Post-Race Analysis -- A Good Idea for Tracks?

[andtheyreoff]

So on my website, I've started up a feature that gives a brief recap of every race run at Belmont Park, to get people (including myself) ready for Saratoga. Here's a sample:

http://www.danonymousracing.com/belmont-park-daily-recap-sunday-june-24-2018/

Doing this little column brought to mind a question: of course, almost every track has people who do pre-race analysis. Would doing post-race analysis be just as beneficial to horseplayers?

Imagine if, after each race, the track handicapper(s) went through the replay, pointing out unusual circumstances and difficult/easy trips that may have impacted the running of the race. I think it's an interesting concept. What say you?

[pandy]

So on my website, I've started up a feature that gives a brief recap of every race run at Belmont Park, to get people (including myself) ready for Saratoga. Here's a sample:

http://www.danonymousracing.com/belmont-park-daily-recap-sunday-june-24-2018/

Doing this little column brought to mind a question: of course, almost every track has people who do pre-race analysis. Would doing post-race analysis be just as beneficial to horseplayers?

Imagine if, after each race, the track handicapper(s) went through the replay, pointing out unusual circumstances and difficult/easy trips that may have impacted the running of the race. I think it's an interesting concept. What say you?

Looks good. Make sure you follow the bias, although lately Belmont has been playing fairly most of the time. Whenever I did television, I would always mention any tough trips or horses that I thought might benefit from the start, or horses that may have been compromised in some way, after the race was over. If an analyst doesn't do that, I don't know what he or she is doing...

Years ago in NY the NY Post had a sportwriter named Henry Heck, who wrote a long detailed column on last night's harness races every day. It was great because he commented on the trips and even criticized the drivers.

[clicknow]

The only people who are interested in reviews and post race analysis are those looking to improve their game for the long haul.

Most who fit this category already do their own review at the end of every day.

The ones who don't just move on to "next!" and I'm not sure they would tune in?

I say this because I asked this question years ago on a few forums and was quite surprised at how few actually sat down at the end of each betting day and analyzed what they got right and where they went wrong/missed something.

[GMB@BP]

I say this because I asked this question years ago on a few forums and was quite surprised at how few actually sat down at the end of each betting day and analyzed what they got right and where they went wrong/missed something.

The more the merrier who take this view I say!

Of course with the whales betting so much not sure it matters, but hey ever little bit counts.

[MadVindication]

Imagine if, after each race, the track handicapper(s) went through the replay, pointing out unusual circumstances and difficult/easy trips that may have impacted the running of the race. I think it's an interesting concept. What say you?

Yes, it also makes the mechanics of the sport more accessible to people new to it (like myself). There's less jargon in a longer analysis than in PPs and it can be learned by context. Good to learn for newbies, something to think about while watching replays or also to save time and skip replays.

I like how your first example is both a pre and post analysis of the contenders.

I'd like to see more analysis than just simple picks. I really like Bannon's journal in Woodbine's free programs. And I would spend time reading similar and longer entries of the type, like yours.

[clicknow]

The more the merrier who take this view I say!

Of course with the whales betting so much not sure it matters, but hey ever little bit counts.

I understand that, GMB, but I live my life around "personal best". What others are doing or not doing has no bearing on my goals for myself.

I just did a 10 mile hike which I could not finish, as I have a chronic and rather severe arthritic condition. I could have compared myself to all the other people who finished the hike. Instead, I got home and made a careful analysis, got my expectations in line with my actual abilities, and learned a whole lot about myself. (i.e. I often bite off more than I can chew because my mind wants to go where the rest of me can't. LOL)

I made it 5.2 miles and that was very good for me, since some of it was uphill and that is where I got the severe upper leg pain, which made it almost impossible for me to take a step. My first instinct was to feel like a loser... then I just moved forward and enjoyed the feeling of accomplishment and decided to analyze what I could do better/different next time.

Regret and self recrimination never works well for me.

Sure, there are whales and others winning more than me. I'm just trying to improve my OWN game.

[chiguy]

I like the effort here. One thing I would like to see is Jockey ratings. If any of you watch soccer, most publications will include in their re-caps an individual rating of each player on the pitch. 0-10. I would like to see someone do that with jockeys. I often find a jockey not using a horses natural early speed and end up with a discouraged animal. I would like to see which guys are more apt to do that.

[thespaah]

So on my website, I've started up a feature that gives a brief recap of every race run at Belmont Park, to get people (including myself) ready for Saratoga. Here's a sample:

http://www.danonymousracing.com/belmont-park-daily-recap-sunday-june-24-2018/

Doing this little column brought to mind a question: of course, almost every track has people who do pre-race analysis. Would doing post-race analysis be just as beneficial to horseplayers?

Imagine if, after each race, the track handicapper(s) went through the replay, pointing out unusual circumstances and difficult/easy trips that may have impacted the running of the race. I think it's an interesting concept. What say you?

For a number or years, probably decades, there was a column in the NY Post called "Through the Binocs"..
John Piesen was the writer. He would post race analyze selected races at the NYRA tracks.
I found it to be a great read. And yes, I took notes and saved clippings.
Unfortunately, I have no clue where these are.

[v j stauffer]

I don't think it's a good idea. I think it's a GREAT idea. The only way track paid handicappers are worth the money they make is if they cultivate bettors to learn more and more about how to form their own opinion. That's the way we've all gone from $2.00 to $20.00 to $200.00 players. Just touting them won't do it. They have to feel the way it does when, without anyone's help, they smoke out a 9-1 shot and $156.00 exacta. In this day and age of ADW's and inter track presentations the day is already pretty much presented as a 4 1/2 television show anyway. Analysis and comments on replays is already an integral part of most mainstream sports broadcasts. Why should horse racing be any different. Also make sure there's a way to archive the "over the replay" comments so people can refer to it later in the day or when a horse from that race runs back. IMO you're 100% on the right track. I say go for it:ThmbUp:

[thaskalos]

I don't think it's a good idea. I think it's a GREAT idea. The only way track paid handicappers are worth the money they make is if they cultivate bettors to learn more and more about how to form their own opinion. That's the way we've all gone from $2.00 to $20.00 to $200.00 players. Just touting them won't do it. They have to feel the way it does when, without anyone's help, they smoke out a 9-1 shot and $156.00 exacta. In this day and age of ADW's and inter track presentations the day is already pretty much presented as a 4 1/2 television show anyway. Analysis and comments on replays is already an integral part of most mainstream sports broadcasts. Why should horse racing be any different. Also make sure there's a way to archive the "over the replay" comments so people can refer to it later in the day or when a horse from that race runs back. IMO you're 100% on the right track. I say go for it:ThmbUp:

The unfortunate thing is that the track handicapper is employed by the track with the short-sighted objective of generating a bigger handle for the track TODAY...instead of aiming for educating the crowd so they could become more confident bettors down the road. To the tracks...a bird in the hand is worth more than ten birds in the bush. That's why we see the track handicapper offering selections on every single race...which is the anathema of competent horseplay.

If a track handicapper ever tried to truly "educate" the crowd...he would surely talk himself out of a job.

[thaskalos]

So on my website, I've started up a feature that gives a brief recap of every race run at Belmont Park, to get people (including myself) ready for Saratoga. Here's a sample:

http://www.danonymousracing.com/belmont-park-daily-recap-sunday-june-24-2018/

Doing this little column brought to mind a question: of course, almost every track has people who do pre-race analysis. Would doing post-race analysis be just as beneficial to horseplayers?

Imagine if, after each race, the track handicapper(s) went through the replay, pointing out unusual circumstances and difficult/easy trips that may have impacted the running of the race. I think it's an interesting concept. What say you?

I like your idea, and your write-ups...and I have a further suggestion:

Why not include the late betting action in your post-race reports? With the heavy last-second betting that we've seen nationwide...it would be interesting to see if any useful betting patterns might be unearthed by the studious observation of the late tote board action on each race.

[v j stauffer]

The unfortunate thing is that the track handicapper is employed by the track with the short-sighted objective of generating a bigger handle for the track TODAY...instead of aiming for educating the crowd so they could become more confident bettors down the road. To the tracks...a bird in the hand is worth more than ten birds in the bush. That's why we see the track handicapper offering selections on every single race...which is the anathema of competent horseplay.

If a track handicapper ever tried to truly "educate" the crowd...he would surely talk himself out of a job.

I must disagree.

This past season I was asked and agreed to do a pre-race handicapping show on the closed circuit system with Nancy Holthus at Oaklawn.

I insisted we be allowed to take the time to not only make the selections but explain how we arrived at the picks.

We used visual aids. Marked racing forms, video of Thoro-graph sheets and of course video replays.

I was told by both management and fans they appreciated and embraced our efforts. I strongly feel we did in fact cultivate players to learn ways to form a better, more informed and sophisticated opinion.

On occasion we invited people from the from the live crowd to join us on set and share their selections. They said that 100% our show was instrumental in their evolution as horse players.

[thaskalos]

I must disagree.

This past season I was asked and agreed to do a pre-race handicapping show on the closed circuit system with Nancy Holthus at Oaklawn.

I insisted we be allowed to take the time to not only make the selections but explain how we arrived at the picks.

We used visual aids. Marked racing forms, video of Thoro-graph sheets and of course video replays.

I was told by both management and fans they appreciated and embraced our efforts. I strongly feel we did in fact cultivate players to learn ways to form a better, more informed and sophisticated opinion.

On occasion we invited people from the from the live crowd to join us on set and share their selections. They said that 100% our show was instrumental in their evolution as horse players.

AWESOME...I never knew this! :ThmbUp:

I've always said that a competent overview of the handicapping process is WAY more valuable than just the rudimentary horse rundown, and the obligatory touting. What good are the picks...if the crowd doesn't see how they are arrived at? Truth be told...I don't have access to the handicapping feeds of any live tracks. The only "handicapping show" that I watch is TVG...which I use as a supplement to my computer feeds. And, sadly...I find the "handicapping" done on TVG to be superficial at best. I say this without having watched any of your own TVG segments...of course.

[v j stauffer]

AWESOME...I never knew this! :ThmbUp:

I've always said that a competent overview of the handicapping process is WAY more valuable than just the rudimentary horse rundown, and the obligatory touting. What good are the picks...if the crowd doesn't see how they are arrived at? Truth be told...I don't have access to the handicapping feeds of any live tracks. The only "handicapping show" that I watch is TVG...which I use as a supplement to my computer feeds. And, sadly...I find the "handicapping" done on TVG to be superficial at best. I say this without having watched any of your own segments...of course.

Our show is streamed if you are a member of Oaklawn Anywhere. We do it Friday, Saturday and Holiday Mondays airing approx. 1 hour 15 minutes before 1st post.

[thaskalos]

Our show is streamed if you are a member of Oaklawn Anywhere. We do it Friday, Saturday and Holiday Mondays airing approx. 1 hour 15 minutes before 1st post.

Great...I wish you much success with the show.

[v j stauffer]

Great...I wish you much success with the show.

Thanks. Last year I showed a $2.00 flat bet win/place profit for over 190 races. Not easy.

[thaskalos]

Thanks. Last year I showed a $2.00 flat bet win/place profit for over 190 races. Not easy.

I love the racing and the graphics at Oaklawn...but, unfortunately, the track isn't too fond of me. I haven't had success there for several years now. The majority of the race results there leave me scratching my head. :)

[v j stauffer]

I love the racing and the graphics at Oaklawn...but, unfortunately, the track isn't too fond of me. I haven't had success there for several years now. The majority of the race results there leave me scratching my head. :)

It's definitely advanced studies. But IMO worth staying the course. It took me an entire season to get a feel. One of the things you might want to re-visit is there are a couple very high percentage barns that can be extremely streaky. Nothing nefarious at all. Let me say that again. Nothing nefarious at all. Some who's horses seem to all need a race. With the length of the meet in mind. Other's that start out white hot and taper off because the purses perhaps invite them to try to get one extra race out of a horse who will be running for half as much at the next town. Looking back at the charts for the entire 57 days may point to some of these trends. Saying this a 3rd time because this is PA. I AM NOT suggesting anything corrupt. More predicting over all meet philosophy and strategy.

[thaskalos]

It's definitely advanced studies. But IMO worth staying the course. It took me an entire season to get a feel. One of the things you might want to re-visit is there are a couple very high percentage barns that can be extremely streaky. Nothing nefarious at all. Let me say that again. Nothing nefarious at all. Some who's horses seem to all need a race. With the length of the meet in mind. Other's that start out white hot and taper off because the purses perhaps invite them to try to get one extra race out of a horse who will be running for half as much at the next town. Looking back at the charts for the entire 57 days may point to some of these trends. Saying this a 3rd time because this is PA. I AM NOT suggesting anything corrupt. More predicting over all meet philosophy and strategy.

I appreciate the help...and will keep this in mind going forward. :ThmbUp:

[Maximillion]

It's definitely advanced studies. But IMO worth staying the course. It took me an entire season to get a feel. One of the things you might want to re-visit is there are a couple very high percentage barns that can be extremely streaky. Nothing nefarious at all. Let me say that again. Nothing nefarious at all. Some who's horses seem to all need a race. With the length of the meet in mind. Other's that start out white hot and taper off because the purses perhaps invite them to try to get one extra race out of a horse who will be running for half as much at the next town. Looking back at the charts for the entire 57 days may point to some of these trends. Saying this a 3rd time because this is PA. I AM NOT suggesting anything corrupt. More predicting over all meet philosophy and strategy.

I didnt play OP this year but it seems like many of the the shippers that have done well there (claiming types) seem to be under-performing when going elsewhere....or the other extreme,horses who showed almost nothing at OP can be a threat for a complete form-reversal.
It backs up what you said,seems like many were geared up just for that meet,and it was so tough it almost makes me want to look past any races there for a lot of horses.

[ultracapper]

OP- great idea.

[Tom]

I must disagree.

This past season I was asked and agreed to do a pre-race handicapping show on the closed circuit system with Nancy Holthus at Oaklawn.

I insisted we be allowed to take the time to not only make the selections but explain how we arrived at the picks.

We used visual aids. Marked racing forms, video of Thoro-graph sheets and of course video replays.

I was told by both management and fans they appreciated and embraced our efforts. I strongly feel we did in fact cultivate players to learn ways to form a better, more informed and sophisticated opinion.

On occasion we invited people from the from the live crowd to join us on set and share their selections. They said that 100% our show was instrumental in their evolution as horse players.


This :ThmbUp:
and the OP :ThmbUp:

[FakeNameChanged]

I must disagree.

This past season I was asked and agreed to do a pre-race handicapping show on the closed circuit system with Nancy Holthus at Oaklawn.

I insisted we be allowed to take the time to not only make the selections but explain how we arrived at the picks.

We used visual aids. Marked racing forms, video of Thoro-graph sheets and of course video replays.

I was told by both management and fans they appreciated and embraced our efforts. I strongly feel we did in fact cultivate players to learn ways to form a better, more informed and sophisticated opinion.

On occasion we invited people from the from the live crowd to join us on set and share their selections. They said that 100% our show was instrumental in their evolution as horse players.Vic, Are any of these shows available on youtube? Would be great to see a few of them. Thx.

[v j stauffer]

Vic, Are any of these shows available on youtube? Would be great to see a few of them. Thx.

I couldn't find any on youtube

[mountainman]

Recaps are by far my favorite part of doing tv analysis. I've always felt (hoped) that serious players are interested in what to "take away" from a race.

My extensive recaps are why we always fall behind on mnr's show. There is soooo much I want to convey after most races-and so little time.

In fact, Nancy sometimes rolls her eyes when I come in behind her short blow-by-blow recaps and extenuate more on what we just watched. And she has a point....her recaps (she does the odd numbered races and I do the evens) are hers to do as she sees fit. But I'm just bursting to weigh in...I can't help it.

But I do believe that a good recap both enlivens and informs.

Her and I have very different ideas of what constitutes good analysis and recaps. But we remain good friends, and well understand each other's philosophy and role. And she deserves a medal for tolerating my ego and swag for 18 years. Be well, guys....no time to post, these days.

Btw, great to see you back, Vic.

[v j stauffer]

Recaps are by far my favorite part of doing tv analysis. I've always felt (hoped) that serious players are interested in what to "take away" from a race.

My extensive recaps are why we always fall behind on mnr's show. There is soooo much I want to convey after most races-and so little time.

In fact, Nancy sometimes rolls her eyes when I come in behind her short blow-by-blow recaps and extenuate more on what we just watched. And she has a point....her recaps (she does the odd numbered races and I do the evens) are hers to do as she sees fit. But I'm just bursting to weigh in...I can't help it.

But I do believe that a good recap both enlivens and informs.

Her and I have very different ideas of what constitutes good analysis and recaps. But we remain good friends, and well understand each other's philosophy and role. And she deserves a medal for tolerating my ego and swag for 18 years. Be well, guys....no time to post, these days.

Btw, great to see you back, Vic.

Nancy & Mark are the GOLD STANDARD of pre and post race analysis.

[lamboguy]

Nancy & Mark are the GOLD STANDARD of pre and post race analysis.that's for sure. i watch them every card they are on and pay very close attention to their post race comments because i miss more than they see.

because of them i had to re-adjust my sleeping habits. i was betting the early day cards and ran out of gas half way through the mountain, today i make the whole card.

[bobphilo]

Sounds good to me. I spend just as much time analyzing a race I bet on as I did on handicapping it. The more relevant info the better. Feedback is crucial and if a horse doesn't run as I expected I want to know if I made a mistake or due to a bad trip.