The Importance of Form

[DarkDream]

I've been reading William L. Scott's books, "Total Victory at The Track" and "How Will Your Horse Run Today?"

The importance of form to me seems to be essential when handicapping any race. No matter how good a horse is, if that horse is not in good form, the horse will not run to par and often prove to be vunerable. With the vast majority of horse races being very competitive affairs, it seems to me that the difference of form between two comparable contenders can spell the difference between victory and defeat.

If as I am postulating, that form is all important, what criteria have people on this forum used to assess form?

For William L. Scott's books, his form factors centered around recency (time between last race and the workouts inbetween), running line (if the horse is up-close at the stretch call) and stretch performance (if the horse looses ground in the stretch).

I have been applying Scott's approach to the races in EMD. I haven't programmed it yet, so as to automate the process.

So far the results seem to be quite revealing and accurate in regards to form. Granted, I have not done any statistical study and this is just a personal assessment.

Scott's books were written in the 80's. Has there been further research on the issue of form, or more detailed studies on the relationship, for example, between lengths back at the stretch call and final position?

What do you guys do to assess form?

--DarkDream

[Secretariat]

Scott's analysis of Form was isolated to Favorites pretty much, and if you apply his form rules to favorites it may get you close to even. He spoke of a way to use the Beyer figs at one of the Handicapping Expos, which does not include the PCR rating.

Be careful of appyling those form rules on any non-favorites, espeically longshots as they don't seem to work.

[twindouble]

"What do you guys do to assess form?"

--DarkDream;


Well, Andy Beyer just a short while ago said he thinks now that the most important thing in handicapping is the trainer. In other words in my opinion he just became a handicapper.

Once you get to know the trainers, you'll see patterns develope over time. That can take different forms depending on the trainer and their ability to spot there horses including their methods in getting the horse in form.

I'll just list one and maybe this can take off and be a good thread.

Depending on the class of horses you play, I find in the lower ranks horses go through a form cycle, in other words they are raced into form. You can see that develope in the PP's and you can conclude what the trainers intent is by how he spots his horse off a layoff by giving him prep races at different or capable distances, then when his form has improved he'll spot him in the right conditions where he has good chance to win. That pattern will show up and you can trust the trainer intends to win.

Anyone else?

T.D.

[kenwoodallpromos]

I look at each horse's PP's to look for a pattern established as to training and racing schedule that is best for that horse; I also look for patterns of ITM success as to racing situation.
Cowboy Badgett was off 4 months with an injury, was brought back and raced every two weeks, the the horse was claimed and given 5 weeks, then another month. But that series of 2 weeks between races did the horse in- it broke down 2nd off the claim and was put down. The horse was overworked earlier.
If you can read the PP's as a flowchart you will be able to see if a large % of horses are fit and at the right level.
Of course, form applies more to the more predictable races (sprints, favorites with an inside post, etc) than to less predictable ones.

[DarkDream]

While I don't disagree that observing trainers and how they train horses and their strengths and weaknesses are important, I'm more interested in specifics regarding a horse's running line, or workouts -- patterns that seem to suggest a horse is on form or peaking into form.

For example, there has been a lot of positive things said about a horse that returns after 7 days to race, or a horse that has a "Big Win" usually defined as winning by 5 lengths or not being ahead by more than two lengths at the stretch call, not loosing ground in the stretch and winning by 3 lengths.

These sort of things are regardless of trainers and are readily testible and identifiable in past performances.

Have people noticed such patterns as loosing and gaining lengths and so on. I believe such analysis is done for long-shot systems. What type of things do people look for to tip their hat that the horse is ready to score a win?

--DarkDream

[Bruddah]

This is an "old standard" on form. It is so old, that with the advent of computers and electronic handicapping, I am suprised how many of the younger handicappers aren't aware of it. I learned it back in the 70's from an old handicapper at Oaklawn. I now refer to it as "POLO" or Peaking OFF Lay OFF.

Look for a horse coming to his third race after a 30 day lay off, or more. The horse must not have won in it's first or second start. It also should have been within 6 lengths of the winner in it's last start. In checking many PP's over the years, for this condition, I have spotted many nice winners. I always notated POLO beside the name of the horse on the form. Reading a horses PP's, you will notice a horses 3rd race after a lay off may not of been a winner, but they were very competitive in the race. Also, with the advent of BEYERS, you will notice a lot of their highest numbers were under these conditions. It has been very indicative of a trainer bringing a horse to form and ready for today's race.

[andicap]

Absolutely the study of form cycles is very important in my handicapping in trying to assess which horse is headed for a peak effort and which are regressing.

I think the works of Ragozin and Cary Fotias are good in assessing form cycles, although nothing is 100%, you're talking probabilities here. E.G., not every horse "bounces," but if a 7-5 shot just ran a huge "top" I'll be happy to bet against him because there's a good probability he will regress after that strenuous effort.

Fotias talks about a "new pace top" to assess peaking horses, those who's previous 4f times (sprint or routes) are his best without the horse topping off in his final time. (There are many variations and this is just for dirt races. For turf he talks about "turf decline lines," etc. "Blinkers Off" is an excellent read for learning about form cycles.)

Ragozin talks about "recovery" efforts, "forging" horses, etc. I don't use either of these "Sheets," but I try to incorporate their principles in my handicapping.

[rastajenk]

I don't see how a discussion of form can not include a mention of the conditions of a race. All the form in the world won't help if the horse is over his head, condition-wise. The trainer of a returning horse probably doesn't give his runner an afternoon workout or two, then thumb through the book and say, "whoo-hoo, there's a juicy spot." More likely, he's picked out that race well in advance, and, assuming the return races are non-winning efforts, he still has a horse that fits the conditions. That's why the "third race off the layup" angle is useful; not so much that it takes three races to get back into winning "form," but that it takes a few (i.e., three) races for all the similar but better horses on the grounds to move on to tougher assignments.

The horses that finish ahead of his are, most likely, no longer eligible for that class and condition. So anything that shows any consistency at all is going to have his "turn" to win if he stays at the same level; if he drops down a notch or two, he'll be a short-priced favorite. Of course, it's complicated by the fact that others may be dropping into his level as well, or he runs into a recent phenom streaking through conditions; the former is certainly a common occurrence, fortunately the latter isn't.

Well, anyway, that's my take. Good form and properly fitted conditions can be a powerful combination, but one without the other is still a crapshoot.

[nobeyerspls]

I'm new to this place, a refugee from drf.com. Nice to see a handicapping forum where people actually discuss handicapping.
I used to think my task was to identify the winner. That's how it was in the Fifties when the only exotic bet was the double and you had eight races at your local track. Now I want to find live longshots for vertical and horizontal plays with large returns. If the "form" horse is a low odds play then I skip that race unless I need to use it in a pick 3 or pick 4.
You might say I'm looking for anti-form, i.e a horse with a lousy record tryind a new surface, or a filly laid off and coming back under a new trainer. Most value is found in horses working their way through conditions and leveraging exotic bets with these can provide solid returns if the angle you use to find them is other than "form"..

[kev]

That's what Andicap was talking about, finding horses who are coming back into form. You might have a horse that fin. from last race on 5th4L 4th6L 11th5L, looks to be showing no sings of life, but within the speed fig. pattern or maybe the running lines you'll see something about the horse that he/she is about to run something big.

[twindouble]

I don't see how a discussion of form can not include a mention of the conditions of a race. All the form in the world won't help if the horse is over his head, condition-wise. The trainer of a returning horse probably doesn't give his runner an afternoon workout or two, then thumb through the book and say, "whoo-hoo, there's a juicy spot." More likely, he's picked out that race well in advance, and, assuming the return races are non-winning efforts, he still has a horse that fits the conditions. That's why the "third race off the layup" angle is useful; not so much that it takes three races to get back into winning "form," but that it takes a few (i.e., three) races for all the similar but better horses on the grounds to move on to tougher assignments.

The horses that finish ahead of his are, most likely, no longer eligible for that class and condition. So anything that shows any consistency at all is going to have his "turn" to win if he stays at the same level; if he drops down a notch or two, he'll be a short-priced favorite. Of course, it's complicated by the fact that others may be dropping into his level as well, or he runs into a recent phenom streaking through conditions; the former is certainly a common occurrence, fortunately the latter isn't.

Well, anyway, that's my take. Good form and properly fitted conditions can be a powerful combination, but one without the other is still a crapshoot.


rastagenk; This is what I had to say on your subject.

Once you get to know the trainers, you'll see patterns develope over time. That can take different forms depending on the trainer and their ability to spot their horses including their methods in getting the horse in form.

By spot, I meant finding the right conditions. To me the classic example of this is Cigar, the connections did a fantastic job keeping his winning streak going, aside from the fact he was a dam good horse but not "great." Yes, I know, great can be subjective.

[hurrikane]

IMHO when talking form it really depends on the class level you are talking about.

Cheap claimers at MNR things are completely different than a 50k claimer at SA.
Alw horses are much different and trained differenly than claimers. GR1 horses are almost impossible to track form on as they dont race often enough. That becomes more of a trainer/wk scenario.

With cheaper horses when a trainer get him ready he has to place him now. these horses can't usually hold form for long and he has one or maybe 2 races to score. After that it's back to the training track. Many times you will find horses that appear to be out of their class range when in fact they are peaking and the trainer just can't find anouther place to run him. Many time these horses are good enough to beat the other more 'classy' horses because many times are all off form anyway. These types pay boxcars. And everyone stands around scratching their heads or worse, saying the game is crooked.

It is a completely different animal than the alw nw2 at BEL.

I love horses possessing an advantage over the others like early speed or vel but look like crap on paper. These are the types that typical pp readers dismiss as off form or out of class. They go off at big odds and pay often enough to make them very profitable.

[twindouble]

Hurrikane; I agree; There's not a heck of a lot that seperates those cheeper horses, form and soundness play a big part.

question, what do you mean by, "vel?"

[Overlay]

question, what do you mean by, "vel?"

I would assume Hurrikane was using shorthand for "velocity".

[twindouble]

I would assume Hurrikane was using shorthand for "velocity".


Thanks Overlay; Never looked at horse racing in that term, just projectiles, wind speed, rockets and so on. A better term would be controlled velocity and that would convert to pace.

[kitts]

Many tried and true ways to asess form. Since most of my success comes in bottom level claimers, the "antiform" mentioned earlier applies. Look to see if there is any hope that a six-race loser might reach back to that one win showing way back. Perhaps a pattern can be discerned. Past class can help
if it is "way past" class.

[JustMissed]

I love horses possessing an advantage over the others like early speed or vel but look like crap on paper. These are the types that typical pp readers dismiss as off form or out of class. They go off at big odds and pay often enough to make them very profitable.

Hurrikane, you are right on target with your post.

I play Mountaineer regularly and my son and I hang onto every word by Mark and Nancy.

Some nights Mark will pick a horse that you would need Sherlock Holmes' spy glass to find any glimmer of improving form or even a chance to finish in the top 6.

Sure as they make moonshine in WV, that horse will win or run a very close second.

All we can do is shake our head and ponder what the heck does Mark know and how does he know it?

I suspect he handicaps the Trainer as much as he handicaps the race and knows when they have one ready to have it's picture taken.

JM :)

[michiken]

How do you assess the form of the typical 'quitter' Early horse that is coming out of a fast pace i.e. CHEAP SPEED?

I bet against these types of horses because they earned a higher fig due to a fast pace (even though they were still decelerating down the lane). This is why I adding a turn time and final fraction ratings to rate the 'form' and validity of the speed fig. Speed figs are just a snapshot in time.

Unless these types are lone early or unpressured early, they melt in the stretch. A horse in good form should be able to reproduce its speed fig.

These high energy types often go down as false favorites at Mountaineer. Why do you think there are so many 5 and 5 1/2 furlong races being carded there now? A few years back, most sprints were 6 furlongs....

[toetoe]

Rasta mon, very good post. I was thinking about this stuff today, on the way to the dumps. I decided thoroughbreds should emulate the trotters, and have some races for winners, rather than losers. These would bar the talented horses that run 2nd, 3rd or 4th 60% of the time, and would be in deep doodoo if they ever advanced to the next level.