PDA

View Full Version : Workouts


PowerUpPaynter
01-25-2016, 01:25 PM
Good Day,

What do you guys look at when looking at the workouts? Also what is breezing opposed to handily? I never see a definitive answer on that.

lamboguy
01-25-2016, 01:45 PM
handily means with a whip. the other question you might have is the g that you often see. that means they worked out of the gate, the ones that didn't started from the pole.

Rise Over Run
01-25-2016, 01:48 PM
handily means with a whip. :lol: :lol: :lol: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

So you're going to tell me that every (ok 99.9%) workout at the socal tracks is under the encouragement of a whip?

Baron Star Gregg
01-25-2016, 01:55 PM
For other than firsters look at their works in the last 3 weeks. Generally you're looking for 3f in 36 & change, 4f in 48 & change, 5f in 1:00 & change, 6f in 1:13 & change and 7f in 1:27 & change.
Some tracks, such as Santa Anita, you'll need to adjust these. For some trainers, like Asmussen, times don't matter unless they are excessively fast.
A sharp work of 3f just before a race is a typical blowout. 3f works further back in the tab don't necessarily mean a whole lot. Longer works are better. Bullets are good. Sometimes a sharp work on an off track may be helpful information.
The breeze vs handily differs depending on which coast you're on.

Stillriledup
01-25-2016, 02:00 PM
:lol: :lol: :lol: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

So you're going to tell me that every (ok 99.9%) workout at the socal tracks is under the encouragement of a whip?

I think Lamborghini might mean urging vs relatively unurged.

PowerUpPaynter
01-25-2016, 02:16 PM
So just for example purposes what can be made of these works.... not to be a pain, just trying to learn


Gift Box (3-Year-Old Colt)

Date: January 25, 2016
Track: PALM MEADOWS TRAINING CENTER
Distance: Four Furlongs
Time: 49:00 Breezing
Track Condition: Fast
Surface: Dirt
Rank: 25/70




Airoforce (3-Year-Old Colt)

Date: January 25, 2016
Track: PALM MEADOWS TRAINING CENTER
Distance: Four Furlongs
Time: 48:00 Breezing
Track Condition: Fast
Surface: Dirt
Rank: 3/70




Rated R Superstar (3-Year-Old Colt)

Date: January 25, 2016
Track: OAKLAWN PARK
Distance: Three Furlongs
Time: 37:60 Breezing
Track Condition: Fast
Surface: Dirt
Rank: 8/17

Baron Star Gregg
01-25-2016, 02:43 PM
The specific works you posted tell very little in and of themselves. They must be looked at in the context of the training track, the trainer's methods and intentions, the intervals between works, etc. That may be of little help in response to your question but there are no shortcuts.

Track Phantom
01-25-2016, 02:46 PM
Workouts a very tricky thing. There isn't one specific thing you can point to since tracks list works differently and trainers train runners differently.

Here is how I use workouts:
-- Spacing: Spacing gets my attention. A work every 7 or 8 days followed by a shorter work, maybe a 3F move, a few days before race typically signals a runner that is well intentioned.

-- Times: Times are meaningless unless you compare the quickness of the works to how a trainer normally works a runner. Many, and I mean many, trainers win off of works so slow you'd think the timer was wrong. However, a trainer like Baffert works them fast, so any omission of fast works from him should be viewed as a negative (especially when cold on the tote board).

-- Clocker reports: Clocker reports help fill in the blanks. It's much more important HOW a horse worked or WHO he/she was in company with. Clocker reports help you know that a 1:03 Bg was actually a great move and finished well or a :59.1 H the horse was all-out.

-- Compare: Sometimes, a trainer will have a first timer win a few days prior to another first timer entered. Go back (Formulator is your best bet to do this) and see what that worktab looked like. Very often, these runners worked together.

Overall, workouts are one of the handicapping factors often misused by the wagering public. As stand-alone data points, they're not very useful. Using clocker reports or comparing to how a trainer normally works live runners makes it more valuable.

Just my opinion....

Kash$
01-25-2016, 03:01 PM
Who worked the same day and if he any company.

2 Year olds outworking older horses

biggestal99
01-25-2016, 03:03 PM
-- Spacing: Spacing gets my attention. A work every 7 or 8 days followed by a shorter work, maybe a 3F move, a few days before race typically signals a runner that is well intentioned.



Well I would say you are mostly correct but some horses spacing doesn't matter, I owned a gelding who was a morning glory, looked great in the morning, perfect work spacing and 1 for 25 was the result OTOH I had a turfer mare who hated working in the morning, bad spacing when she was in the mood, terrible work horse, 10 wins later......

Thats why I mostly don't use works in my handicapping.

Allan

SuperPickle
01-25-2016, 03:05 PM
Valento is totally right. Basically time while not meaningless is really not what you should be concerned about in workouts. Any good work horse can throw a bullet if the train wants him too.

As Valento mentioned frequency really trumps anything. Like an a first you want consistent works 7-10 days apart. My thought has always been its ok to miss one work because maybe its just a clockers omission. Consistent works reflect fitness. Sporadic works reflect speed but no stamina.

Also a bunch of gate works on a firster or maiden generally reflect a poor gate horse. So if you see a firster with a ton of gate works its generally a bad sign.

Probably the best sign workout wise is a older horse working 7-10 days after a race and the stronger the race the better the sign. Compare that with a horse running a big race, entered back six weeks later with no works for four weeks. That's concerning.

Another angle I love is second time starters. Let's say a horse runs 4,5 or 6 first out. Entered back 4-6 weeks later with 3-5 works. That's generally a very positive sign. Horses like that tend to move up.

Finally trainer angles. There's lots of old school guys who love 3-5 furlong works in 12 second furlongs. Shug, Motion, Clement, etc. Then there's guys like Jason Servis who work horses super slow. However Servis still is great off a layoff. A.C. Avila is famous for seven furlong and mile works. People say that's his tell. When you see a guy who's notorious for working horses fast (Baffert for example) with a horse with slow works its a concern. The opposite deal is a guy who's notorious for working horses slow. If he shows up with a horse with quick works its generally a very positive sign.

Remember time only matters in jail. Don't hijacked by random quick works.

Track Phantom
01-25-2016, 03:05 PM
Here is an example of what I mean. The horse on top is a first timer running today at Sam Houston in the 5th race. I chose it since it hasn't run yet and we can see how he does.

You'll see that trainer Danny Pish had a firster win just 6 days ago with Parker aboard. He not only won, but he won easily and spread the field out behind him in a very fast time.

That winner appeared to work in company with this one on Jan 8 and maybe on Dec 19th.

You'll notice how slow the works were for Prediction but he ran like a runner who could have fired off 58 and change in the morning.

Knowing this trainer has a history of working them like this allows you to go to the next step in handicapping this horse knowing he is likely well-meant.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/WO%20Combined_1642x351_zpsfrrqinny.jpg (http://s968.photobucket.com/user/valento07/media/WO%20Combined_1642x351_zpsfrrqinny.jpg.html)

letswastemoney
01-25-2016, 03:13 PM
Looking at final workout times seems like a waste of time. I look at the spacing between works.

None of us were there to watch, so we don't really know the context of what happened within the work other than the time.

Track Phantom
01-25-2016, 03:14 PM
Well I would say you are mostly correct but some horses spacing doesn't matter, I owned a gelding who was a morning glory, looked great in the morning, perfect work spacing and 1 for 25 was the result OTOH I had a turfer mare who hated working in the morning, bad spacing when she was in the mood, terrible work horse, 10 wins later......

Thats why I mostly don't use works in my handicapping.

Allan
Agreed. Nothing is universal. Speaking in terms of general principles. There are always going to be anomaly's and that is why I only use works in context of something else. (Who the horse outworked, how the trainer normally does, etc).

My opinion is trying to ascertain something meaningful from JUST looking at a worktab is generally fruitless.

I learned my lesson on this back in about 1988. There was a horse, I believe his name was Conway Chitty. He turned out to be a decent runner. In his debut, he came in with workouts like :33.2 bg, :45.3b, :57.2h, etc. He showed great speed but faded to third.

Baron Star Gregg
01-25-2016, 03:58 PM
Here is an example of what I mean. The horse on top is a first timer running today at Sam Houston in the 5th race. I chose it since it hasn't run yet and we can see how he does.

You'll see that trainer Danny Pish had a firster win just 6 days ago with Parker aboard. He not only won, but he won easily and spread the field out behind him in a very fast time.

That winner appeared to work in company with this one on Jan 8 and maybe on Dec 19th.

You'll notice how slow the works were for Prediction but he ran like a runner who could have fired off 58 and change in the morning.

Knowing this trainer has a history of working them like this allows you to go to the next step in handicapping this horse knowing he is likely well-meant.

http://i968.photobucket.com/albums/ae169/valento07/WO%20Combined_1642x351_zpsfrrqinny.jpg (http://s968.photobucket.com/user/valento07/media/WO%20Combined_1642x351_zpsfrrqinny.jpg.html)

Good work Valento. Didn't win but got a good run.
BTW I like your site, well done.

horses4courses
01-25-2016, 04:30 PM
Looking at final workout times seems like a waste of time. I look at the spacing between works.

None of us were there to watch, so we don't really know the context of what happened within the work other than the time.

Right here......the gospel truth when it comes to workouts. :ThmbUp:

Nothing else matters, and only a trained eye that you can trust,
obviously for a paid fee, is worth considering when it comes to works.
Unless, of course, you are a clocker yourself.

The form for workouts?
Complete fiction......except for gaps between works.

deelo
01-25-2016, 04:35 PM
Good Day,

What do you guys look at when looking at the workouts? Also what is breezing opposed to handily? I never see a definitive answer on that.

depends on the clocker...generally the west coast tracks consider "handily" as the horse working 'in-hand' as in doing it all on his own and "breezing" to be with urging. On the flip-side east coast and Midwest tracks consider "handily" to be with urging by the jockey and "breezing" is the horse doing it on his own.

You should be able to decipher from looking over the workouts on a card if a clocker swayed from this general rule. Yes, it makes things confusing but for whatever reason there was a disconnect between the coasts when these terms came to be.

Tall One
01-25-2016, 06:05 PM
Right here......the gospel truth when it comes to workouts. :ThmbUp:

Nothing else matters, and only a trained eye that you can trust,
obviously for a paid fee, is worth considering when it comes to works.
Unless, of course, you are a clocker yourself.

The form for workouts?
Complete fiction......except for gaps between works.


Layoff horse, you like too see steady works leading up to the next start off the shelf. I see a noticeable gap, something is amiss.

SG4
01-25-2016, 09:10 PM
depends on the clocker...generally the west coast tracks consider "handily" as the horse working 'in-hand' as in doing it all on his own and "breezing" to be with urging. On the flip-side east coast and Midwest tracks consider "handily" to be with urging by the jockey and "breezing" is the horse doing it on his own.

Have to disagree with you on this one - on the California circuit pretty much every single workout is given the handily designation so that can really cover almost all types of effort a horse is putting in. A breezing designation is very rare, and goes to horses who work very easily. A designation of a breeze on a work from a Cali clocker is a big tip off of quality when I see it.

I used to pay attention to the B/H designation on east coast circuits, but I feel like they're useless now & used to have more meaning for whatever reason (maybe clockers changed over the years?).

deelo
01-25-2016, 09:24 PM
Have to disagree with you on this one - on the California circuit pretty much every single workout is given the handily designation so that can really cover almost all types of effort a horse is putting in. A breezing designation is very rare, and goes to horses who work very easily. A designation of a breeze on a work from a Cali clocker is a big tip off of quality when I see it.

I used to pay attention to the B/H designation on east coast circuits, but I feel like they're useless now & used to have more meaning for whatever reason (maybe clockers changed over the years?).

and on that note, I would agree that b and h designations are pretty much useless in most cases. You'd think a simple notation such as that wouldn't be so easily debatable to different players across different tracks...it's kind of ridiculous.

chadk66
01-25-2016, 09:33 PM
As a former trainer I'll tell you works don't mean much. They tell you the horse is relatively sound and can at least work fast enough to get a published work:p If you knew how many times the clockers didn't actually clock the work and put down "well that looked like 36.2" you'd be amazed. And if you knew how many horses worked under another horses name it would just piss you off :(.

maclr11
01-26-2016, 04:14 AM
I agree with Chad's points because workouts aren't the most reliable I will however say workouts are different whether your at a big track or a small track I think, or a claimer vs a stakes horse and each individual trainer. certain trainers have tendencies with workouts and I think that might be the most valuable use of workout information.

chadk66
01-26-2016, 09:13 AM
I agree with Chad's points because workouts aren't the most reliable I will however say workouts are different whether your at a big track or a small track I think, or a claimer vs a stakes horse and each individual trainer. certain trainers have tendencies with workouts and I think that might be the most valuable use of workout information.I agree. I should have probably elaborated more in my post. It can vary from day to day also. Some days there are a lot of workouts and some days not so many. A good track after a couple days of mud/rain will have a huge amount of workers making it very tough to clock. Same case for right after the break where they harrow the track. Everybody wants out there to work right after the break so you may not get an accurate clocking. It runs the whole gammet. Only way to really use workouts is to clock em yourself. There are serious handicappers that will sit in the grandstand in the morning and clock their own workouts. They have radios/scanners to hear the call ins from the guy at the gap gate calling in the works to the clockers tower.

Capper Al
01-26-2016, 09:57 AM
Maybe in the end all that workouts can tell us is if the horses hasn't had recent action one better get high odds.

deelo
01-26-2016, 10:29 AM
I think the biggest takeaway is that if you're going to put a lot of stock in workouts, you should spend the cash for clocker special reports.

therussmeister
01-26-2016, 03:48 PM
Well I would say you are mostly correct but some horses spacing doesn't matter, I owned a gelding who was a morning glory, looked great in the morning, perfect work spacing and 1 for 25 was the result OTOH I had a turfer mare who hated working in the morning, bad spacing when she was in the mood, terrible work horse, 10 wins later......

Thats why I mostly don't use works in my handicapping.


Allan
There is no handicapping methodology that works 100% of the time, and handicapping workouys may be less reliable than other facrors, but it still accounts for a major portion of my profits as it seems many bettors either ignore workouts or don't know how to evaluate them

green80
01-26-2016, 05:09 PM
If you have a chance, go to your local track in the am, and get as close to the clocker as you can. Listen for the riders to call the horses name and distance. Look at the number of clockers and the number of horses that work in the morning, no way they get close on these times. Clock a few yourself and see what the clocker gets. You will never put much stock in works again, other than the horse worked, maybe.

ultracapper
01-26-2016, 05:46 PM
If anything, there seems to be some reliability when it's a big barn FTS. The clockers have been waiting for the horse with the buzz and I'd bet they're a little more careful with them.

chadk66
01-26-2016, 06:41 PM
If you have a chance, go to your local track in the am, and get as close to the clocker as you can. Listen for the riders to call the horses name and distance. Look at the number of clockers and the number of horses that work in the morning, no way they get close on these times. Clock a few yourself and see what the clocker gets. You will never put much stock in works again, other than the horse worked, maybe.exactly.

pandy
01-27-2016, 09:45 AM
Have to disagree with you on this one - on the California circuit pretty much every single workout is given the handily designation so that can really cover almost all types of effort a horse is putting in. A breezing designation is very rare, and goes to horses who work very easily. A designation of a breeze on a work from a Cali clocker is a big tip off of quality when I see it.

I used to pay attention to the B/H designation on east coast circuits, but I feel like they're useless now & used to have more meaning for whatever reason (maybe clockers changed over the years?).


True, if you see a horse get a "breezing" denotation for its workout in So. Cal, that basically means that the clocker thought it was a giant workout. They rarely give b's out there. Which is ridiculous because a lot of the workouts are breezes. Just like in NY, they give breezes when it should be handily.

elhelmete
01-27-2016, 12:06 PM
If you have a chance, go to your local track in the am, and get as close to the clocker as you can. Listen for the riders to call the horses name and distance. Look at the number of clockers and the number of horses that work in the morning, no way they get close on these times. Clock a few yourself and see what the clocker gets. You will never put much stock in works again, other than the horse worked, maybe.

Done this. 110% correct.

elhelmete
01-27-2016, 12:10 PM
I think the biggest takeaway is that if you're going to put a lot of stock in workouts, you should spend the cash for clocker special reports.

I did this a few times last year, and to be honest, I'm not sure what I got.

Not sure what I'm supposed to glean from the difference between a B+ work and an A- work. Pretty much every horse was B+ or better...grading on the curve, obviously?

I look for regularity (the oft mentioned 6-10 day pattern) with no glaring gaps. I like to see (in a young horse) a work equal to (or, rarely, greater than) the distance of today's race, like a 6f work or two going into a 6f maiden special.

ultracapper
01-27-2016, 02:36 PM
I did this a few times last year, and to be honest, I'm not sure what I got.

Not sure what I'm supposed to glean from the difference between a B+ work and an A- work. Pretty much every horse was B+ or better...grading on the curve, obviously?

I look for regularity (the oft mentioned 6-10 day pattern) with no glaring gaps. I like to see (in a young horse) a work equal to (or, rarely, greater than) the distance of today's race, like a 6f work or two going into a 6f maiden special.

Have you found this to be predictive? I would lean towards maybe/maybe not. I have found all workout patterns to be predictive if, and only if, I know the trainer, what s/he usually does before a horse runs it's best effort, and then seeing that in the workout record. Just wondering if you have seen any reliability to the premise that 1 or 2 6f works by a young horse is a relatively universal indication that a young horse has a big chance to win today in a MSW 6f race.

I have had the inclination, many times over the years, to scream at the top of my lungs when at the simulcast outlet, "Who gives a **** if you like it. Tell me if it means the horse is going to win", when the nausuously over-used, repetitive statement, "I like that this horse had a 3f blowout 2 days ago" is uttered. I have seen absolutely ZERO evidence in 30 years of playing the horses that a recent 3f blowout means anything other than this horse had a recent 3f blowout. I have never ever found it to mean "this horse is dangerous today". But it seems about 96.54973% of all handicappers seem to like it when a horse has a recent 3f blowout.

ultracapper
01-27-2016, 02:42 PM
Have you found this to be predictive? I would lean towards maybe/maybe not. I have found all workout patterns to be predictive if, and only if, I know the trainer, what s/he usually does before a horse runs it's best effort, and then seeing that in the workout record. Just wondering if you have seen any reliability to the premise that 1 or 2 6f works by a young horse is a relatively universal indication that a young horse has a big chance to win today in a MSW 6f race.

I have had the inclination, many times over the years, to scream at the top of my lungs when at the simulcast outlet, "Who gives a **** if you like it. Tell me if it means the horse is going to win", when the nausuously over-used, repetitive statement, "I like that this horse had a 3f blowout 2 days ago" is uttered. I have seen absolutely ZERO evidence in 30 years of playing the horses that a recent 3f blowout means anything other than this horse had a recent 3f blowout. I have never ever found it to mean "this horse is dangerous today". But it seems about 96.54973% of all handicappers seem to like it when a horse has a recent 3f blowout.

Have we become a "Family Friendly" website? I understand swearing is usually uncalled for, and is "common", for a lack of a better word, but it does have it's place in order to emphasize emotion, particularly anger or frustration.

PaceAdvantage
01-27-2016, 02:57 PM
Have we become a "Family Friendly" website? I understand swearing is usually uncalled for, and is "common", for a lack of a better word, but it does have it's place in order to emphasize emotion, particularly anger or frustration.Certain words have always been automatically bleeped...been this way for over a decade...

ultracapper
01-27-2016, 02:58 PM
I'm amazed I haven't used that word on this board before. Or not noticed the edit.

It's one of my favorite words, to make a point. Always seems to bring it home.