Trainer Maneuvers and Trainer Intent

[Turfday]

I was looking at today's Form and saw a race for maiden 2 year-old fillies going a mile on the grass at Del Mar.

I realized that many horseplayers, INCLUDING myself, like to look at angles and try to judge "intent" to gain an edge.

Being a former horse owner, I was in partnerships with horses in the barns of some of the best trainers on the West Coast....Gary Jones (now retired), Bobby Frankel, the late great Ed Gregson (who won the Derby with Gato Del Sol). I know how the game works.

But the horse shortage...at least out here in Southern California...has dramatically changed the game. It is so different nowadays.

Back in the days of full fields, it was much easier for the racing secretaries to fill races instead of needing to write (and fill) "extras" that weren't in the condition book.

We, as players, looking from the outside in, unless we actually use the condition book, don't know which races were in the book and actually filled and those that were put on as "extras."

We, as players, don't know if trainers were "doing the racing office a FAVOR" but helping fill a race with one of their horses so IN TURN, the racing office would do THEM a favor later on.

This GOES ON....trust me.

Yet, when we see horses entered in a given race, part of the puzzle we must decipher is "what is the horse doing in this race and does he fit."

Sure, there are clues....often good ones, others more subtle.

BUT....too often is the case that trainers are sometimes now entering (1) because there was NO OTHER RACE in the condition book for that particular horse (2) simply experimenting on a surface switch (3) doing the racing office a favor (4) because their owner wants to see the horse run and was going to be on hand.

Think about (1).... "Well, I've been running this horse long and he's been running okay, but there was no other race in the condition book for $16,000, so I'm going to take a shot and shorten him up rather than wait three weeks for the next race."

Is that a "trainer maneuver" or does that show "trainer intent?" Think about how many times that must happen these days....trainers throwing a horse into a race for the above or similar reasons.

In the case of the first race at Del Mar today (Monday, Aug. 23), none of these fillies have been two turns, none have been on the turf and a few are first-time starters.

Just wondering if there was an ALTERNATE race at a mile on the DIRT if it would have got the same number of entrants.

What's ALSO happening on the Southern California circuit (which I follow)....is that statistics are getting SKEWED just because of the "descending" field sizes over the years.

It's MUCH EASIER now to "pad" stats....trainer, jockey, trainer-jockey, sire, etc. simply because it's easier to win or finish in the money simply due to smaller field sizes.

I think all of this is good food for thought.

[TravisVOX]

Horses being hustled is a big part of it, you're right. Giving the racing office a hand, political means for getting stalls next year etc...

But....

DELTA SEA won from last at the Spa last week, and the horse was hustled for the race.

Crazy game.

[Turfday]

It would interesting to really know how many trainers have a "blueprint"...a design for each horse they train...that actually comes to fruition.

Or how many times that "plan" gets sidetracked for lack of a race in the condition book and needing to put that horse into a different spot than actually intended.

What if a trainer really wants to get two or three good sprint races into a comebacker before stretching him out to the horse's preferred distance of two turns, but can't because the spacing of the races or the sprint races he's pointing for to sharpen him up don't come up as planned or even GO because the race doesn't fill? So then he has to go to "plan B."

The point is, we often look at this as a "maneuver" or trainer intent, but, gosh darn it, the trainer had no thought or desire to plan it out that way. It's just the way it came up.

[Tom]

I had a trainer move at FL years ago, or at least I thought I did.
The pattern was improved early speed at a mile, leading at the 6 furlong pole, then a cut back to a sprint and a class drop.
I had a horse at 10-1 or so that fit this pattern and I bet the ranch on it. I then went over to the track bar, and the trainer in question was there. As the the horses went to the gate, he looked out on the track and seemed confused. He said to the guy next to him,"What is this, 5 and a half? I thought is was 8 and a half!"
D'oh!
:eek:

[kenwoodallpromos]

In So Cal horses can be stabled at Hol, SA, DM, Pomona, SLR, and any number of layup or private farms. There is not a lack of horses.
I will apoliogize for those comments if DM stables are not full.
According to your race conditions, the purpose is 2fold for this type of race (and DM turf is fast enough for dirt racers)- 1 make another turfer on the card, for extreme losers; 2 glean losers out early (at 2) while fillies are not too badly hurt and can be converted to other types of uses, or bred for the next generation of 2 year old losers to water down the gene pool and overcharge first time owners who are rich at the yearling sales.
Rich owners keep the racing industry alive and pay the backside costs. ! big name stallion can covers hundreds of mares in a year, so the need is for mares who have won 1 race.

[CryingForTheHorses]

Originally posted by Turfday
I was looking at today's Form and saw a race for maiden 2 year-old fillies going a mile on the grass at Del Mar.

I realized that many horseplayers, INCLUDING myself, like to look at angles and try to judge "intent" to gain an edge.

Being a former horse owner, I was in partnerships with horses in the barns of some of the best trainers on the West Coast....Gary Jones (now retired), Bobby Frankel, the late great Ed Gregson (who won the Derby with Gato Del Sol). I know how the game works.

But the horse shortage...at least out here in Southern California...has dramatically changed the game. It is so different nowadays.

Back in the days of full fields, it was much easier for the racing secretaries to fill races instead of needing to write (and fill) "extras" that weren't in the condition book.

We, as players, looking from the outside in, unless we actually use the condition book, don't know which races were in the book and actually filled and those that were put on as "extras."

We, as players, don't know if trainers were "doing the racing office a FAVOR" but helping fill a race with one of their horses so IN TURN, the racing office would do THEM a favor later on.

This GOES ON....trust me.

Yet, when we see horses entered in a given race, part of the puzzle we must decipher is "what is the horse doing in this race and does he fit."

Sure, there are clues....often good ones, others more subtle.

BUT....too often is the case that trainers are sometimes now entering (1) because there was NO OTHER RACE in the condition book for that particular horse (2) simply experimenting on a surface switch (3) doing the racing office a favor (4) because their owner wants to see the horse run and was going to be on hand.

Think about (1).... "Well, I've been running this horse long and he's been running okay, but there was no other race in the condition book for $16,000, so I'm going to take a shot and shorten him up rather than wait three weeks for the next race."

Is that a "trainer maneuver" or does that show "trainer intent?" Think about how many times that must happen these days....trainers throwing a horse into a race for the above or similar reasons.

In the case of the first race at Del Mar today (Monday, Aug. 23), none of these fillies have been two turns, none have been on the turf and a few are first-time starters.

Just wondering if there was an ALTERNATE race at a mile on the DIRT if it would have got the same number of entrants.

What's ALSO happening on the Southern California circuit (which I follow)....is that statistics are getting SKEWED just because of the "descending" field sizes over the years.

It's MUCH EASIER now to "pad" stats....trainer, jockey, trainer-jockey, sire, etc. simply because it's easier to win or finish in the money simply due to smaller field sizes.

I think all of this is good food for thought.


Great post sir!!

CALDER is land of the extra's, Always 10 to 12 extra's on the overnite.The thing I like if there isnt a race in the time you want, I never worry as he always seems to write one in time,I love to run my horse every 9 to 10 days,Saves wear and tear from morn trainng and when you run this way..you are usaully the fittest horse in the race..I have won at 6 1/2 and shortend up to 5 1/2 and won again..WHY..I was the fittest..3 weeks off a horse loses his edge..The main thing is..You have to know your horse

[Fastracehorse]

Think about (1).... "Well, I've been running this horse long and he's been running okay, but there was no other race in the condition book for $16,000, so I'm going to take a shot and shorten him up rather than wait three weeks for the next race."

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Trainer intent often involves more than just an entry in a race - unless the race is a completely different event than the horse has ususally competed in - like you said above. With that eg. I would pay closer attention.

However, trainer intent often involves more than one factor - it can be a jock switch or equipment change, etc..


You make an intelligent and interesting thread.

GL - :)

fffastt

[Tom]

Yeah, this thread is interesting.....why is the horse in this race would seem to take precedent over pace, speed figs, equipment, etc. If the horse is not meant to win, it probably won't.
When a fieind owned a horse years ago, his trainer would put him in races just to kep him fit and to help out the racing secretary by filling a superfecta race. No way the horse was meant ot do anything but keep on the muscle. If he did win, the jocks would heve been shot!
Knowing when this happens is not always that easy though.

[CryingForTheHorses]

Thats a bunch of crap filling a race IMO.I send my horse to the race ready to dance!!. when I claim a horse I get his Lifetime PP and analyze him .You can claim a horse,spot him properly,Look after his battle wounds and 90% of the time he will ring the bell.These trainers that fill races just because they areafraid of losing their stalls are JUST puppets,These are also the kind of guys that will tell a owner anything and everyhing he wants to hear.I am a racing secretary's dream as I love to run my horse and always make sure he is going to run to his full potential. If he isnt he wont run.Seems that these small tracks like to bully the trainers and make them run where they dont belong, As for giving a horse a race......NEVER

[Dutch]

I remember a bet I made with absolute confidence. I handicapped a race, and a horse I was considering scratched when the race came up sloppy. He didn't look like he could run in the slop. I said to myself "the connections were planning to win this race - and didn't feel like they could in the slop". I saw him come up again, and figured they placed him where they thought they could win. He did win, at a fair price. If the horse had just been out for exercise, they would have left him in.

[Fastracehorse]

If you wouldn't mind,

Could you give us horse players some insight on what problems horses have - that need to be corrected off of the claim.

Is there a situation, with a horse, you would stay away from when analyzing his PP's??

I know some guys are big on de-worming - at least they say they are.

Thanx,

fffastt

[CryingForTheHorses]

Im very wary of gaps..If a horse has 6 starts for the year and was off last year for 6 months, That doesnt bother me, Whar worries me is to see a horse that has run for 25k hit the board dropped to 16k hits the board then dropped to 8 k..This is a warning sign, Horses may have a lot of problems off the claim...deworming is just one of the things, you got to have sound legs,Horse has to be eating well and he needs to be happy..

[delayjf]

McSchell racing
I always wondered how you or any trainer determines what is the proper level to race your horses. Obviously guys like Mullins are good at it and that's probably why they win so much, they don't have to worry about making a living on trainer fees. Success definately breeds success.

But how to you judge a horses proper level and what makes you decide that a horse can stand a raise in class. Interesting stuff

[kenwoodallpromos]

As a capper, I can tell you I base level strictly on cutoff between ITM and not ITM. I write a price above the horse's name.
If the horse wins at various levels, I do not put a price.
As as I knpw Tom claims them close to where they fit and may only raise or lower slightly.

[andicap]

Originally posted by McSchell_Racing
Great post sir!!

CALDER is land of the extra's, Always 10 to 12 extra's on the overnite.The thing I like if there isnt a race in the time you want, I never worry as he always seems to write one in time,I love to run my horse every 9 to 10 days,Saves wear and tear from morn trainng and when you run this way..you are usaully the fittest horse in the race..I have won at 6 1/2 and shortend up to 5 1/2 and won again..WHY..I was the fittest..3 weeks off a horse loses his edge..The main thing is..You have to know your horse

If a horse loses his edge after three weeks off, tom, then why do so many horses win after 30 days off or 40 days off. Statistics show there is really no difference (I believe. I could be wrong, that there is a difference in win% and I am thinking of ROI for the handicapper, not the win % for the trainer) bringing a horse back in 3 weeks or 5 weeks or even 7 weeks. (assuming he's trained well to remain fit.)

[Tom]

fffastt.....
Worming was a key factor for a couple of horses I know of.
One of the biggest hit I ever had - Strictly a Gamble (Cool name!)- won and paid $47.80 off the claim and de--worming. This trainer (long gone) claimed 6 horses off the same guy one season and won 5 of the six next out, just by doing simple things to make them feel better. Three of the winners were de-wormed. One had a tooth problem of all things!
I think at minor tracks, you have a lot of horses that are far better than they look due to just plain bad trainers and stupid owners. These claims were all $2500 horses, so you know they were not getting state of the art vet care.

[rrbauer]

Turday/Selvin said:
BUT....too often is the case that trainers are sometimes now entering (1) because there was NO OTHER RACE in the condition book for that particular horse (2) simply experimenting on a surface switch (3) doing the racing office a favor (4) because their owner wants to see the horse run and was going to be on hand.

Comment:
OK. So What? What's different about today's trainer-crystal-ball vis-a-vis
past years? The horses are entered (for whatever reason), the PP's are available for analysis, the other nuances are subject to interpretation.

Turday/Selvin said:

It would interesting to really know how many trainers have a "blueprint"...a design for each horse they train...that actually comes to fruition.

Comment:
Yes that would be interesting. But, in the absence of that knowledge, we are left to our own devices for speculation and with the other historical stats that make up the base of knowledge we use to make betting decisions. Nobody that I know is privy to trainer intention info, on a race-by-race, trainer-by-trainer basis.

Wish in one hand. Crap in the other. Which one fills up first?

[Fastracehorse]

I know I wouldn't handicap with a bad tooth-ache :)

fffastt

[Fastracehorse]

If you think of anything else let it fly.

fffastt