Key Race Theory

[BMeadow]

I am working on a column for American Turf Monthly in which one topic I will discuss is "key races."

The column is called The Skeptical Handicapper, so mostly what I do in these columns is to question conventional handicapping wisdom.

Has anyone done any research as to whether following horses from so-called key races is of any use? If you have, I'd appreciate it if you could post your results and include exactly what your definition was of a "key race."

[mhrussell]

Certainly I seem to be in the minority on this, but I have always thought this 'key race' idea as something that never made much sense. Yes, stronger horses come out of stronger races, but it's the horse not the race that makes it so! I always thought this as a case of the "tail wagging the dog".

Every race is like a "snowflake" and it's the ability of this particular group of horses on this particular day that matters most; not comparing which race each "came out of" and noting how well other horses ran in other races. That in my mind is mutually exclusive to todays race.

I know many good handicappers use the "key race" idea and I don't intend to demean anyones approach or methods.. just that I never could buy into the premise behind the value of this concept.

Barry- I will be interested in reading your article.

Also, I have to tell you, I just loved "Blackjack Autumn". Read that a couple of months ago. Over the years, I have often dreamed of doing that same thing, but with the quality of the games going down and the heat going up... it just put me off. And now I don't have to! Thanks for a great vicarious experience.

[TravisVOX]

I'm a big fan of key races. I've been tracking every NYRA race since last August. Thus far, it has enabled me to find the horses who faced a strong field....

I track winners and second place finishers. When I get a horse who was sandwiched in a field of key horses, I stable watch him. Saturday, I had a $10.80 horse who went from a NYRA key race to Monmouth...too bad I was out of town. Can't beat it.

They help me determine a lot of things, but don't dictate wagers. I like to see a strong performance versus a key race field rather than a dull versus a dull field. The logic make sense...

[Valuist]

I've been doing key races since the early 90s. I've found they are good for one reason but it is a very important reason: they uncover plays that speed figures don't. Here's a few things I've learned about key races.

1. Forget about tracking open claiming races for key races. Speed figures and your own judgements can tell you whether a claiming field was tough.

2. They work best in Maiden, Maiden claiming, NW1X (or state bred NW1X) and NW2 claiming. The reason for this is that tracks tend to card more of these than say a NW3X. These fields tend to be either lightly raced, or wildly inconsistent. And with 2YOs and early 3YOs, the numbers are changing at quick rates.

3. They point out layoff horses with class edges. Here's a hypothetic example that comes up numerous times every year.

Its spring, and a group of relatively newly turned 3YO maidens meet at Gulfstream.

Horse A: ran 5th and 6th in two starts at Keeneland in October. The 2nd, 4th, 8th and 9th place finishers from its last race have all since broken their maidens (not necessarily in their next race). Five horses from his previous race also have broken their maidens at the Mdn Sp Wt level, including 2 who finished behind Horse A. Horse A's Beyer speed figures are 62 and 60.

Horse B: ran 2nd in a modest Mdn race at Gulfstream two weeks earlier. Nobody has run back yet so we don't know if its a key race. The Beyer SF was a 73. Horse B's race before that was a 2nd in a Mdn race over the inner dirt at Aqu in January, earning a 69. The 3rd place finisher eventually broke his mdn in a M40000 race.

The public will invariably bet Horse B heavier than Horse A, arguing that the speed figures for Horse B are superior. I will always prefer horse A in these instances and take the better price.

One other thing: when I do key races, I go back and circle the horse in the previous charts, going back as much as 6 months, as long as the horse was at that condition. In my DRF, I'd notate Horse A's last race as a 4 (the # of horses who've broken their maiden from that field) with a circled 2 next to it (the # of horses who've broken their mdn that finished behind horse A). For Horse A's first race, I'd notate it with a 5 and a circled 2.

Hope this makes sense.

[Secretariat]

When do you quantify a race as a key race, or is it intuitive? For example, say a horse ran 4th, and another horse ran 5th. The 5th place finisher comes back and wins his next race at the same company as last race. The horse who finished 4th is now also running against the same class in a different race Would this qualify as a key race, or would you need more proof based upon the outcome of other finishers in the race? When does one decide one has enough proof to justif a Key race call?

I don't use key races, but am interested. I always figure one horse may be on a downward cycle and another on the rise. In my example, I used the same class. But if horses generally run in all kinds of different levels in returning. For example, that 5th place horse who won may have been dropping slightly while the 4th place finisher was staying the same. Now if the 5th place finisher stayed the same and won and the 4th place finisher was dropping one might assume that the 4th place finisher had a distinct advantage. But one wonders...why the drop? If a horse who finishes below it comes back to win at the same class, why would the trainer risk his horse at a lower claiming level. I guess my fear on the key race is it is hard to quantify and objectively test because the parameters in defining a key race and measuring it have never really been attempted to my knowledge. Maybe there is a statistical study out there I am unaware of.

[Valuist]

Secretariat-

I think anytime a horse who finishes behind your horse comes back to win at the same level, it makes the horse a threat. There could be extenuating circumstances; maybe the horse who finishes fifth was in an all out duel and your horse clunks up for 4th. In that case, it may not be significant. Key races are obviously most effective if you get them early on. Predicting key races before anyone runs back is a little trickier. When I get home and get my charts, I'll post a couple recent races that I think will turn out to be key races.

[andicap]

great replies all, but I think Barry is looking for EMPIRICAL research on this area, something you can hang your hat on in a handicapping article.

Having said that I'm highly skeptical of empirical research with key races because they are so many variations and angles.
You can say X number of horses coming out key races win for X ROI, but its highly probably only a small subset of horses from key races are profitable.
Perhaps they are horses who ran close to what was a fast pace in a specific key race.
Perhaps they are horses who closed strongly in a slow paced race.
Perhaps they were horses caught on a dead rail.
Perhaps it was a key race because a number of horses dropped in class after that race and won.

There are a million races why a key can elicit several winners and I don't believe empirical research can capture the angle's effectiveness.

Can you set up a viable query on Valuist's angle -- races where horses DON"T win -- a negative key race, in maidens?

What about size of the field. In a 12-horse field, its more likely that 2 or 3 horses will come out and win than in a 6 horse field.
There are more horses, they are more liable to have had bad trips and if they find themselves in a race with a weaker field and a pace to their liking they'll improve.

What about races that don't seem like key races because horses don't come right out and win, but they do down the line because
a) they bounced off good performances and it took them 2 months or so to recycle back into good form
b) they were freshened a bit after the race
c) they had bad luck in their next two races or in bad pace situations or had a bias against them or ran on sloppy tracks.
d) they were shipped out of town and you are only looking at charts for your home circuit.

So, Barry, I am skeptical of your entire premire of trying to bring empiricism and research to the chaotic and unwieldly world of key races.

Curious to get Karl's opinion on this since he is a leading proponent and user of key races on this board.

[Valuist]

I don't believe you can run a study on it w/number of starters, wins and ROI because it is too subjective. Not everyone uses the same definition of a key race, and there's no specific defining point when a race becomes "key". There's a few generalities, but they are too vague. Key races tend to have at least one big gap in them somewhere; preferably not in the first 3 horses, which would appear in the horses' next pps. Generally speaking, they are stronger than usual races for a specific class level. Its kind of like that guy who said about pornography, "he couldn't define it but he knew it when he saw it." If you keep charts and keep them up regularly, you'll know when you see one.

[Light]

Barry

You may or may not have noticed a recent "Key race" thread which included my opinion and a statistical reply relating to an angle I mentioned. In case you didn't,here's the link:

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=10787

[ratpack]

I started using Key races in the 80's and I have come to learn a few things.

1st. You need the Class and finish position of the key race horse or horses. This is why the Key races in the BRIS Insiders Pick and Power Play is almost usless.

2. The horse that is coming out of the key race should not be bet blindly. He should show something. Beat 1/2 the field or showed some early lick or closed some lengths

3. Horses from Key races 2 back can be bet but should have a Major trouble excuse. I mean like Stumbled or Blocked. Not if a horse broke alittle slow when 5 wide to catch up and then lost by 1/2 length. That was the race he was suppose to win.

[Valuist]

Horses can be bet from 2 key races back, 3 back, 4 back etc. With Mdns, the big key IMO is the drop to Maiden claiming. I've seen horses running 8th or 9th beaten 12-14 lengths (in key races) drop into maiden claimers and hammer "figure" horses who had been repeatedly running second or third against the same maiden claiming level.

I can give you an example of a horse running tomorrow that was in a key race 4 starts back. Arlington race 7, Skip Poker. The 10th race at Keeneland on April 17 was a major key NW1X field. Cuyahoga, the 3rd horse won out, Key to the Cat, the 8th place finisher broke thru the NW1X condition last weekend, Plaid won out of the NW1X and Humorous Miss won a NW1X at Arlington (around $16 to win). So THREE horses who finished behind Skip Poker have come back to win a NW1X. As for Skip Poker, she caught a sloppy track in an off the turf on May 15, another off the turf race k June 13 and ran second last out July 1. I don't figure to bet her to win but I will be using her in either Pic 3 or Pic 4 tickets.

[Fastracehorse]

Prosperous Bid was a nice S'n Calif. 3 yo that won a race back in the late 90's. That key race led to at least 4 subsequent winners at odds of over 20-1.

Do you remember Hannuman Highway?? He came 2nd in the Arkansas Derby at 25-1 - just missed. But prior to that Derby, H. Highway won at 35-1 first out after the Prosperous Bid key race.

Another horse named Court Costs won at 20-1 - he was freshened after the key race and won on turf.

At least 2 others won at big odds out of that race.

I believe Prosperous Bid ran a 111 Beyer - and it makes sense that horses who lost to him, looked worse in the PP's than they really were.

The Beyer doesn't figure in ground lost or excessive early pace pressures and hence, a lower than actual figure is printed - plus the excessive beaten lengths doesn't sit well with the public.

So, that is why key races work. Superior animals run good horses into the ground, so they look worse than they really are.

Eg., if a speedy 10 claimer tries to run with a speedy 50 claimer early; then the 10 claimer will tire much worse than if he goes with another 10 claimer. Obviously you know this - I'm trying to make a point.

Lastly, key race research is very tedious. I have developed an adjusted speed figure so I don't have to do key-race research. It works!

This year I have posted 117 longshots ( 6-1 or > - top pick only ) on DRF. A large portion of these winners were due to key race theory - and the subsequent development of a speed figure.

Yours truly,

Fastracehorse.

[ratpack]

I remember a key race back in the late 70's. I can't remember the horses name maybe Silent Fox? but he was a full brother to Affirmed.

He won a Mdn race and every horse that came out of that field won it next start.

[Valuist]

I think Fastracehorse hit the nail on the head. Maiden races are such a mix; one or two could become stakes horses, another 2-3 may be allowance types a few may only win a mdn claimer and a few others may never win a race. The public doesn't like those big beaten length margins.

The best key race I remember was from Arlington back in the summer of 1989. I remember the winner won by 10 and there were several stakes horses in the also-rans. Sound of Cannons and Home at Last were in the also rans. I think an Illinois bred who ended up winning the Remington Derby ran about 6th. 8 horses ended up breaking their maiden from that race. The winner by 10? That would be Unbridled. Not every Derby winner started out in New York, California or Kentucky.

[Valuist]

Go up a few posts and see the post re: Skip Poker. She did graduate today. Not a big price but got it done. That Baxter Hall field is the biggest key race of the Kee meet.

[Rexdale You]

Barry,
You have probably read it allready,just a
reminder,Steve Davidowitz wrote a chapter on
key races,His book was" Betting Thoroughbreds"

I have found it useful thru the years,tho have no
stats to verify his results.

When the DRF indicates a key race i pay attention.

Regards,,,Rex You

[Light]

Valuist

Skip poker was my pick today in the Arlington eliminator contest. I wouldn't attribute his win to a key race factor even if he came out of one.. He stood out to me cause his lowest Turf speed figure was higher than the highest Turf speed figure in the rest of the field.

[First_Place]

Barry,

This article may interest you:

Welcome to another edition of Horseracing Info Newsletter.

"Today's "October Nuggets" newsletter begins with a discussion of the very real but still mysterious phenomenon we refer to as key race."

http://www.free-horseracing-info.com/Horseracing_Info_Newsletter-oct3.html

FP

[JPinMaryland]

If you want to test that theory you might want to look at that race where Culinary ran the 87 Byer in Arlington Park and Runway Model was right behind her. Dont have the entire records in front of me, but that might be an interesting race to key on.

Hurry before the 3 race cycle ends.

[karlskorner]

I will PM you the basics of a chart that I use, will it work at multiple tracks ? I doubt it. I have the good fortune of having 12 months of racing at CRC/GP. The best "key race" horse I ever had was called Little Whitey on the turf several years back. He paid $143.20

[kenwoodallpromos]

I'm sorry- I thought the classic key race theory was not really unconventional, just under used.
Since I use mostly 3 unconventional handicapping methods, let me tell you that in 1 of my methods, my place/show method, I use 5 automatic eliminations and sometimes have 2 or 3 horses that qualify.
Horses from those races come back and do well, because my eliminations are based on consistency. The more consistent the horses in a "key race" are, the more likely they will do well next time.

[First_Place]

karlskorner,

I'd be interested in obtaining a copy of your chart since Calder is one of the main tracks that I play...er, I mean 'invest' in.

Thanks.

FP

[SmartyMarty]

Ya don't have to be a genius ta know that there's a place for the "key race" concept in cappin..

Sounds like these guys that write racing articles for a living have to drum up wacky contrarian notions to fill magazine space...

[Chico]

Has anyone done any research as to whether following horses from so-called key races is of any use? If you have, I'd appreciate it if you could post your results and include exactly what your definition was of a "key race." [/B]

Some excellent posts in this thread. Here's my take on the subject. I have previously tested both methods for evaluating a key race. The first (two next-time winners coming out of a race) I found to be a monumental waste of time and record keeping. I could find no significant patterns nor profitable ROI after 1 year. Tracks tested were NY circuit, NJ circuit, MD circuit and PHA.
The second method (horses coming out of Fast-Fast races) showed more promise. That, filtered with some of the ideas presented in this thread, could prove to be interesting.
Regards,
Chico

[karlskorner]

It's in your PM box

[Valuist]

Key races work great with multiple tracks, provided you have the weekly charts.

[ratpack]

Does anyone know of a site that sells Key race info like gets posted in the DRF.

The ones in the BRIS Insider Picks and Power plays are pretty much worthless without the finish position and Class of the horses that came back to win.

[lefthandlow]

I have seen his stuff and he uses key races alot.He must have
access to a them and he may sell them.Its worth a shot..I'm not connected with this guy at all just have read his picks and he uses key races all the time.He does Pimlico and he's real sharp..LL



http://www.turfnsport.com/bios.html

[First_Place]

Thanks much, karlskorner, I appreciate it.

FP

[rrbauer]

Ffffast wrote:
Prosperous Bid was a nice S'n Calif. 3 yo that won a race back in the late 90's. That key race led to at least 4 subsequent winners at odds of over 20-1.....

Some of Fast's examples strike a different chord in my handicapping playbook: One of my favorite angles and all time bests in terms of "kaaching" value is the 3-YO that got good. The beauty is that every year the faces change, but the angle and resultant plays remain the same. (I know this is deviating from Barry's stated interest!)

Basically, the 3YOTGG angle starts with a 3YO winning at a big price with an effort that is significantly better than any previous effort. Usually there aren't any signals (maybe some improved works if you follow those) that this was coming. Then, the next time out, the horse moves up and tackles tougher competition. Usually, the crowd reads the last jump-up effort as some kind of form reversal and ignores the horse. It moves forward and wins again. Big price again. Sometimes you can catch one more move-up, big-price play, before everyone figures out that the horse is for real.

Now to the key-race stuff: What is a key-race? A bunch of horses all come out of the same race and run improved efforts? So how long do you wait; and, how many of those runners have to do that, before you declare the race, a key-race? And, by the time that happens, is there anything left to benefit from in terms of value?

Can you have a "bad" key race? Like a maiden race that horses come out of and except for the winner, the others never break their maiden (or, not for a year, or two, anyway). And, the winner from that race, it usually turns out, can be tossed from consideration in subsequent races with other winners.

Is a key-race nothing more than a classification of the field that participated?

Sorry, Barry.

[Valuist]

There are a couple different interpretation of what a key race is. The most common is a race that produces multiple (usually 3 or more) next race winners. I have my own interpretation: any race in which 3 or more horses graduate from a condition, although it is NOT limited to just horse's next race. IMO, the whole point is to determine how tough a Mdn, Mdn Clm or conditioned allw or claiming field is. While I use speed figures a lot, I find key races better for handicapping races w/lightly raced horses.

[MrUniverse99]

Just as some background to your article. I have been reading Bill Veeck's book "Thirty Tons a Day" about his two year stint as operator at Suffolk. His book was written in 1972. On page 183 he talks about this 'successful system' he saw utilized at the track. It was called the 'Key Horse'. He has a definition in the first paragraph on that page that probably defines the term at the beginning of its use 30+ years ago. Cheers

[karlskorner]

To select a horse just because he came out of a race where there 2 "next out" winners is probably the worst wager a player can make. As I explained to those I PM'd my chart too, where was he in relation to the 2 "next out" winners in that race, what were the conditions of that race and what are the condtions of the race today. What kind of race did the 2 "next out" winners go on to win ? That's why we keep charts. Finding a horse that came out of a "key race" is just the beginning to the solution. All my chart does is point out that on a certain date, in a certain race, 2 or more horses were "next out" winners, now the work begins and it's worth the effort.

[ratpack]

True, that is why the Key races at BRIS are no good. When I was tracking Key races for the So. Cal circuit in the late 80's I had a simple catalog for the info.

I had a calendar and each day I bought the form and checked the charts. I then looked at the winner in each race and checked the date he has ran his last race and then noted on the calendar the finish positon in that last race and today win class- Like 2 C16. That tells me the Second horse in this field came back to win a clm 16.

Then when I handicapped I checked each horse last race and went back to the calendar and noted on the form how many, if any horses came out of that race to win.

So now I have all the info necessary to see if this key horse is worth a bet.

Finish Position in last race
Class of last race
Class of this race