same old story with tracks

[WINMANWIN]

I have been wagering on horses for many yrs now.I have noticed for many yrs, that racetracks do not divulge blinker changes on/off
in some races.The pp's dont have the info and the public address
announcer sometimes doesn't announce the change.I have written to nyra and they have not responded.I e-mailed drf.com and bris and they reported they only can publish the info the tracks give them.I agree with that,My reply to the form and bris was,you should complain that fans notice the changes,and are peeved that the changes are hidden to the public.The tracks may listen, but I'm sure nothing will change.Also, in mdn races with 1st time starters,why cant blinkers be identified in the pp's also.Sure,you can view the post parade,but with simulcasting
all over, info is the key to success and sometimes,lack of info
cost players BUCKO'S...........

[PurplePower]

WinMan,
Rules of Racing in most states govern what a track must do regarding blinkers changes. Since 1988, in Texas and all other states where I raced when training (Minnesota, Iowa, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana) the Rules of Racing required that blinker changes be approved by the starter and announced to the public. Occasionally a trainer enters a runner with a blinker change and an entry clerk fails to input that information in the computer. IF the signed entry form shows that indeed blinkers were added, then the change will not show up in the Daily Racing Form but will show up in the program and/or will be announced as part of the late changes. If not done, this is a violation of the rules of racing in Texas.
In the "good old days" a horse could make its first start at a meeting with a blinker change and nothing was noted. Since there were no notations in the Racing Form back then, only players that kept detailed notes would be aware of the change. First time starter information could be provided, but I don't think that is relevant unless you also know whether the horse wore blinkers during its workouts or not. The CHANGE of equipment after the horse has started running would be more important than knowing whether he is going to debut wearing "shades" or not (imho).

[ranchwest]

There's very little disclosed about workouts, the use of blinkers being only one.

How much does the workout rider weigh? Was the horse working in tandem or group? With what other horses? What were the times of the other horses? Was the horse ridden out? What were the fractions? Did they even clock the right horse? Did the clocker post an accurate time? Can the public watch the work? If working from the gate, was the time started when the gate broke or when the horse reached the timing pole? Was the horse's legs wrapped? On and on.

[hurrikane]

I agree with the missinformation or no information. That like most things the management does is to see what they can get away with before we start whining. And then how long do they have to wait before we go away.
As for blinkers personally, I think they are meaningless. And every trainer I have ever talked too has no clue if blinkers are what a horse needs or not. They are just making a guess.

[mudcat]

MAC
I'v seen you at the track a few times, How close is the track to getting slot machines? Are they working on it? Do you ever think it will happen?
I would like to see it, so we could get some decent horses,
What do you think about it?
mudcat

[WINMANWIN]

If you look at the form and see a horse up the track by 40 lengths his last 3 races,and he's in the same class,and wins by 5 with 1st blinkers on.That would indicate to me,That hoss runs better with blinkers.I cant tell you how many times blinkers on/off have won in the past 2 mths that I've seen, at just aqueduct alone.Now if your talking nation wide well, I would think the % 's may be comparable.With younger horses I think it means more.But if you have an older hoss and you view the pp's with blinkers on or off and the hoss cant run with both, I agree with you.I also agree, that trainers are guessing with blinkers,but sometimes they make a blinker change and the work outs improve
to signal us.

[Zaf]

Workouts (the way they are reported now) are basically useless info to the public. Ranchwest pretty much summed it up best.

Gotta love those at the private farms that are not reported or the ones that the clockers missed.

For the most part I ignore them. If a horse is showing a recent (w/i 10 days) 5F workout or longer in a reasonable time, I will give the horse a plus for that. Aside from that they do not mean much to me.

ZAFONIC

[PurplePower]

Originally posted by mudcat
MAC
I'v seen you at the track a few times, How close is the track to getting slot machines? Are they working on it? Do you ever think it will happen? I would like to see it, so we could get some decent horses, What do you think about it? mudcat Mudcat,
SHRP administrators have gone to the legislature the last two times it was in session with an "alternative gaming" plan - including a card club and slots. The political climate in Texas is not conducive to slots at Texas tracks and the argument that the money is just "going to Louisiana" has not phased many in the legislature. With many legal entities talking about raising property and other taxes, maybe the legislature will take a longer look at slots at racetracks this year.
originally posted by Hurrikane
I agree with the missinformation or no information. That like most things the management does is to see what they can get away with before we start whining. And then how long do they have to wait before we go away. As for blinkers personally, I think they are meaningless. And every trainer I have ever talked too has no clue if blinkers are what a horse needs or not. They are just making a guess.
We can't blame EVERYTHING on track management. If enough people would pay $50 or so a day to have detailed workout information published they could probably be talked into providing that information. If yoiu have never attended morning workouts at your local track, head out there one Saturday morning about 5:30 to 6:00 AM and take notes. At SHRP about 100 horses will work between 6 and 8 and again between 8:40 and 10:00. Riders are hollering names at Gap Attendants or Clockers, forgetting half the name - failing to remember the trainer and mis calling the distance to be worked. Working three different stop watches - identifying the horses, getting sudden calls from the gate telling them that two are getting ready to break form the gate to go a half mile, some horse running off with its rider (going fast enough that clockers catch the time) and timing others that weren't called in and have to be identified walking off the gap- and our clockers get over 99%.
Blinkers can make a big difference and some trainers DO know when to put them on and take them off. That is another reason to use the DRF blinkers stats along with others. Yes, sometimes a trainer will put blinkers on because he has done "everything else" and none of that worked. But, blinkers can and do make a big difference in how a horse runs - and it can move a horse from a no-name claimer to a state-bred champion. Or, putting blinkers ON can make a consistent check cashing $5000 claiming mare stand in gate and watch a field leave her standing and trainer looking like a dummy. Another part of this game that makes it sooooooo much fun!

[GR1@HTR]

Zarfonic,

That is one spooky avatar...

[MV McKee]

There is a fair amount of information not divulged at American tracks. Anyone who has ever been to the races in Hong Kong is constantly amazed by the amount of information in the "Form" there. Any time a horse steps on the track, even for a brief jog, or "2-minute lick", it is in the Form.
Blinkers are a funny thing, there are probably 100+ different configurations, ranging from basically nothing in the way of eye cups, to fully enclosed, and these do change from race to race on a given horse. Shoes are another interesting item, some places ya know, others ya don't. The item I have always wanted to see listed is the Figure-8 noseband. Have caught many a winner here in the Northwest when this piece of equipment first makes it way onto a quitting or hanging type. Interesting discussion.

[Zaf]

Originally posted by GR1
Zarfonic,

That is one spooky avatar...

Your the second one to tell me that. I'll try to get a better picture of myself. (just kidding).

I will remove it if it disturbs you.

ZAFONIC

[smf]

Originally posted by mudcat
MAC
I'v seen you at the track a few times, How close is the track to getting slot machines? Are they working on it? Do you ever think it will happen?
I would like to see it, so we could get some decent horses,
What do you think about it?
mudcat

Mudcat,

Exactly WHERE would these better horses come from? Delta Downs?

I doubt seriously that $lot$ w/ have the same impact here that it did at Delaware or Woodbine. More like Charlestown or FT Erie, perhaps.

Until the breeding program here gets better (and owners get more aggressive, imho), what we get is what we already have, slots or no. We'd just be paying out more $$ to the same old pigs.

Of course, I'd be interested in your opinion if you disagree.

[smf]

Originally posted by PurplePower
The political climate in Texas is not conducive to slots at Texas tracks and the argument that the money is just "going to Louisiana" has not phased many in the legislature.

Blinkers can make a big difference and some trainers DO know when to put them on and take them off. That is another reason to use the DRF blinkers stats along with others. Yes, sometimes a trainer will put blinkers on because he has done "everything else" and none of that worked. But, blinkers can and do make a big difference in how a horse runs - and it can move a horse from a no-name claimer to a state-bred champion. Or, putting blinkers ON can make a consistent check cashing $5000 claiming mare stand in gate and watch a field leave her standing and trainer looking like a dummy. Another part of this game that makes it sooooooo much fun!


Mac,

Concerning slots--I agree that our legislators could care less about the $$ going to Louisiana. Racing here is so insignificant to them it's appalling...at least to me it is.

About blinkers, I used to tape post parades for the midAtlantic tracks (from the now defunct USA TRN). You could catch a nice priced winner from Dale Capuano when he changed the blinker cups (opened/ closed). Not something many here want to read or believe, but it's a factor. I agree w/ ya. Adding the hood may be luck for some trainers, but for others that know what they're doing, it's a pattern of sorts.

[PurplePower]

Originally posted by smf
Exactly WHERE would these better horses come from? Delta Downs?I doubt seriously that $lot$ w/ have the same impact here that it did at Delaware or Woodbine. More like Charlestown or FT Erie, perhaps. Until the breeding program here gets better (and owners get more aggressive, imho), what we get is what we already have, slots or no. We'd just be paying out more $$ to the same old pigs. Of course, I'd be interested in your opinion if you disagree. In the first year the horses would be many of the same. With the turf course we have and the difficulty trainers have in getting horses in races in Florida, we could expect to pick up some new outfits from that circuit. We would need a change in philosophy to upgrade out program to accomodate that level of horse - and we would get some flack from local horsemen that didn't have the stock to compete. I think we are in a large enough metro area that if we could offer $300,000 plus a day we would get some Pletcher types and maybe a stable or two from California where they have to pay 43% workman's comp premiums.

[smf]

Reid,

Lot of "ifs ands and butts" in there, sir.<G>

Of course, I'd love (absolutely love) to see your track (a) get purses up to 300k per nite, and (b) dwarf the track up I-45 from you in Mediocre Prarie, but.....

I think Tampa already is an option for the Florida owners. Owners like to see their runners run, and traveling to Houston is a stretch, no?....Perhaps I'm wrong in my assumption, you definitely know this stuff better than me.

Jmho again....Our quality of racing isn't going to be on the upswing anytime soon, slots or no.

One thing won't change tho, is the fact that your track is a favorite with nite time players around the country. You can take a good deal of credit for that, yourself.....<<...all that coming from a FG bettor :)

[PurplePower]

Originally posted by smf
...I think Tampa already is an option for the Florida owners. Owners like to see their runners run, and traveling to Houston is a stretch, no?....Perhaps I'm wrong in my assumption, you definitely know this stuff better than me.... Lots of those Florida horses are owned by New Yorkers and Kentuckian (and an occasional Californian). They can fly into Houston about as easy as Miami I would think.

One thing won't change tho, is the fact that your track is a favorite with nite time players around the country. You can take a good deal of credit for that, yourself.....<<...all that coming from a FG bettor :) :o - Thank you, sir.:cool:
BTW - the tall lanky assistant trainer for Hal Wiggins is my youngest son Brett. After stopping at FG this weekend, Hal is coming to Houston for Christmas then on to Oaklawn to run his stable there. Brett will be running the entire 28 head shedrow down there. I'll be making a trip or two for Sunday and Monday racing in January.

[ranchwest]

One of the factors as to whether horses could be attracted from FLA would be the restrictions that might be placed on slots money. If it has to go all or primarily to TX breds, then there won't be many TX breds leaving FLA or other states for TX.

I think the legislature sees slots and casinos not far apart and they've seen what the Louisiana casinos have done to politics. I'm not expecting slots or casinos in TX for awhile.

[mudcat]

smf
I think the breeding program would get better if the breeders & owners were getting hungry because of the outside horses coming here to take the bigger purses.

[smf]

Mudcat,

Thanks for your response, and it does make sense.

However, look at what is going on in Louisiana. They've known slots have been on the way for awhile now. Yet the breeding program hasn't gone foreward, in fact it might have stepped back a lil bit.

I love Louisiana racing, but.....I can't name a significant sire brought into LA even tho the breeders know they have a golden goose at their feet. I know Mr Krantz has bred some stout turfers and I wish the others in LA followed his lead.

There's been much conversation on the LA breeding topic on the startinggate forum at nola.com for the past 2 years. As much as I hate to admit it, poster "PPD" is right about the impact slots have had there....'Since there wasn't any incentive to breed horses that are competitive in open company, they still breed junk' (to paraphrase him).

To be perfectly honest, I am **all for** horsemen getting all the $$ they can, when they can, however.....I haven't seen anything in our program here to think it w/b any different to be honest. No one seems to want to step up. Werner/ Durant took their best horses out of state, leaving Lone Star (our so-called premier meet) with the bench warmers running here, while the stars go elsewhere. The Preston's, McNair, etc, etc, running their best elsewhere. Who can blame them, really? Quality Racing here isn't a priority, and won't be until they decide it is important amongst themselves and with some help from Austin.

When AP re-opened in 2000, a lot of good trainers here took their A TEAM there, or left Lone Star altogether. They had good reasons, I'm assuming.

Ranchwest,

You summed up the situation in Austin concerning the passing of slots perfectly, imho. I doubt we'll see it for 20 years. And when it does pass, we'll likely have the same problems that Louisiana has with the slot $$ distribution. Since the lobbyists will be Texans/ Texas breeders/ owners, guess where the lions share of the slot $$ will be distributed??? Take a look at the slot $$ distribution at LA tracks. It's disappointing to say the least.

[hurrikane]

Winmanwin


If you look at the form and see a horse up the track by 40 lengths his last 3 races,and he's in the same class,and wins by 5 with 1st blinkers on. That would indicate to me,That hoss runs better with blinkers.


interesting...for most people on this board that would indicate the trainer is using heavy drugs and should be banned from the sport.


I cant tell you how many times blinkers on/off have won in the past 2 mths that I've seen, at just aqueduct alone


I can

Aqu 10/17/02 - 12/16/02
blk on or off
12/229
9.17% wins
0.91 ROI (and that includes one 113.00 saver)

of the 352 races during this 2 month period
there were 229 horses in 157 races with blinker changes. Of those 21 won for a loss of 9% on your money.

[PurplePower]

Originally posted by hurrikane
Aqu 10/17/02 - 12/16/02
blk on or off
12/229
9.17% wins
0.91 ROI (and that includes one 113.00 saver)

of the 352 races during this 2 month period
there were 229 horses in 157 races with blinker changes. Of those 21 won for a loss of 9% on your money. Great stats Hurrikane. (Actually the WIN percentage would be 21/157 or 13.4% unless you would expect dead heat winners from all horses with blinker changes.)
What were the comparable stats for blinkiers ON as compared to blinkers OFF? My "gut" feeling is that there would be more blinker ON changes and maybe a slightly higher WIN percentage. Secondly, I'd like to know how many of the blinker ON runners would have been considered throw-outs (obviously the $113.00 winner would have been) disregarding the blinker change.

[hurrikane]

you are correct purple...dentist appt left me a little buzzed this morning.

that stat is actually 21/229. the 9% is if you bet all horses with change of equip. Will try to get these right.

blk on
Aqu
16/178 (139 races)
bet
356
won
389(with the 111 winner)
of these 65 were at odds of 20-1 or higher(at aqu that is a throw out). In that group there were 2 winners 111 and 54.

blk off
4/51 (46 actual races)
bet
102
won
28
21 of these were odds of 20-1 or higher. no winners in that group

[WINMANWIN]

HURRIKANE, what information thank you kindly. unfortunately are friends at aqueduct are at it again. In the 4th race today at aqueduct LIZZY COOL was up the track last out by 33 lenghts.He ducked out,last race and was entered in a mdn special race.Today, He's back at 75k mdn claiming. In the drf pp's, THEY had NO BLINKERS ON CHANGE documented. I was out today and did not hear p.a. announced changes,but I would say, a blinker change was not announced.
lizzy cool had a 9 lenghth lead in mid stretch and won by 3 or 4, I believe. It appears equipment changes do not get recognized
by aqueduct investigators, when BOBBY BARBARA makes them.I dont know how you did your survey,But on 11/30 HEAVENLY KEVIN ran and won at 26 to 1 with bright grEEen BLINKERS ON, and no blinker change was documented in bris pp's or drf pp's.No p.a. announcement was made either.Trained by BOBBY BARBARA, Heavenly kevin ran 2nd today and the horse that won is named FORMIDABLE FOX with 1st TIME BLINKERS ON ! ADD 2 more to the list... AND DOUBLE CHECK TO SEE IF KEVIN MADE YOUR LIST ! lol !!!!!!!!!!

[smf]

Yeah, sometimes Equibase and others don't catch the late changes concerning equiptment, med's, jockeys, etc. Last year I remember a late jock change on a Scott Lake horse that paid $20. He had some spare named to ride, but when they went to parade Keith Jones announced that Flores (Lake's go-to jock) would ride the Lake horse.

In the charts it listed that the spare jock rode the horse. I checked the bris pp's for win% and roi's of Lake's runners the following week and sure enuff, the win was credited to the spare jock that didn't ride the winner.

I'm certain this happens more than any of us want to think is possible.

[hurrikane]

Winman,
all 3 of these horses had a blinker change listed in my data. My data comes from HDW..through HTR.
Maybe you need a better data source.

Lizzy Cool..#1 speed at dist, #1 spd at track, #1 spd last 90days, Drop back to mdn75k where she finished 2nd by a half 2 races back..this wasn't blinkers.

Heavenly Kevin. No way to figure but in a race with 4 FTS and a bunch of unprovens..not surprised.

Formitable Fox...no big surprise here either. Mott trainer, Mig on the back..and again 2yo where improvement and unexplained winners are the norm.

[BillW]

Originally posted by WINMANWIN
HURRIKANE, what information thank you kindly. unfortunately are friends at aqueduct are at it again. In the 4th race today at aqueduct LIZZY COOL was up the track last out by 33 lenghts.He ducked out,last race and was entered in a mdn special race.Today, He's back at 75k mdn claiming. In the drf pp's, THEY had NO BLINKERS ON CHANGE documented. I was out today and did not hear p.a. announced changes,but I would say, a blinker change was not announced.
lizzy cool had a 9 lenghth lead in mid stretch and won by 3 or 4, I believe. It appears equipment changes do not get recognized
by aqueduct investigators, when BOBBY BARBARA makes them.I dont know how you did your survey,But on 11/30 HEAVENLY KEVIN ran and won at 26 to 1 with bright grEEen BLINKERS ON, and no blinker change was documented in bris pp's or drf pp's.No p.a. announcement was made either.Trained by BOBBY BARBARA, Heavenly kevin ran 2nd today and the horse that won is named FORMIDABLE FOX with 1st TIME BLINKERS ON ! ADD 2 more to the list... AND DOUBLE CHECK TO SEE IF KEVIN MADE YOUR LIST ! lol !!!!!!!!!!

I checked all 3 of these and Bl ON was documented for each in TSN files ... it's not AQU :confused:

Bill

[WINMANWIN]

Originally posted by BillW
I checked all 3 of these and Bl ON was documented for each in TSN files ... it's not AQU :confused:

Bill

Well , I cant understand when the tracks supply the info to all data sources, That bris and drf.com, dont have the same info as the others. Puzzleing in my mind , but that's expected in this so called SPORT OF KINGS ! :mad:

[takeout]

Originally posted by WINMANWIN
Well , I cant understand when the tracks supply the info to all data sources, That bris and drf.com, dont have the same info as the others. Puzzleing in my mind , but that's expected in this so called SPORT OF KINGS ! :mad:
This is something that has been bugging me since the great DRF/Equibase "diworsification" of around a decade ago. These continuous little inconsistencies between the resellers leave the 'capper on shaky ground. It sure would be nice if the resellers could all get on the same page with their trainer names and race conditions. I shudder to think how distorted some of these databases must be getting after 10 years of this stuff. The latest one I've noticed is some sort of conditioned race where the DRF file has a "b" after the claiming price, TSN has a "c" after, and the track program has a "cd" after. There's 3 different symbols for the same thing and I don't know what the REAL condition of the race is yet. By the way, has anybody noticed that the print copy of the DRF is not putting the full written conditions at the top of their results charts again? What the hell? The ones at their site have them. Just one more example of the right hand not knowing what the left is doing, I guess.

I don't think tracks do supply info to all data sources. I think it's supplied to Equibase only. I might be wrong but if I'm right it makes the problem even worse in that the info is getting changed and sometimes corrupted by the resellers.

Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't industry-owned Equibase started for the express reason of having a database that was not dependant on outside companies such as DRF? I think that was the ONLY reason it was started. So, what has never made sense to me is why the two companies formed some kind of uneasy alliance yet continue to produce different files with different trainer names, race conditions and so on. And, it has been obvious for years that the two don't really work together on anything or have any communication.

As far as I know, it's right back with the same old ultimatums of telling a track to buy so many Forms a day or they don't get any. That's the kind of stuff that got Equibase started in the first place. How does DRF get away with that? Would someone please tell me why, with all of the info at Equibase at their disposal, that tracks don't just print a DECENT program that's on a par with the best of the resellers and tell the print DRF to take a hike? What am I missing here?

I've used everyone's PPs at one time or another and done a lot of comparing. What you get with one, you give up with another. I remain as baffled as anyone as to why one reseller sometimes will have info that the others don't. I assume that it's all coming from Equibase. I don't see anyone else paying any chartcallers. Sometimes at the track they will announce blinkers on or off because it isn't in the track program, yet I'll have it in the TSN fifty-centers from a file that I get over 48 hours in advance. Go figure. Other times, they will have a workout in the program that I DON'T have and it will be eight or ten days old! By the way, am I the only one noticing a lot of workouts that just MUST be wrong? You know, like ran on the East Coast, worked out on the West Coast then ran on the East Coast again, all within a very short time frame. There are a lot of loose ends in this data stuff.

[WINMANWIN]

Nice post ! Takeout, your points are very valid. When I e-mailed
drf.com and Bris,I got no resonse from them and decided to let it go. After all, 2 e-mails should suffice, If they care to not respond,
and NOT prioritze customer service, Shame on them !

[hurrikane]

I deal with huge amounts of data every day. I've build monsterous databases that may make Equibase look like and excel spreadsheet. The thing is they are dealing with enormous amounts of data. You are dealing, usually, with one race or even one race line of one horse. Little inconsistancies and 'static' are going to happen.
I know some places (HDW for one) go to great pains to check their data and when errors are found they go back, correct the results and reissue the data to their members. Not everyone takes care of their customers that way.
I'm not sure you can really create a pure/error free db at this level.

On the bright side..all those errors you see..spell opportunity!