The workout myth...

[Track Phantom]

First off, I get daily workout reports for So. Cal. (2 versions actually), so I believe there is something there as it pertains to works.

But, c'mon! I've read most of the comments by trainers and connections for the Breeders' Cup horses and I've yet to find one say "He worked ok but he looked dull and I'm concerned he's not on the top of his game". Every single comment is virtually identical..."He worked perfectly and couldn't be doing any better".

I know connections are not going to say anything disparaging about their horse, but, if they don't, is there a point even asking the question or listening to the answer?

There's a small part of me that wonders if visually watching works is akin to visually critiquing art (or wine). It is so subjective without the possibility of a wrong answer. If the horse is highly touted in works and runs poorly, it's some other unknown thing that happened. If he is lowly touted and wins, the trainer was shrewd and keeping the horse under wraps.

Not really an overly serious discussion point, just more of an observation.

[Stillriledup]

One of two things is possible, one is that trainers just don't know the difference between a good work and a bad or average one or two, they're lying to the public.

I guess the 64 dollar question would be this, is it ok for a trainer to say the horse didnt work well, or 'could have worked better' and still run the horse? In other words is it still ok to run even if you think the horse isn't training well.

It's all grain of salt stuff with trainers and I would ask any interviewer who happens to be reading this post to ask a question that's more fact based than asking for an opinion. Ask the trainer how hard was the horse urged in the workout, was there a jock on board or an exercise rider, did the horse gallop out an extra furlong or was he pulled up quickly after the work was over.

I also believe that anyone interviewing a trainer who says "trained well" should know what the clocker reports have said and to ask the trainer about the clocker comments if they differ from what the trainer is saying.
Good topic.

[Track Phantom]

Good points, SRU.

I actually read this and was very intrigued (from Marcus Hersch, DRF):

LAST WALTZ (14) in the Juvenile Fillies Turf. Brown mentioned her in the context of bemoaning her terrible draw for the race, saying the post was especially disappointing because he thought Last Waltz was "super live." Last Waltz, Group 3-placed in Ireland last out, is making her U.S. debut after a private purchase, and Brown said she's big, strong, good-looking horse. She's worked twice for Brown, the first time going in company with Grade 1 winner Watschachances, who Brown said had to work to keep up with her younger mate.

Now there is something I can sink my teeth into and is meaningful. So, there are some nice nuggets you can find, just have to filter out the "fools gold" I guess.

[NorCalGreg]

Good points, SRU.

I actually read this and was very intrigued (from Marcus Hersch, DRF):

LAST WALTZ (14) in the Juvenile Fillies Turf. Brown mentioned her in the context of bemoaning her terrible draw for the race, saying the post was especially disappointing because he thought Last Waltz was "super live." Last Waltz, Group 3-placed in Ireland last out, is making her U.S. debut after a private purchase, and Brown said she's big, strong, good-looking horse. She's worked twice for Brown, the first time going in company with Grade 1 winner Watschachances, who Brown said had to work to keep up with her younger mate.

Now there is something I can sink my teeth into and is meaningful. So, there are some nice nuggets you can find, just have to filter out the "fools gold" I guess.


Was just looking at these late posts before I turn off the ol' comp---you're right Valento.....there ARE some "nice nuggets" you can find--just made a note in my BC booklet about LAST WALTZ.
good night
NCG

[pandy]

First off, I get daily workout reports for So. Cal. (2 versions actually), so I believe there is something there as it pertains to works.

But, c'mon! I've read most of the comments by trainers and connections for the Breeders' Cup horses and I've yet to find one say "He worked ok but he looked dull and I'm concerned he's not on the top of his game". Every single comment is virtually identical..."He worked perfectly and couldn't be doing any better".

I know connections are not going to say anything disparaging about their horse, but, if they don't, is there a point even asking the question or listening to the answer?

There's a small part of me that wonders if visually watching works is akin to visually critiquing art (or wine). It is so subjective without the possibility of a wrong answer. If the horse is highly touted in works and runs poorly, it's some other unknown thing that happened. If he is lowly touted and wins, the trainer was shrewd and keeping the horse under wraps.

Not really an overly serious discussion point, just more of an observation.


Watching a show like TVG's, The Works is kind of interesting but I haven't found workout videos or workout reports to be that helpful for handicapping races like the Breeders Cup. The problem is, there are very few top class horses that don't look good working out. These are magnificent athletes at the top echelon of the sport, they are not going to look bad breezing. The workouts are very useful for first time starters or other lightly bred horses and sometimes they can help evaluate an older raceway horse that is returning from a layoff. Top class horses, not much help.

[Hoofless_Wonder]

It's important to have a disinterested, 3rd party review the works if you're relying on their comments to help. Connections are always biased.

I've found that negative workouts or behavior in the morning can sometimes help eliminate some horses, especially the shipping Euros when the BC is in a a warmer clime. Of course an even bigger edge is reviewing them in the paddock and post parade on race day.

When a horse like AP or Frosted puts in a stellar move in the morning, would we be expecting anything less coming into the BC?

[pandy]

Certainly what the trainer's say about their top horses training usually means nothing unless it's a trainer who's very modest. But sometimes what they say about a firster or a regular horse can be illuminating.

Some years ago I made a nicely bred 2yo 1ster my Best Bet based on her workouts, which seemed unusually sharp for her trainer. She was trained by Ron McAnally, who never wins with firsters. I had bet $40 on her. I was watching TVG and minutes before the race at Hollywood Park they found McAnally sitting in the stands and asked him about this filly. McAnally's face lit up and he said, "Everyone knows I don't win with firsters, haven't won with a firster in years, but I can tell you that this filly has impressed me....she can run."

Well, I immediately doubled my bet and she won easily and paid over $40. McAnally is a modest guy who isn't prone to hyperbole like most of these blowhards so I knew his words meant something.

[cj]

I did see the trainer say he wasn't happy with Private Zone's work.

[Track Phantom]

I did see the trainer say he wasn't happy with Private Zone's work.
Ahhh....very interesting. Didn't hear that. I guess I stand corrected.

Thanks CJ

[cj]

Ahhh....very interesting. Didn't hear that. I guess I stand corrected.

Thanks CJ

I'm trying to find a link but all I get is the one on the 18th which he seemed to love. I'll keep digging, I'm positive I read that recently.

[Track Phantom]

Certainly what the trainer's say about their top horses training usually means nothing unless it's a trainer who's very modest. But sometimes what they say about a firster or a regular horse can be illuminating.

Some years ago I made a nicely bred 2yo 1ster my Best Bet based on her workouts, which seemed unusually sharp for her trainer. She was trained by Ron McAnally, who never wins with firsters. I had bet $40 on her. I was watching TVG and minutes before the race at Hollywood Park they found McAnally sitting in the stands and asked him about this filly. McAnally's face lit up and he said, "Everyone knows I don't win with firsters, haven't won with a firster in years, but I can tell you that this filly has impressed me....she can run."

Well, I immediately doubled my bet and she won easily and paid over $40. McAnally is a modest guy who isn't prone to hyperbole like most of these blowhards so I knew his words meant something.
Good story....and I agree that workout information is vitally important with debut runners and comebackers. You're very right. With top class horses, they're always going to look good. I guess if you can compare with how a top class horse looked previously vs now, that could be important.

Just overall, hearing about how American Pharoah or Songbird worked and how great they looked doesn't help me much.

[cj]

Ahhh....very interesting. Didn't hear that. I guess I stand corrected.

Thanks CJ

It was the one on the 24th, said it was too slow. The one on the 18th he was very happy.

[Track Phantom]

It was the one on the 24th, said it was too slow. The one on the 18th he was very happy.

Hmmm....that is interesting. You'd think that Private Zone would prefer longer and would prefer to control the pace. If he is at all off form, going shorter and having to stalk, he could be a bet against.

I'm guessing his odds drift up to around 4-1 with all the hype on Runhappy and others taking the approach that the speed will meltdown and looking for longer priced closers.

Appreciate the update.

[ebcorde]

for races 8f and under and maidens. Longer races not so important and not important with deep closers. I like to look at the overall body of works within the last 4 weeks.

[ronsmac]

First off, I get daily workout reports for So. Cal. (2 versions actually), so I believe there is something there as it pertains to works.

But, c'mon! I've read most of the comments by trainers and connections for the Breeders' Cup horses and I've yet to find one say "He worked ok but he looked dull and I'm concerned he's not on the top of his game". Every single comment is virtually identical..."He worked perfectly and couldn't be doing any better".

I know connections are not going to say anything disparaging about their horse, but, if they don't, is there a point even asking the question or listening to the answer?

There's a small part of me that wonders if visually watching works is akin to visually critiquing art (or wine). It is so subjective without the possibility of a wrong answer. If the horse is highly touted in works and runs poorly, it's some other unknown thing that happened. If he is lowly touted and wins, the trainer was shrewd and keeping the horse under wraps.

Not really an overly serious discussion point, just more of an observation.Navarro is the only trainer who was unhappy. Everyone else says their horse couldn't be better. That seems impossible that every horse is better than ever.

[ronsmac]

Navarro is the only trainer who was unhappy. Everyone else says their horse couldn't be better. That seems impossible that every horse is better than ever.Sorry, I see Cj already pointed Navarro out.

[ebcorde]

I would have said Private zone is a lock to win the Breeder's. had a fantastic spring/summer. But I've changed my mind, 30 lifetime starts adds up to a lot of battle scars going into a 15 horse Breeder's cup race. There always seems to be at least 1 horse fresher, stronger.

The other concern is how many Breeder cups has this trainer/jockey combo won?

This is a very difficult race. I could spend 2 days on it and be off the board

[Stillriledup]

I think there's a difference between being 'no good' in the work and being not pleased about something like going off too fast early and finishing 'tired' or going off too slow early and not hitting a target final time.

[GatetoWire]

Good points, SRU.

I actually read this and was very intrigued (from Marcus Hersch, DRF):

LAST WALTZ (14) in the Juvenile Fillies Turf. Brown mentioned her in the context of bemoaning her terrible draw for the race, saying the post was especially disappointing because he thought Last Waltz was "super live." Last Waltz, Group 3-placed in Ireland last out, is making her U.S. debut after a private purchase, and Brown said she's big, strong, good-looking horse. She's worked twice for Brown, the first time going in company with Grade 1 winner Watschachances, who Brown said had to work to keep up with her younger mate.

Now there is something I can sink my teeth into and is meaningful. So, there are some nice nuggets you can find, just have to filter out the "fools gold" I guess.

Hard to judge if this is the truth or not. Over the years of listening to info and digging for these nuggets I find that Chad Brown generally pumps up all of his horses to the press prior to stakes races. This filly could be ready for a big effort or Chad could be just pumping her tires.

[GatetoWire]

It was the one on the 24th, said it was too slow. The one on the 18th he was very happy.

They were about to have a break to groom the track but then Track Maintenance announced that they were going to seal the track during the break. The plan was to work PZ after the break on a fresh track. Once they found out last minute that the track would be sealed they sent PZ out at the end of the session.
I heard the track was pretty chewed up but hard to tell if that is why the work was lack luster or not.

[cj]

They were about to have a break to groom the track but then Track Maintenance announced that they were going to seal the track during the break. The plan was to work PZ after the break on a fresh track. Once they found out last minute that the track would be sealed they sent PZ out at the end of the session.
I heard the track was pretty chewed up but hard to tell if that is why the work was lack luster or not.

I'm not judging the work myself, I just read the trainers comments and he wasn't pleased with it.