How Accurate are Workouts?

[sq764]

I was watching a race the other day (cannot remember where), and a horse was shipping in after a year and a half layoff. He showed zero works over that entire layoff.. He went off at 3/1, off a 12-1 morning line and won easily..

The horse had some back class and had been facing much better in his last race, a year and a half ago.. So it was pretty obvious that he had worked out multiple times on the farm..

To me, when I see these situations, its always a pass, because you know that he had to have some unlisted works, and because he was bet down from 12/1 to 3/1, someone knew something..

This is why, like harness racing, there should be a mandatory listed work if a horse is off for xx amount of months. I think this is the only way to try and protect the betting public.

[so.cal.fan]

In California, it is a CHRB law that a horse must show at least 3 works, unless it has been racing.
I don't bet tracks outside of So. Cal. because of these strange workout rules. I know there is a lot of training centers, because my son owns a horse in Kentucky. They just don't seem to be required to record the works.
Now if I were back there, I would watch for the type of horse sq764 mentions. If it looked good before the race......you most likely have a very good bet.

[Tom]

The 3-1 odds were the key to this one...it wasn't the general public betting a long layoff horse down. On the one hand, you can assume the horse is "live" and on the other, why risk a bet on a long layoff horse?
It was a good race to pass.
As to protecting the betting public, that was a good one...LOL, my sides hurt, you nut, you <G>.

[sq764]

Hey.. The SEC says they are actually going to crack down on BS earnings reports to protect the stockholders, so maybe there is hope for the racing execs to follow suit??

[JustMissed]

For a long shot/trainer intent handicapper these are the easiest plays around. You usually only need to know a few things:

1. Is the horse owner/trained?

2. How bad does the owner or trainer need a win?

3. Does the trainer have a history of bringing horses back off the farm and winning?

4. How good is the jockey and does he have a history of winning on layoff horses?

5. Watch for this-If the odds get too low the trainer may hold the horse back to darken its form, if the horse comes back and goes off at high odds with the same jock next race you had better bet heavy cause he's probably going to win going away.

6. Also, if a router, the trainer will often bring the horse back with a 2211 pattern. Two sprints, a form darkened route and then today's route. If the router comes off layoff with a sprint it probably an exercise rise. Or the same for a sprinter coing back to a short route.

As far a being fair-if you learn to spot these layoff plays you'll be the one smiling with a big fat bankroll in your pocket.


Good luck,

JustMissed

[BillW]

JustMissed,

This is why I rarely support the call for better data in horseracing. There is a lot of information hidden in the data that we have today. That is one aspect that makes handicapping so intriguing. on the other hand, if the info were perfect we'd all have the same edge. :rolleyes:


Bill

[BIG HIT]

Hi guy's alway's thought horse off that long have to show a work or the work was not in the fourm it would be announce over p.a. system.Are you sure it was not.?Think it is a rule

[Rick]

Well, sometimes what seems to be a negative is really a positive. Enough said.

[so.cal.fan]

What is going on in Arizona, Rick? Is there something you want to tell us?
I thought they were pretty straight with the works there.
Now, New Mexico is another story. Never been there, but I heard they have a lot of funny stuff going on. Could be just BS, don't really know.'
I do know, some of those Arizona trainers who come here to So. Cal. are pretty slick. Eric Krueljac, Jeff Mullins, Cory Owens come to mind.
There was also an incident last year of a "phony" Beyer number on a shipper, who won for fun at, I believe Santa Anita. Any one remember that one, may have been two years ago?

[Rick]

socal,

I don't think it's much different here than elsewhere, but wherever you have small purses there's certainly an incentive to cash a bet now and then to help pay the bills. I've seen some ranches around here with some very nice training tracks so I assume they're being used for non-public workouts. The same was true in Northern California around Pleasanton and Livermore. There probably aren't as many places they can go in Southern California and the purses are higher there. I remember horses shipping in from Caliente winning in Southern California at 60-1 odds so I think anyone with a really nice horse from a minor track would want to give it a shot there. As to the 3 workout rule, I think you could find at least a few horses every week with less than 3 listed workouts in DRF.

[so.cal.fan]

Rick,
You're right about the No. Cal angle. Every so often one of the sharp stables will have a horse training up there, send it down here to break it's maiden, usually at a very good price.
You have to wonder why they would be training a horse in No. Cal. pass all the easy maiden races up there, to ship down here.
I'll bet there are angles like this that work in every part of the country, you just have to research them, and wait.

[highnote]

Our horse came off a six week layoff and had a dismal "official" work over the track. The workout time was so bad the clocker asked our trainer what "official" time she wanted him to record. The listed workout time was totally fictitious!

In this case it didn't hurt the public too much. He looked bad on paper and he lost his race by a mile.

[Jeff P]

I don't know how it is elsewhere in North America, but in AZ I have seen a handful of cases where a trainer has worked Horse A and deliberately told the clocker that it was horse B. The works later appeared in the form as belonging to horse B. In one of those instances in question horse A won easily at long odds. The bottom line at minor tracks is that they're not always diligent about identifying which horse(s) are actually actually going around the track in the mornings like they are in the afternoon. The practice is not widespread but it can and does happen.

Food for thought.

[Tom]

So much for the integrity of some trainers and clockers.
A lie is a lie. These people need lifetime suspensions fro the sport.
With the amount of money being wagered at tracks everyday, there is no room for liars and damn liars. And no matter how you slice it, these cumballs are nothing more than liars.
Just what detergent can be used to clean up racing and get rid of the ring these people leave around it?
Zero tolerance for cheaters and liars. First offense, goodbye forever.

[highnote]

Tom,
I agree with you - maybe not banned for life for the first offense, but certainly a penalty for giving false info.

By the way, we longer employ that trainer.

Racetrack employees, management and horsemen seem to forget who the customers of racetracks are. The customers are not the owners, not the employees, not the trainers and not the management. The customers are the bettors. The horsepeople look out for each other, as in the case of our former trainer and the track clocker, but they could care less about the bettors.

The only recourse for us bettors is to not bet. I have certainly curtailed or stopped my betting at certain tracks. If bettors stop betting the tracks will either change they way they do business or go out of business.

When the tracks finally admit that the bettors are the customers things may get better.

[Derek2U]

I think many of you are2 serious, and NOT serious enough
where it counts. Forget about workouts ... after all what are
you calling for, the WO Patrol? Grow up & accept the reality
of your sport. Maybe most of you, no matter how much data you
see -- even PerfECt data -- could not make you winninG players.
In other words, most of you will be Losers no matter what.
Maybe -- maybe -- thats unfortunate -- but a fact anyways.
Give IT UP or just accept it as the price YOU (not me) GOTTA PAY
for your Fun. hey what the H ... its your destiny probably .. but
in my case, I understand TheHorse & I dont impose some silly
standard on IT.. so just adapt or take Up bowling. WOrkOuts
are meaningfull but dont get crazy about it all & DemanD a
Horse carry ID with it always cause you Be killing your own GamE.
And where would that Get U?

[Tom]

Horses carrying ID?
What are you talking about?
I know I shouldn't ask, but I have to.....:confused:

[BillW]

Originally posted by Tom
Horses carrying ID?
What are you talking about?
I know I shouldn't ask, but I have to.....:confused:


Well, yea ... next time you see a horse, just ask him to say "cheese" :D

[Jeff P]

Racehorses do carry an ID. Each has a lip tattoo with a unique identifying number. If you watch closely in the stalls while the horses are being saddled you can see track personnel inspect the tattoo of each horse against his paperwork. That's what they do in the afternoon on race day.

I have never seen them check this during morning workouts. And the reality of the game is they probably never will.

[Dick Schmidt]

Derek,

Once again you have managed to be as insulting and demeaning as possible, and on a subject where I agree with your position no less. I never look at workouts and think that those who emphasize them are not looking at reality, but to label them lifetime losers because they would like more accurate numbers is just a bit over the top.

You are getting very close a lot of "ignore" lists here, Der. Maybe you should, like, just type when you are, like, sober. Hehe.

Dick

[GR1@HTR]

My everchanging dB usually consist of the current meet data:

The following data is based on any horse having a "A" rated workout listed for its most recent workout (must be w/ in the last 30 days). An A rated workout is defined as either a bullet or a workout that ranks among the top 10% of fastest w/o times within the last 365 days:

BEL
33/230
14.35%
-11.02 ROI

SAR
19/81
23.46%
1.13 ROI

DMR
28/111
25.23%
1.60

HOL
62/455
13.63%
-37.41

LS
54/359
15.04%
-8.52

RET
7/32
21.88%
1.77

LAD
18/116
15.52%
-46.72

[highnote]

GR1,
Good idea. Yours is probably a better way to look at workouts. If a horse has a bullet work then the time is probably more accurate than that of a horse whose work was 29th fastest of 35 others that same day.

You put two clockers handtiming a horse during workouts and you'll get two different times.

What's probably more important is how far the horse worked, the number of furlongs the horse worked in the last month, and the fact that the horse even got a work over the track.

That said, I did have a workout factor in an old factor model I made. I only used workouts as a factor because they were statistically significant. By themselves they probably won't put you onto a lot of winners, but combined with other handicapping factors they can give you some idea about the level of fitness of a horse.

[so.cal.fan]

GR1:

An A rated workout is defined as either a bullet or a workout that ranks among the top 10% of fastest w/o times within the last 365 days:

Am I reading you right? Wouldn't it be a bullet or in the 10% fastest that day?
Also, is this at the track the horse is running at?
I would think that would make a difference?

Here in So. Cal. we have "fairly" accurate works.
They have to identify themselves at the gap.
They fine trainers for trying to sneak one in.
They recently got after some trainers for working too early, before the clockers got there.
We have so many clockers (good ones) and even more private clockers, that very, very little gets by.
Now, the times and even the distances are only about 80% accurate, but that is better than many of the Eastern tracks.

[GR1@HTR]

SCF,

A rated workout must meet 1 of 2 conditions:

A) Bullet workout
or
B) Workout ranks within the top 10% fastest at the distance and surface (same track) over the last 365 days.

[hurrikane]

I know an owner of some horses...harness. Each winter he moves to the Meadowlands. Before that he lays his horses off. Swims them. Then gives the a slow work if required by the track.
He does all of this specifically to get a price on his horses.
And he does.

From this I learned one thing. Most works are meaningless.
My point is..except for perhaps the frequency of the work pattern or data like GR1 shows you're best bet is trainer patterns. These guys and gals don't make this up as they go along. Forget the clockers and works. You can work a horse as slow as you want and he can be in great shape. No matter what you do with the rules there is no rule you can make that says you have to work your horse all out today.

It's irrellevant. IMHO.

[so.cal.fan]

Hurrikane:
Even with our more accurate works here in So. Cal. I think you are right! I always used a guide line. I liked to see a work of at least 5 furlongs or more within the past 13 days. (note: this is for distance races only)
Another guide was I liked to see a horse come back and work at least 4 furlongs within 2 weeks of a start.
The problem is, they miss works, they get the distances wrong and I have found more and more trainers are working their claiming horses on drugs to lose them or perhaps not lose them.
I think the above guides work well in Stake races, you won't find too many not fitting into both patterns.

[Derek2U]

I speak ONLY of NY races: Workouts ARE without question
crucial to handicapping. Of course, who will ever know the
extent of their accuracy/inaccuracy, but I got to think they're
VERY reliable & accurate. I look at Frequency, but also Distance
and Time .... honestly, I just eyeball them and make the decision:
GREAT / HO-HUM and move on. But I never ignore them.

[sq764]

Derek, I just read your last posts and basically (after all the insulting drivel), you came to 2 points:

1) Workouts can be meaningful, and
2) Workouts are not always accurate...

Well, no sh|t!!