12:32 PM
Has anyone ever seen a study on whether FTGs win more than their fair share of races (controlling for their PPs), jump up more often than the average horse, and what the ROI is?

I never pay any attention to this info. I've been hearing horse players say it's a positive for as long as I've been going to the races, but I've never seen anyone actually document it. You are certainly going to find horses that jump up and win at big prices as FTGs, but you'll find horses like that when the jockey is wearing pink for the first time too. It's hard to know how much is cause and effect and if there is any value in it without a real study. That goes double given the reporting issues being discussed in this thread and now that it will be widely available.

(milkshaker, your note early in the thread is correct)

I think it could be done now, but the info wasn't available in a format that allowed studies in the past.

I suspect, like I think you do, that alone it isn't a great angle. I've always had more luck betting back horses that ran well after being gelded, not betting them the first time.

classhandicapper
12-29-2014, 12:47 PM
I suspect, like I think you do, that alone it isn't a great angle. I've always had more luck betting back horses that ran well after being gelded, not betting them the first time.

That makes some sense. At least you have a tangible reason to think any improvement might not be a fluke.

I have enough trouble sorting through all the information I know matters, let alone all the undocumented things other people use.

Jeff P
12-29-2014, 12:56 PM
I tested the performance of first time geldings back in either 2009 or 2010. (I'd have to comb through a backup archive and find my notes before I'd be able to post results here.)

But going from memory...

I recall both win rate and roi for first time geldings with previous racing experience being slightly lower than geldings in general with previous racing experience.

This kind of surprised me because what I saw in the data ran contrary to what I'd always been "told."

Although there are always going to be individual horses who are exceptions - in analyzing the data I came to the conclusion that a time component exists.

In general, the more elapsed time since a horse has been 'cut' the better the win rate and roi - and the closer performance of first time geldings gets to win rate and roi for geldings in general.

That said, if you run geldings in general as a stand alone, you don't get anywhere close to break even.



-jp

.

o_crunk
12-29-2014, 01:04 PM
Unless someone is creating a data set that is fed from sources other than Equibase, I would consider any study on first time geldings to be basically useless.

If you want to make the point that there's bad data in pretty much any data set, I'd agree. But with gelding data specifically, you're seeing bad intake at a high enough percentage (approaching 50% of the data set is bad and thus making "clean up" of the bad data a subjective task), that anyone creating output statistics based on it, is seeing garbage-in-garbage-out.

I would think the TFUS blog post makes that clear...but I guess not.

cj
12-29-2014, 01:09 PM
Unless someone is creating a data set that is feed from sources other than Equibase, I would consider any study on first time geldings to be basically useless.

If you want to make the point that there's bad data in pretty much any data set, I'd agree. But with gelding data specifically, you're seeing bad intake at a high enough percentage (approaching 50% of the data set is bad), that anyone creating output statistics based on it, is seeing garbage-in-garbage-out.

I would think the TFUS blog post makes that clear...but I guess not.

Don't you think it is pretty easy to identify the first start as a gelding, at least after the fact? I realize the date of gelding is unknown.

o_crunk
12-29-2014, 01:13 PM
Don't you think it is pretty easy to identify the first start as a gelding, at least after the fact? I realize the date of gelding is unknown.

It's possible...but like I said (after I edited the post), the rules you'd come up with may be different than the rules I come up with.

I've got a set of rules in my mind and even then there's plenty of "gotcha" moments within those rules that would probably still yield bad results.

I'm probably being too black and white on this but the grey area is pretty wide for this data set.

cj
12-29-2014, 01:15 PM
It's possible...but like I said (after I edited the post), the rules you'd come up with may be different than the rules I come up with.

I've got a set of rules in my mind and even then there's plenty of "gotcha" moments within those rules that would probably still yield bad results.

I'm probably being too black and white on this but the grey area is pretty wide for this data set.

Understood, and like I said and Jeff as well, there is no gold in these hills anyway.

o_crunk
12-29-2014, 01:22 PM
The other problem here and it's not really touched on, is that this "ultimate" equipment change is a one time event. It only happens once, so accurate intake is critical. If you're excluding a large enough percentage of a data set, every single "first after geld" excluded has an effect on the accuracy of the good "first after geld" included.

chadk66
12-29-2014, 05:32 PM
I tested the performance of first time geldings back in either 2009 or 2010. (I'd have to comb through a backup archive and find my notes before I'd be able to post results here.)

But going from memory...

I recall both win rate and roi for first time geldings with previous racing experience being slightly lower than geldings in general with previous racing experience.

This kind of surprised me because what I saw in the data ran contrary to what I'd always been "told."

Although there are always going to be individual horses who are exceptions - in analyzing the data I came to the conclusion that a time component exists.

In general, the more elapsed time since a horse has been 'cut' the better the win rate and roi - and the closer performance of first time geldings gets to win rate and roi for geldings in general.

That said, if you run geldings in general as a stand alone, you don't get anywhere close to break even.



-jp

.your findings with FTG's doesn't surprise me. mostly because you have no way of knowing when they were gelded or how long it takes to remove certain hormones from their system. Nor do you know whether or not they immediately gave the horse equipose (hormone replacement), etc. Which from my understanding is no longer allowed to be used. When that happened I don't know. And I don't know if it's all states or not.

o_crunk
12-29-2014, 06:50 PM
Not to press this issue too much...but here's another example of how misleading this data can be.

Yankee Cowboy is entered in the 8th at Fair Grounds on Friday. He last raced on 11/30/2014 at FG R9. The race went off at 6:28 PM EST. Equibase via The Jockey Club registry reported that Yankee Cowboy was now a gelding on 11/30/2014 at 2:18 PM EST.

Obviously, looking at his pp lines and going on the data provided, he was gelded before the start on 11/30. Yet, here's DRF telling you he's making his first start since reported gelding on Friday. This horse will also show up in the late changes feed on Friday as making his first start since reported gelding.

(I've also attached the TFUS line for the same horse, where we handle geldings reported on the same day as a race day as being gelded *before* the start)

It's nice that the data is now "out there" for the public to digest and some pp providers are taking a victory lap on creating trainer stats....but it's basically garbage-in-garbage-out data. And if you're creating trainer stats based on this data, you're misleading your customers.

Tom
12-29-2014, 11:10 PM
The wave of incompetence that is racing rolls on.
The sunami of stupid.

Ruffian1
12-30-2014, 07:51 AM
Ahhh.

The body of your posts make sense to me now.

In some of the other threads I quoted you and disagreed (vehemently) with what you had posted. (For instance, your contention that horsemen have nothing to do with ever higher takeout.)

I'm a 360+ day a year bettor and have been involved in horseplayer advocacy through HANA (http://horseplayersassociation.org/) since 2008.

Countless meetings and conversations with track management, state regulators, and horsemen have made it clear to me that up until about 2004 the industry was still doing a fairly good job (relative to itself) of satisfying customer needs and wants.

The rash of anti-player policies put in place by the industry that have caused handle and public interest in horse racing to plummet: ever higher signal fees, source market fee in state after state, denying track signals as a negotiating ploy, denying track signals as a means of eliminating competition, UIGEA, the three takeout increases (that I know about) in California, outright refusal to allow exchange wagering, outright refusal to deal harshly with those who cheat through the use of drugs, and the more recent takeout increase at Churchill...

The bulk of that (at least the things of that nature that I know about) has been backed by horsemen alphabet groups and started happening with ever increasing frequency in 2005.

Knowing that you left the game in 2001 helps me put many of your previous posts in context.



-jp

.

Well all I can say is that it's a damn shame. I honestly had no idea that was or continues to taking place. When I left, I left. The break was clean . I do keep in touch with a few people even today, but had no clue about horsemen sitting in on meetings like that. Would have loved to hear what they had to say though. I guarantee you it was B.S.
I would get my share of funny looks from the old timers when I advocated for the customer back in the late 70's- early 80's. But being young I suppose I was rebelling to some extent. But in reality, The trainers answers were usually so darn outdated and misinformed that there was no way I wanted my voice to sound anything like what they were saying. It was just soooo backwards, it was embarrassing. I paid a price for that, with not getting stalls that I desperately needed or being stabled in 2 different barns at Bowie, a 1/2 mile apart but it was worth it. More often than not, they would pretty much say what management had told them to say. Backroom deals with the breeders assn. or whatever. It wasn't even sophisticated to be honest, almost reminded me of a cross between Mr. Green Jeans and Larry, Darryl and Darryl if you are an old school TV guy.Lol.

Thanks for the explanation and sorry if I misled you about the time lines. From what you just said, it is probably reason # 101 for being thankful I left when I did. I feel real bad for the customer though. Before I was anything at the track, I was a customer. And I never forgot that.

chadk66
12-30-2014, 09:30 AM
Well all I can say is that it's a damn shame. I honestly had no idea that was or continues to taking place. When I left, I left. The break was clean . I do keep in touch with a few people even today, but had no clue about horsemen sitting in on meetings like that. Would have loved to hear what they had to say though. I guarantee you it was B.S.
I would get my share of funny looks from the old timers when I advocated for the customer back in the late 70's- early 80's. But being young I suppose I was rebelling to some extent. But in reality, The trainers answers were usually so darn outdated and misinformed that there was no way I wanted my voice to sound anything like what they were saying. It was just soooo backwards, it was embarrassing. I paid a price for that, with not getting stalls that I desperately needed or being stabled in 2 different barns at Bowie, a 1/2 mile apart but it was worth it. More often than not, they would pretty much say what management had told them to say. Backroom deals with the breeders assn. or whatever. It wasn't even sophisticated to be honest, almost reminded me of a cross between Mr. Green Jeans and Larry, Darryl and Darryl if you are an old school TV guy.Lol.

Thanks for the explanation and sorry if I misled you about the time lines. From what you just said, it is probably reason # 101 for being thankful I left when I did. I feel real bad for the customer though. Before I was anything at the track, I was a customer. And I never forgot that.gotta love those backroom deals. Funny you bring that up. For years nobody has penetrated the HBPA in MN. The won't reveal the books to anybody. But it's pretty obvious what is going on. One old timer has been on the HBPA board there forever. And he takes numerous trips a year for pleasure paid for by the HBPA. That is just the tip of the iceburg. And guess who gets sweetheart deals all the time.

Ruffian1
12-30-2014, 04:01 PM
gotta love those backroom deals. Funny you bring that up. For years nobody has penetrated the HBPA in MN. The won't reveal the books to anybody. But it's pretty obvious what is going on. One old timer has been on the HBPA board there forever. And he takes numerous trips a year for pleasure paid for by the HBPA. That is just the tip of the iceburg. And guess who gets sweetheart deals all the time.


Yes sir. They have been going on forever unfortunately. Those cooked books have as well. That is why Md. broke off from the HBPA years ago and started their own assn.

I fought those old coots for years and they did not much like it.

I did not care. I guess it comes with being young . After all, like a lot of us, "I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now".

But I am glad I spoke up and did not go along with status quo. It was old and stale. And I was not.

Now, I am an old coot(ouch) but I still dislike them.

I swear Chad, so much of this could be fixed if management wanted it to be. Horsemen would have no chance.

chadk66
12-30-2014, 04:17 PM
Yes sir. They have been going on forever unfortunately. Those cooked books have as well. That is why Md. broke off from the HBPA years ago and started their own assn.

I fought those old coots for years and they did not much like it.

I did not care. I guess it comes with being young . After all, like a lot of us, "I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now".

But I am glad I spoke up and did not go along with status quo. It was old and stale. And I was not.

Now, I am an old coot(ouch) but I still dislike them.

I swear Chad, so much of this could be fixed if management wanted it to be. Horsemen would have no chance.ownership, management and even a handful of horsemen.

Ruffian1
12-30-2014, 07:00 PM
ownership, management and even a handful of horsemen.

Totally agree Chad.

Stillriledup
12-31-2014, 03:37 AM
Check out Shimba in the 7th at Laurel. Listed as gelded on 11/22, last raced on 11/22 and listed as a FTG today with the "G" next to the L.

How do you know if this is first time gelding TODAY?

cj
12-31-2014, 08:26 AM
Check out Shimba in the 7th at Laurel. Listed as gelded on 11/22, last raced on 11/22 and listed as a FTG today with the "G" next to the L.

How do you know if this is first time gelding TODAY?

Almost certainly is not.

classhandicapper
12-31-2014, 08:32 AM
Check out Shimba in the 7th at Laurel. Listed as gelded on 11/22, last raced on 11/22 and listed as a FTG today with the "G" next to the L.

How do you know if this is first time gelding TODAY?

Here's how I would interpret this as a horse player.

1. The 11/22/14 date is the REPORTED gelded date. That's the day the connections of Shimba told the world that Shimba was gelded.

2. Given that Shimba also ran that day, we can presume he was gelded prior to that race. You can't be gelded and run on the same day.

3. Given that there was a small layoff between his races on 9/1/2014 and 11/22/2014, it is likely that he was gelded somewhere between those 2 dates. That means he is probably second time gelding.

Consider the (G) in the PPs as a notification that you should take a look at the REPORTED gelded date and the horse's recent races to try to figure what happened.

Unlike, what was implied earlier in this thread, the 11/22/14 date is ACCURATE. But again, it is a REPORTED gelding date and may not be when the physical procedure was performed. In order to report when the procedure was performed 100% of the time, THE INDUSTRY must do a better job of collecting that data (tracks, horsemen, the Jockey Club etc...). That way the PP providers can pass it along to the horse players.

Some horse players have been clamoring for this information. So some PP providers will give them what is available as accurately as possible. Now it's on the industry to do a better job for us as horse players. My guess (and I have no info on this) is that there are going to be more articles, educational webinars, etc... from a variety of sources to explain both what's going on and hopefully push this in the right direction. It's brand new. I hope that helps.

o_crunk
12-31-2014, 11:10 AM
More questionable entries in today's first time geldings feed.

All That Scat FG R7
Last race: 12/5/2014
Reported gelding: 12/5/2014

Bixio TUP R1
Last race: 11/19/2014
Reported gelding: 11/19/2014

Long to Win TAM R2
Last race: 12/17/2014
Reported gelding: 12/17/2014

o_crunk
12-31-2014, 11:28 AM
FWIW...over the last 7 days of racing, 61 geldings have been reported as making their first start (only using t-bred races, no QH races). 25 of those 61 were (almost!) certainly not making their first start since gelding.

Like discussed earlier...garbage-in-garbage-out. Great new service for horse players!

Seems everyone is "happy with crappy" for the horse player.

Show Me the Wire
12-31-2014, 12:20 PM
FWIW...over the last 7 days of racing, 61 geldings have been reported as making their first start (only using t-bred races, no QH races). 25 of those 61 were (almost!) certainly not making their first start since gelding.

Like discussed earlier...garbage-in-garbage-out. Great new service for horse players!

Seems everyone is "happy with crappy" for the horse player.

If I am not confident in the data I pass the race. Crappy data results in loss of revenue, from me, to the track. When all handicappers adopt this attitude it will result in substantial revenue loss to the tracks, which may have them take notice that their are problems that need correcting.

chadk66
12-31-2014, 01:45 PM
FWIW...over the last 7 days of racing, 61 geldings have been reported as making their first start (only using t-bred races, no QH races). 25 of those 61 were (almost!) certainly not making their first start since gelding.

Like discussed earlier...garbage-in-garbage-out. Great new service for horse players!

Seems everyone is "happy with crappy" for the horse player.what was their win percentage first time out after gelding?

o_crunk
12-31-2014, 02:27 PM
what was their win percentage first time out after gelding?

So the raw data is 4 wins out of the 25 who were "erroneously" reported. $2 ROI of $2.11.

But here's the "gotcha" stuff I was talking about. 7 of those 25 were making their first start. So really they never were "first start since gelding", they were just straight geldings making their first start. None of those 7 were winners, BTW.

So, we can further exclude those 7 and you're at 4 wins out of 18 who were "erroneously" reported. $2 ROI of $2.93.

Further still, when digging even deeper into the data, I'd suspect that 3 out of the 18 were not truly making their first start since gelding based on the closesness of their two back start (I set the limit within 21 days, you may disagree...I have no idea what's a good limit). None of those 3 horses were winners either.

You can now see how messy this stuff is. At some point you have to just move on...it's bad data.

chadk66
12-31-2014, 04:19 PM
I never had a horse win first time out after gelding.

o_crunk
12-31-2014, 05:02 PM
Spot the differences:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:www.drf.com/news/drf-past-performances-note-first-time-geldings

http://www.drf.com/news/drf-past-performances-note-first-time-geldings

Saratoga_Mike
01-01-2015, 02:21 PM
Once the data is more reliable, I'd pay closer attention to FTG on expensive auction buys ($100k+). Cheap horses are gelded as a normal course of business. If you have a $400k colt, you aren't likely to geld him (early in his career) unless you think it's really going to make a difference. Therefore, I suspect such horses are more likely to win FTG. I have no evidence to back this assertion, though.