Minimum and maximum time between races?

[TonyMLake]

Hi all,

If you had to pick a hard couple of numbers, perhaps based on distance and/or other arguably important factors, what is the minimum time you'd like to see between races? What's the maximum time before you'd call it a "layoff"?

As an example, I'd like to see a horse with at least 7 days since the last race, and no more than 42.

I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.

Thanks.

[thaskalos]

10 days minimum, and 30 days maximum.

[DeltaLover]

Hi all,

If you had to pick a hard couple of numbers, perhaps based on distance and/or other arguably important factors, what is the minimum time you'd like to see between races? What's the maximum time before you'd call it a "layoff"?

As an example, I'd like to see a horse with at least 7 days since the last race, and no more than 42.

I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.

Thanks.

In this exrtract from my notes you can read some of my views about recency:

http://themindofagambler.com/horse_betting_recency.pdf

[horses4courses]

Varies.....10 days and 30 days might be good guidelines,
but you will see horses winning outside those parameters.

That being said, if you passed betting on horses who rested
above, or below, those numbers, you would likely save money.

The only exception I might point out is where a horse is a proven
winner, or top performer, off an extended layoff. The horse should
have displayed significantly improved form after a long rest at least
twice in it's career. Some horses respond to time off, and if you can
spot a "layoff lover" like this, sometimes you can catch a nice mutuel. :ThmbUp:

[Stillriledup]

Keep in mind that days that intertwine in between meets are also a factor. For example, if a horse who ran in December at Late Nov at Mountaineer and then didnt race until opening week of the Mountain meet in March, i would give that horse much more leeway than i would if a horse was missing 90 days from January to April at Aqueduct.

Days matter within the context of the situation, knowing your horse, the type of horse (graded horse or claimer) when meets end, etc.

[HUSKER55]

I prefer at least 10 days between races. Less than that,... it depends on how I feel about the trainer.

[lamboguy]

the biggest factor of horses being able to run with days off is the lasix and the other drugs that go into horses in preparation for races these days. no doubt the lasix helps the horse run faster, but i don't think its that great on his insides.

this is a different era in horse racing today, years ago the horses that ran every 3-5 days were better than the ones that needed 10 days off to run. back then racing was a game of stamina and perseverance. today its all about speed

[MJC922]

I like to look at the individual horse's prior spacing and efforts to get a feel for what might be best for that horse. Some horses these days don't appear to be robust enough to handle short rest. Some will fire their best efforts when off for 6 weeks lets say and even though next out they might regress only mildly and still win I generally don't want that same horse coming back on two weeks rest after an effort. I'm of the opinion that some horses will protect themselves when on short rest and take the 'week off' throwing in a non-effort. All of this may even have a seasonal component to it, might even have an age / sex component to it. Spacing is highly underestimated area of study IMO. Maybe I tend to overrate it but factors that generically mean nothing when looked at from afar but then mean a lot only sometimes are exactly where I believe the money is.

[Capper Al]

10 days minimum and max varies by race type. A graded race max might be 60 days, while a claimer 30 days.

[Tom]

Research by Dave Schwartz and Ken Massa (independently) clearly show horse off 30-60 days are not at all disadvantaged.

My own studies on Gr1 and Gr2 races show 90 days off is absolutely no concern.

[RXB]

the biggest factor of horses being able to run with days off is the lasix and the other drugs that go into horses in preparation for races these days. no doubt the lasix helps the horse run faster, but i don't think its that great on his insides.

this is a different era in horse racing today, years ago the horses that ran every 3-5 days were better than the ones that needed 10 days off to run. back then racing was a game of stamina and perseverance. today its all about speed

Agree on all counts.

[ReplayRandall]

10 days minimum and max varies by race type. A graded race max might be 60 days, while a claimer 30 days.
I agree with higher caliber horses of 60 days, and my "expiration" time from noted replay race is 35 days for claimers and maiden races.....

[Capper Al]

Research by Dave Schwartz and Ken Massa (independently) clearly show horse off 30-60 days are not at all disadvantaged.

My own studies on Gr1 and Gr2 races show 90 days off is absolutely no concern.

I didn't make a study of Gr1 and Gr2. Thanks for the info.

[Capper Al]

I agree with higher caliber horses of 60 days, and my "expiration" time from noted replay race is 35 days for claimers and maiden races.....

I lump maidens and claimers together here also.

[whodoyoulike]

Hi all,

If you had to pick a hard couple of numbers, perhaps based on distance and/or other arguably important factors, what is the minimum time you'd like to see between races? What's the maximum time before you'd call it a "layoff"?

As an example, I'd like to see a horse with at least 7 days since the last race, and no more than 42.

I'd like to hear other people's thoughts.

Thanks.

I'd probably consider 60 days off before considering the time as a "layoff" from the horse's regular racing schedule.

What does DRF and BRIS consider layoff time periods?

It's noted in their pp's with an underline, I forget.

I would think you and others have a database to determine a horse's regular racing schedule. Years ago, I looked at average time off for horses winning and their last race and if I remember correctly, it was between 3 and 4 weeks.

I'm curious how that compares to someone else's database results?

[Elliott Sidewater]

But I once attended the races at Longchamps when in vacation in France, and it was 45 minutes between races. This ugly impatient American couldn't take it and left when the card was half over. It took the entire afternoon to run 7 races. And before I forget, another abomination was when the horses enter the Bois du Bologne (dense forest) on the far turn for about 30 seconds and emerge in a completely different order. With some practice (and a bottle of tranquilizers) maybe I could learn to appreciate the leisurely pace of racing in France, but it's more likely that it would induce a coma.

[Elliott Sidewater]

Tom: my observation is that recency seems to mean almost nothing in turf races. I ignore it in my handicapping of those races. Having said that, I'm still wary of all horses that haven't run for 15 months or more.

[whodoyoulike]

Tom: my observation is that recency seems to mean almost nothing in turf races. I ignore it in my handicapping of those races. Having said that, I'm still wary of all horses that haven't run for 15 months or more.

Only wary of horses which haven't run in 15 months or more?

Does that mean 8 or 9 months off, you have no concerns?

[Elliott Sidewater]

What I meant to say is that I have no concerns up to 15 months off in turf races only. Dirt races are an entirely different story and an 8 or 9 month layoff would be of concern. If a horse has missed more time than the 15 mos., he's probably missed an entire season of turf racing in the northeast part of the country. That's usually a red flag, unless the trainer is someone like Michael Dickinson - and there aren't many like him.

[JohnGalt1]

If a horse not raced in 28 days, (4 weeks) I consider a lay off. A claiming horse that does not race is just processing oats and not earning

I use the most recent line for a pace figure, unless a good reason to go farther back.

If off a layoff I use the "best" pace line that will be more predictive for todays race.

Stakes races and turf races lay offs are less a negative.