Do your figs hold up on off-tracks

[andicap]

With all the rain in the Northeast lately I'm wondering if people handicap in the usual fashion on off-tracks. That is, do you use your usual figures and make adjustments only if there is some obvious bias, like a front-running track, etc.?

Do you account for a horse's off-track record?
Mud breeding?

etc.

[kitts]

I used to worry about off-tracks. Then, at a seminar conducted by Gordon Jones, a student asked Gordon, how does he handle off-track handicapping to which Gordon replied, "Handicap the same as fast tracks but bet less." This advice has helped me a lot and saved me a lot of time. I handicap all dirt races on a fast track basis and it seems to be working well for me. I try to maintain track models as all fast tracks. I adopted this practice in the '80s so it has been tested enough for me.

[kenwoodallpromos]

I have to know exactly what is "off" that makes it an off-track- how muddy, how fast the seal made the track.
I used to be lost in the mud but doing better since keeping an eye out for false favs on an off-track.
I usually do not bet horses who like to go wide, on an off-track at all. And I like horses who have shown good speed on an off-track of the same type run on currently.

[Hosshead]

I think I am more wary of a horse that ran good last out, on a muddy track, and is trying to repeat the performance today, on a fast track.
IMO horses rarely run the same on both surfaces.
Tracks that are : Good, Fast-Wet, just Sealed, are a different call.

[rastajenk]

"Mud moves up the good ones" is an adage I've always relied on.

[andicap]

An overwhelming response.

I guess I'll have to post a liberal or conservative screed in order to get more feedback next time.

Sloppy tracks are nothing but a liberal plot to destroy racing!

It's pretty lame when the off-topic board seems livelier than the horse handicapping one. (Better yet, we can beat the Beyer figures to death some more.)

PA, it's a distraction to the real purpose of this site.

Kill that puppy. (but keep the off-topic sports)

[cj]

I don't bet sloppy tracks any differently than any other day. Doesn't seem to matter much to me.

[ryesteve]

I don't do anything differently. My bets tend to be biased toward early speed types, and if anything, the slop tends to help.

[PaceAdvantage]

PA, it's a distraction to the real purpose of this site.

Kill that puppy. (but keep the off-topic sports)


I don't think they have much to do with each other. Why do you think off-topic politics is a distraction to the horse board?

[Rockford]

With all the rain in the Northeast lately I'm wondering if people handicap in the usual fashion on off-tracks. That is, do you use your usual figures and make adjustments only if there is some obvious bias, like a front-running track, etc.?

Do you account for a horse's off-track record?
Mud breeding?

etc.

I think that many bettors overreact to the "Wet" record in the earnings box, and that creates overlays on others. That is especially true of the everyday claimers, who's wet track records are meaningless out of the context of their overall form cycle.

As far as breeding goes, I've never been able to apply it successfully. I think the Mike Helm books are interesting, but not actionable. When I look at pages and pages of sire rating stats, I ask myself, "could I tell the difference between this and some random distribution of results?" Probably not. - Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying breeding doesn't play some role in success on different surfaces, just that I can't base a wager on it.

[Tom]

I let the race shapes tell me if an off tack race is usable or not, but I prefer not to use them.
I like the horses for courses angle - sloppy at Bel is not sly at Sar - but if it's raining at Sar and the horses has a good line in the mud last year, I mkae him a contender (current class and form being acceptable).

I tend to avoid palying on tracks when it is raining, generally, though. Just too many fast racks available to me to waste my time.
I use those rainy days to go hunting in Off Topics! ;) :lol:

[twindouble]

With all the rain in the Northeast lately I'm wondering if people handicap in the usual fashion on off-tracks. That is, do you use your usual figures and make adjustments only if there is some obvious bias, like a front-running track, etc.?

Do you account for a horse's off-track record?
Mud breeding?

etc.

andicap; I believe I stated in another thread in different words that not much has changed over the years when it comes to picking horses with the excption of an increase in drug use, long lay offs and the design of tracks. The materials, bace and drainage systems are geared toward speed. There's no such thing as a heavy track any more or horses to be clasified as "mudders".

Any horse thats in form, has speed and fits the conditions or out classes the field is dangerous on a fast track as well as a wet, sly, or muddy track, regardless of the breeding, plus horses that you think might be coming into form. Even horses that have long layoffs that have speed, today you have to give them a good look as well on a sly or muddy track sealed or not. A good track is tough to nail down because of the rate that the tracks drain and dry out. Closers do move up on a good track taking advantage of the bias that exists for a period of time but you'll notice as the day goes on most will stay off the rail and the track is almost running fair again. What validates my thinking is today a track can go from sly to fast before the day ends.

Good luck,

T.D.

[cnollfan]

Agree with Gordon Jones above -- I basically ignore track conditions as far as individual horse preferences go. I tend to think of mud as an exaggerator rather than a changer -- i.e. a poorly-meant horse will get beat worse in the mud than on a fast track, but a well-meant horse will run well either way.

Turf horses running on dirt are completely different., of course. Many turf horses can't stand up in the mud. No secret there.

[betchatoo]

I do handicap differently on sloppy tracks. I researched the most predictive methods in the software I use (JCapper), and over about 45,000 races the ROI on sloppy tracks for these methods was 11-12% worse in the slop. I am more patient than usual during sloppy conditions and wait for horses that have excellent rain breeding or have run well under the conditions previously, and seem to be coming into the race in good form.

[Valuist]

I think each surface is different. For instance, at Hawthorne, the surface usually gets more early speed favoring when its sloppy or wet fast. The opposite is generally (not always but generally) true at Arlington. Keeneland, which often favors front runners to some extent when its dry, gets even more speed favoring when its sloppy. At Churchill doesn't seem to get speed biased when its off.

As for the individual horses, I tend to focus more on the horse's recent off track races. Also the DRF lumps "good" tracks in with sloppy tracks in horse's wet track records and those two conditions may end up being completely different.

I always scale back wagers when the track comes up sloppy or muddy, or pass on that days card.

[JackS]

Handicap for fast but perhaps shift your prefferences for speed slightly or wholley.
That horse you loved last night in the fifth that figured to be midpack at the half may have had his chances severly compromised because of rain.
Total emphisis on running style might be the new order of the day.
The above recs seem to be pretty universal but probably best to make this judgement on a track to track basis if you have the data.
Also keep in mind, that track conditions may change during extended periods of rain when the surface may go from wet-fast to sloppy to muddy and slow. My advise- initially accept that the track will play to speed until you know otherwise.

[twindouble]

I think each surface is different. For instance, at Hawthorne, the surface usually gets more early speed favoring when its sloppy or wet fast. The opposite is generally (not always but generally) true at Arlington. Keeneland, which often favors front runners to some extent when its dry, gets even more speed favoring when its sloppy. At Churchill doesn't seem to get speed biased when its off.

As for the individual horses, I tend to focus more on the horse's recent off track races. Also the DRF lumps "good" tracks in with sloppy tracks in horse's wet track records and those two conditions may end up being completely different.

I always scale back wagers when the track comes up sloppy or muddy, or pass on that days card.

Good point on different tracks, I get stuck in the mud not most handicappers get to know the tracks they are playing when it comes to wet track conditions. I've never done a study on how each track is designed to support what I said but I would venture to say at most tracks, the 3 top choice horses on a sly or muddy track have eary or tactical speed, morning line and off odds. I would wager their win percentage will be much higher than closers. My point was that speed carries further today than in the past including wet conditions. I'll hang my hat on that because I've made that necessary adjustment in my handicappping.

[JackS]

Valuist brings up a good point. The question we usually ask ourselves "can this horse handle an off track?" Again, on a basis of often never being really sure, assume that your preffered horse will.
I have read this statement many times in more books than one, " Do not play horses who have showed no ability on an off track". Good advise perhaps if the horse in question was favored or low-odds and the off-track conditions box shows 6-0-0-0. However what about the horse with this exact record that shows odds ranging from 8-1 to 40-1 in the same six races?. This horse (if you like him today), should be played and given a benefit of a doubt. It's my opinion the 90% of all horses will eventually compete successfully on an off track and until you know better, don't put total reliance on this seemingly negative report.
Next time you handicap and play an off-track, keep these suggestions in mind. One other thing. A horse that looks like this will usually be somewhat shunned at the tellers and the price will no doubt be fair.

[Fastracehorse]

Beyers that are too generous often occur on sy tracks - IMO, don't be too quick to dismiss any dominating performances.

fffastt

[Valuist]

I think it really depends on how much sand and how much clay make up the composition of the track. Belmont, I believe is more sand based and speed usually tends to do well there when its off. I believe Arlington has more clay in it and AP tends to get kind of soupy and horses tend to tire quicker there than when its dry.