PDA

View Full Version : success JUST by association?


46zilzal
10-12-2006, 06:44 PM
Two Brazilian grade one stakes performers make their NA debut. One is from the Frankle barn the other from the well renown Pablo Lobo. They have won 38 and 40% respectively. So who gets all the betting action? but then who gets the win? Funny how people forget it is the HORSE running NOT the trainer.

4th race - Oak Tree At Santa Anita - October 12, 2006
Pgm Horse Win Place Show
4 River Savage (BRZ) 12.00 6.60 5.00
5 Lake Marina 7.40 5.00
6 Plata Quemada (ARG) 4.00

cj
10-12-2006, 07:02 PM
Not only that, the two had faced each other the last two times in South America. They split decisons. The favorite today won at 12f, while the 1 horse today won at 10f. With today's race at 9f, I thought this was a no brainer. The rest of the field was pretty weak to boot.

bigmack
10-12-2006, 07:15 PM
4th race - Oak Tree At Santa Anita - October 12, 2006
Pgm Horse Win Place Show
4 River Savage (BRZ) 12.00 6.60 5.00
5 Lake Marina 7.40 5.00
6 Plata Quemada (ARG) 4.00
You posted the results for the 3rd, 46.

At the same time Frankel got Naughty he picked up Niquita, a four-year-old daughter of Midnight Tiger, won one of five starts and placed second three other times, including a pair of runner-up efforts in both the Grande Premio Piracicaba (Brz-G1) and Grande Premio Diana (Brz-G1), the first two legs of Sao Paulo's Triple Crown series for fillies last season.—

4th race - Oak Tree At Santa Anita - October 12, 2006
1 Nakaba (BRZ) 26.20 9.40 4.00
3 Ghurra 4.40 3.00
2 Naughty Rafaela (BRZ) 3.00

46zilzal
10-12-2006, 07:48 PM
results are the same no matter my mistaken label.

classhandicapper
10-12-2006, 08:12 PM
A few observations......

The Frankel horse was favored in both races against the #1, including after the losing effort. We don't have trip notes etc..., but being favored "again" after just losing to the same horse suggests something about the trip. The horse also had good efforts at a shorter distance than todays.

I think these are the stats that has the biggest impact on the odds.

Lobo was 0-30 with turf layoffs over 180 days over the last 5 years coming into today (and not much better on dirt).

Frankel was 57-200 with turf layoffs over 180 days over the last 5 years coming into today.

Lobo was 0-28 with turfers first time in his barn.

Frankel was 57-140 with turfers first time in his barn.

I can't tell you what the appropriate odds were in this race, but the Frankel horse deserved to be favored over the #1. It's a matter of by how much. That's always the tough part. :rolleyes:

IMHO, if you discount the impact that having a superior trainer has on the probability of a horse running back to its form (or improving further), you are almost certainly making errors in your odds line. I know, because I spent many years believing that the trainer factor was overrated and argued that point of view constantly. I cashed some tickets on longer priced horses here or there because of my beliefs, but I was wrong way more often than not. It took a long time for me to understand this. It's almost embarassing how long because my two best horseplayer friends profit almost exclusively via trainer information like the above.

If you want to test this, look at the record of one of the super trainers whose horses usually get bet very heavily relative to what the horse has shown on form. (pletcher is a good example) Take a look at all his odds on favorites. Most trainers like this will equal or outperform the take on odds on favorites relative to the typical odds on horse.

If these horses were taking tons of unwarranted money because of the trainers' reputations, the returns on their favorites should be abysmal relative to the take (underperforming the typical odds on favorite). The fact that many of these trainers outperform the take with short priced favorites despite all that extra money demonstrates that many of these horses are either improving or holding their form better than for the average/below average trainer. (naturally they all strengths and weaknesses, but in general the trainer is worth something independent of form).

All that said, I didn't play the race and the price does look kind of attractive on #1, but the odds weren't insane. IMO, there was a very good reason for favoring the Frankel horse over the #1. It's a question of degree. I didn't see the race either, but it looks from the chart like the Frankel horse had the tougher trip.

the_fat_man
10-12-2006, 08:28 PM
Lovely.

Looks like they're doing the Meadowlands thing out at Oaktree:

abbreviated headon shots (just the break and the stretch run)

Go idea. No sense wasting the tape.

And, knowing how quickly GOOD THINGS catch on,

I'm sure this will quickly become the norm.

pic6vic
10-12-2006, 08:53 PM
Frankels' horse had enough trouble to cost him the race.

bigmack
10-12-2006, 10:10 PM
results are the same no matter my mistaken label.
? Most strange post 46. Hope all is well.

Overlay
10-12-2006, 10:56 PM
No cause for concern. 46 was just saying that, although he may have labeled the race incorrectly in his initial post (i.e., as the 4th race rather than the 3rd), the result he posted was still accurate. River Savage won the race that 46 was wanting to talk about.

njcurveball
10-13-2006, 12:22 AM
I hope we all can agree that it was the 4th race that had the horses shipping to the United States.

They both had last raced on December 3, 2005. So given the long layoff it is standard practice to check the trainer and his stats with layoff horses.

In doing so the crowd bet heavily on Frankel's horse. Were they wrong? The race comment for the winner sounds like a dream trip

saved ground, chased, 3 wide into lane, rallied,led,held gamely

The race comment for Frankel's horse sounds like a nightmare ride.

chased, inside, steadied 5/16,rail move,tight 1/16,missed 2nd

This is the problem with adding lengths for horses going wide. In this case the horse on the inside probably lost 2 or more lengths by Nakatani trying to save ground in a 6 horse field.

If/when these 2 horses match up again, I certainly hope the crowd looks blindly at the last race and makes Nakaba the favorite. I will play the troubled horse losing by less 2 lengths almost every time.

Jim

cj
10-13-2006, 02:45 PM
...In doing so the crowd bet heavily on Frankel's horse. Were they wrong? The race comment for the winner sounds like a dream trip

saved ground, chased, 3 wide into lane, rallied,led,held gamely

The race comment for Frankel's horse sounds like a nightmare ride.

chased, inside, steadied 5/16,rail move,tight 1/16,missed 2nd



Absolutely they were wrong. Not so much that they might have tabbed the better horse, but the huge discrepancy in the odds. Had they been 2-1 and 3-1, that would be different.

bigmack
10-13-2006, 03:25 PM
Absolutely they were wrong. Not so much that they might have tabbed the better horse, but the huge discrepancy in the odds. Had they been 2-1 and 3-1, that would be different.
Glad we're on the same page with the race & all - Agree w/ the "OLay" on Nakaba. The race was a mere perfect example of public going with the wrong flow. I say, dummy-up that public more often.

njcurveball
10-13-2006, 03:45 PM
Lobo was 0-30 with turf layoffs over 180 days over the last 5 years coming into today (and not much better on dirt).

How much chance do you give a trainer who is 0 for 30?

cj
10-13-2006, 03:56 PM
I don't look at stats like that in this case. The horse wasn't in his care before the layoff.

I look for reasons to pass on favorites, not 12-1 shots. I am by no means trying to say the horse was a lock or anything, just a good bet at those odds. It is very rare we can compare foreign shippers with actual running lines from the same race, let alone two! The fact the 1 had beaten the 2 at the distance much closer to today's was a big reason to pass on the favorite.

I'm not convinced the 2 was really better anyway, but that is certainly a subjective opinion. I'll have a more informed opinion once I make the pace and speed figures for the race and see the shape.

cj
10-13-2006, 04:00 PM
A few observations......

The Frankel horse was favored in both races against the #1, including after the losing effort. We don't have trip notes etc..., but being favored "again" after just losing to the same horse suggests something about the trip. The horse also had good efforts at a shorter distance than todays.


You know I think you give the public too much credit sometimes, but I can see your reasoning. But now you are even giving the Brazilians this same credit? No way, Jose! (and that is Joe-say, like the Portugese say!)

Isn't it just as likely the change from 1 1/4 to 1 1/2 had as much to do with the results as any supposed bad trips you are dreaming up?

RXB
10-13-2006, 04:04 PM
I look for reasons to pass on favorites, not 12-1 shots. I am by no means trying to say the horse was a lock or anything, just a good bet at those odds.

The salient point.