Saved some Dough NOT betting trainers

[bobhilo]

Aloha all,

After about a month (which would be a losing one...had I bet) the Info in Bob Selvin's post about trainers...is not making much $$$....

I put his recent female trainers on the Bris Stable alert list and am not even going to consider betting them...

I am in no way slamming Bob Selvin...there is more than just blind betting involved

Gordon Pine has a couple of articles on trainer handicapping....

a quote
"It’s vital to have not only statistics, but statistics on your statistics. Stay with me here. In other words, you mark down your positive stats before the fact, and then keep track of how you would have done if you had bet them. That way, you are treating them as before-the-case predictors, not just after-the-case statistics.....

You’ll be surprised how many after-the-case positive statistics do zilch as predictors.....

But not all. When you find a positive before-the-case predictor, then you’ve got something"
Gordon Pine's words in quotes above

It is the horse still...and the trainer knowing where to put him, how to medicate him, equip him etc....

If you see who is HOT ...like at an opening meet like CD in early May...then you can make $$$$....
No thanks to trainers for me

[timtam]

How about Ed Bain and his method. I think it was all trainer induced

4 + 30 or something like that? It was blindly betting trainers with certain

percentages whethor the horse was out in 60 days or not. ( that was just

an example I don't know the criteria but I looked into it a couple of years ago)

and it too blindly bet on trainers. Maybe he changed it now i don't know

[Overlay]

I realize that the trainer is the individual most responsible for a horse's preparation for, and placement in, a situation where it can win, and that there is something to be gained from a knowledge of trainer patterns associated with a future winning effort. However, to me, as far as taking a horse's connections into account for purposes of day-in, day-out handicapping, it makes more sense to focus on the jockey, both from the standpoint of ability and meaningful statistics (due to the greater frequency with which jockeys ride as compared to the frequency with which trainers enter a horse in a race), and as an indicator of trainer intent (that is, it has seemed to me that trainers as a whole would seek to get the best rider possible for a horse that was well-meant in a particular race). I certainly don't advocate betting blindly on either trainers or jockeys, no matter how hot they are at any given time. But the jockey carries more weight in my personal thinking.

[bobhilo]

some other thread mentioned Ed Bain and he has some interesting articles on his website that I read....

but...I looked at most days summary from BRIS on the female trainers...and they lost...

you must be more selective...and handicap a little...but being more selective might work...

just like physicality handicapping...I read one guy's story that he watched a guy do the Joe Tackach ,eyeball horses thing and lost for a season....

it is still the horse that carries the jockey....look at the horse(past performances)...... seems easier with less runouts....

"opinions are like feet, everyone's got them...and they all stink"
(the clean version)

[Overlay]

As you say, I totally agree that the horse does the running, and is (or should be) the main consideration. I just intended to note that, to the extent that I factor connections into my handicapping, I look at the jockey more than the trainer.

[bobhilo]

I realize that the trainer is the individual most responsible for a horse's preparation for, and placement in, a situation where it can win, and that there is something to be gained from a knowledge of trainer patterns associated with a future winning effort. However, to me, as far as taking a horse's connections into account for purposes of day-in, day-out handicapping, it makes more sense to focus on the jockey, both from the standpoint of ability and meaningful statistics (due to the greater frequency with which jockeys ride as compared to the frequency with which trainers enter a horse in a race), and as an indicator of trainer intent (that is, it has seemed to me that trainers as a whole would seek to get the best rider possible for a horse that was well-meant in a particular race). I certainly don't advocate betting blindly on either trainers or jockeys, no matter how hot they are at any given time. But the jockey carries more weight in my personal thinking.

I can see your point...

some jock/trainer stats seem to be a good tool...you gotta catch them when they are hot...I remember 8 or 10 years ago that Jesus Bracho was winning on the lead ,with the bug at Calder, he was good on the early hosses(then at least)...so jocks do have some bearing...still the Hoss carries the jock...no trainer bets for me thanks

[bobhilo]

As you say, I totally agree that the horse does the running, and is (or should be) the main consideration. I just intended to note that, to the extent that I factor connections into my handicapping, I look at the jockey more than the trainer.

Bailey/Mott...Baze/Hollendorfer...no profit on those duos, and by the time you see a pattern on others, it is too late...as your handle says ...Overlays...(with some decent 'capping) is a good way to go...

and with that.... "I'm off like a prom dress"....

[Turfday]

TRY THESE FOUR ON FOR SIZE

(based on stats from June 17, 2002 through June 17, 2005)

Trainer Jennifer Pedersen / Jockey Alan Garcia

148 sts / 20 wins (14%) / $24 avg. win mutuel



Trainer Amos Laborde / Jockey Edwin Maldonado-Alicea

112 sts / 29 wins (26%) / $11 avg. win mutuel


Trainer Carmelo Mendoa / Jockey Gilbert Concha

130 sts / 40 wins (31%) / $12 avg. win mutuel

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
NEED A BIGGER SAMPLE SIZE?

Trainer Bruce Kravets / Jockey Luis Belmonte

302 sts / 58 wins (19%) / $14 avg. win mutuel

[kenwoodallpromos]

Is it ever possible to bet on or against assisstant trainers of big trainers at certain tracks? I have heard some big trainers are not a good bet if they are not physically at the track.

[hurrikane]

A couple of cents worth of opinion.

1st, I believe Bobs posts was about female trainers in the money and using them in the exotics. Not betting blindly to win. A couple of people made a good profit playing at least one (Pascual) for a while. This is not how I play trainers but there werer some happy people around.

2nd. There is not one horse in all of horse racing that gets up in the morning, pours a cup of coffee, looks at the condition book and say 'I think I'll run in this claimer on Thursday. Should put up Karamonous with some lasix and I think I'll check out the fillies running so no blinkers'. It is the trainer. how can anyone say a trainer has no affect. I repeat, it is the trainer.

One caveat. You pick horse A in a race because he apprears to be coming into form, has beeten this projected pace, run competitivly at this level and has a good mount. I pick one on a trainer. You win. So are you now right and trainer betting it stupid. Absolutely not. It's only you won I lost.

Next race I win you lose. Who's stupid now. We all can't bet the same horse. It doesn't mean it doesnt' work if you can't make it work. You just have a way that you perfer to play.

A note about trainer, or any, stats.

I don't think lumping in stats over the last 5 years makes sense. What was going on in this persons life, stable, track, family, finance, love life, has nothing to do with today.

[hurrikane]

Ken,

that's a good question. I don't think you can apply it unless you are at the track every day. Even then I'm not so sure. Back before simulcast and trainers with multiple barns it was a plus. Not I dont' know and there is no real way to track it.

Would love to has Groom/Asst Trainer info.

[Wickel]

My sentiments exactly, Hurrikane. In addition to choosing the proper spots, equipment and rider, a horse can't get fit on its own. IMO, trainers are an extremely important handicapping angle. Every Monday or Tuesday, Brisnet published a list of the top trainers and trainer/jockey combos of the last 60 days. Also, in its Tracks at a Glance, it points out who's hot and who's not--trainers and jocks.

One more point: A lot of you think Bain's method was a bit iffy, but when you isolate a 30-plus percent trainer in any category that has proven himself, I don't feel that's such a bad investment.

[Lasix1]

How about Ed Bain and his method. I think it was all trainer induced4 + 30 or something like that? It was blindly betting trainers with certain percentages whethor the horse was out in 60 days or not. ( that was just an example I don't know the criteria but I looked into it a couple of years ago) and it too blindly bet on trainers. Maybe he changed it now i don't know
Last time I checked, Ed Bain was selling his "Lay-offs and Claims" trainer stats in a new package called "Automatics." You bet them blindly which, of course, demands that you be at the track or at your on-line account everytime they run. Miss one and it could ruin your ROI for a month.

As I recall, he tracks Lay-Offs and Claims 1st, 2nd, and 3rd time out for every trainer in the country and gives you those trainers who have at least 4 wins and a 30% hit record. It's a sound system, although the $100+ download fees require lots of heavy betting and a substantial bankroll to eek out a modest profit.

I do disagree with the essence of many of the posts about this. I think tracking trainers is much more reliable than tracking jockeys since they have much more to do with the readiness of horses than jockeys whose agents simply try to put them on the backs of as many live mounts as possible. In fact, I think when you track jockeys you are mostly tracking the performance of jockey agents.

There are many fine jockeys, but trying to make a profit off of them is very difficult. If I were looking at a Grade 1 race and the field was packed with jockeys of the caliber of Jerry Baily, Gary Stevens, Edgar Prado, et. al., I'd much rather know more about the trainer and the horse than I would about this distinguished crop of riders.

[cash2]

.
A note about trainer, or any, stats.

I don't think lumping in stats over the last 5 years makes sense. What was going on in this persons life, stable, track, family, finance, love life, has nothing to do with today.

utterly spot on! and i'll give you a perfect example. Maria Pascual has been the subject of much discussion here and several of us made good money backing her. now her stable is having a good meet at DEL but we don't see the bomber payoffs this year. could have something to do with the short fields at DEL or... maybe it's the fact that she's pregnant and went home to argentina. you may be betting a Pascual horse, but you're not getting a Pascual trained horse.

[takeout]

Would love to has Groom/Asst Trainer info.
Me too!

[kenwoodallpromos]

Equibase says currently Frankel is about 40% ITM at Churchill and about 70% ITM at Belmont. Is it the horses?

[andicap]

utterly spot on! and i'll give you a perfect example. Maria Pascual has been the subject of much discussion here and several of us made good money backing her. now her stable is having a good meet at DEL but we don't see the bomber payoffs this year. could have something to do with the short fields at DEL or... maybe it's the fact that she's pregnant and went home to argentina. you may be betting a Pascual horse, but you're not getting a Pascual trained horse.


Trainer information is great if you keep an eye on what's happening right now.
Sometimes the data will say a trainer had a lousy year with 2 yr olds suggesting he/she has no abilities with babies. But maybe the trainer had a crop of slow horses that year from the farm.
Many good trainers train to the ability of what's in the barn. Instead of adhering to fixed patterns they will adapt to the abilities and quirks of what they have.

For example, a trainer might be 10-20 with layoff horses one year. Well maybe the horses he had were the type that did not need to be raced into shape. The following year, after a turnover of sorts, the trainer might be 3-20. Did he suddenly turn bad in working horses into shape?

No, just as Felipe Alou did not suddenly become a bad manager when Barry Bonds got hurt or Lou Piniella did when his payroll was slashed to $20 million.

If a trainer has shown ability with a factor in the past and is still showing it now I'll have more confidence in that statistic...

[hurrikane]

Thanks cash.

how did you find that out? This is the type of info that is hard to come by if you are not at the track or on the backstretch. It is a bankroll builder and saver.

The info not everyone has is what makes the money.

[Turfday]

For every stat, there is a counter-stat. You can put a chink in any stat that you want.

Do you believe major league baseball players batting averages are an accurate stat? Is one great season by a player who hits .340 truly indicative of his ability and how great a hitter he is?

What if that player hit .265 the year before and hits .280 the season after?

And how do we know, as observers, how many "banjo" type hits or infield singles that player lucked out into in his .340 season? Or were they all solid line drives that he hit?

Yet many fans that follow baseball look at batting average as "gospel."

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

You can put a chink in any stats offered by any racing service. The legitimate ones who are partnered with Equibase all receive their data from the same source.

So any stats offered by any of them, including our service, are up for interpretation. And that's the key word.

Similarly, there are many sources of speed figures. And one man's "best bet" because of a high figure is another man's "bounce."

No one said this is an easy game.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Personally, I have my own personal "watch" list set up for the top value trainers, jockeys and trainer-jockey combinations in North America and Canada based on stats from my database and Betting Value Averages. I am strictly interested in turf racing only. I complement this by keeping a list of turf value sires handy.

I check my database for the LAST THREE -YEAR (1095 days back from today) period to see if the stats have LONGEVITY and a BIG sample size. I then reinforce that by strictly looking at the last 365 days from today to see if the stats and averages are better or worse from this most recent period than the full three-year period.

In the last 365 day period, I'm looking for a sample size of at least 30. If the stat is as good or better than my long term stats, I place that trainer, jockey or trainer-jockey combination on the watch list.

I can very easily "re-do" this at will, and perhaps make some changes every 30 days or so to keep on top of "what have you done for me lately."

Right now, I have about 24 trainers on my watch list, 11 jockeys and 18 trainer-jockey combinations. These trainers, jockeys and trainer-jockey combos have both the good win percentage/high value I'm looking for both long term (three years) and short term (most recent 365 days).

Come back in six months and my lists could be different, because the game is always evolving.

I'm only interested when these trainers, jockeys or trainer-jockey combinations are on TURF and only when the morning line is AT LEAST 4/1 or better. I then look at our turf sire stats to see if they are complementary.

[CapperLou]

Hey Bob:

What happened to Senor Lobo these many past months on turf. He finally had a good winner the other day. Man, has he tanked this past six months though.

Who might be a good one to replace him with in CA?

All the best,

CapperLou

[cash2]

Hurrikane

i'm at del all the time. unlike last year, Maria has not been in the paddock. i asked around and a friend who works on the backside told me. i'm reminded of Mark Cramer's story about how you could tell a certain barn at Canterbury was live if one particular groom brought the horse over.

[toetoe]

I notice Paulo Lobo has a s#@*load more horses now. I think he has so many new equine faces in his barn, Brasilian and otherwise, that he has to figure out where they belong, class- and/or distancewise. I'm still waiting for Nikinipo to come back.

[bobhilo]

thanks Mr. Selvin,

the trainer/jocks info is interesting

Again Bob, I just put in some of those trainers as a lark on stable alert,
I am sure some of you PA members do ok using the trainer data(plus handicapping)...
I never would slam you or anyone else on this board...there are other places on the web to slam(like on the ABC politics board)
I wish to learn more and my topic was just what I had observed...
I didn't bet them...I didn't lose a cent

the trainer and jock combined with the other methods of handicapping are an interesting way of possible profits

I hope you don't think I was trying to be offensive

Aloha