work out update

[46zilzal]

In an effort to get at the heart of the relevance of workouts in evaluating a horse's race ability, I spent the last week interviewing exercise riders, gate crew, trainers, a clocker, and the track vet in order to get their impressions of the relevance.

Bottom line: frequency is more important than time as there are too many variations in the specific work schedules of each animal.

Past apprentice of the year rider: "A work in relatively quick time doesn't mean a thing if the horse can not finish up on that time. Many a horse I worked in the morning was puffing so badly after that quick move that I knew he could not go the longer distance in the afternoon. It was the horse that made a strong move (not particularly quick) who could then 'take off' from there (and after the clocker has already recorded the final time) that I knew would be race ready. Unless you are there, are part of the stable, or know the schedule specific to each horse, the workout times will not tell you if this horse will be race ready."

Exercise rider:"One of the quickest sprinters on the grounds who regularly threw in opening quarters of 22.0 flat would never work anywhere close to that time, but his regular moves would tell me that this injury prone animal was healthy enough to run to his potential."

The overall consensus is that workouts are not uniform, and regularity was more important that time since moves within a work, or a second finishing up move after the scheduled work were not recorded for the public to evaluate.

[Tom]

And yet people on this board are using works and winning race. Go figure.
Perhaps you should interview bettors and winners.

You just can't get it that everyone agrees works are incomplete and often missing info, yet on a case by case basis, people can sift through and find usable info to help them evaluate trainer intent of horse fitness.

Horses than work out on private farms or in swimming pools are a mystery, yet there are enough that work on the track to shed some light on the condition of the horse.

My last words on work outs: if you don't want to use them, don't.

[Dave Schwartz]

Some trainers believe the key to winning is to get a couple of pounds off. Others say it makes no difference.

You say potato and I say corned beef on rye.

[Jeff P]

In an effort to get at the heart of the relevance of workouts in evaluating a horse's race ability, I spent the last week interviewing exercise riders, gate crew, trainers, a clocker, and the track vet in order to get their impressions of the relevance.
That's really thoughtful of you.

Tell me somthing...

How many exercise riders, gate crew workers, trainers, clockers, and track vets have the ability to query and get reports from racing databases?

You know... reports that show exactly what happens when a significant workout is selected for every starter in a race... and that selected workout is converted to velocity in feet per second... and then all starters in each race are sorted and ranked by that velocity... for tens of thousands of races... hundreds of thousands of starters... not just last year... but EVERY year that I've ever looked at...

On second thought... TIME OUT. I can tell I'm wasting my time here. :bang:

You win. In fact I retract everything I've ever said about Workout Brilliance. All those starters with fast works that outran their odds? Total fluke.

Databases are useless.

I'm going to spend the afternoon deleting all of my models. Tomorrow I'm creating new models based on saddle cloth colors.

Could you do me a favor though? Could you ask an excersise rider about saddle cloth colors for me? Since I'm starting completely over I'll need to know which ones work best.

-jp

.

[46zilzal]

I never said any one analysis has merit over another, but rather posed the position repeatedly that the data the handicapper receives to evaluate is not accurate to the state of fitness the horse.

Tainted data. Given the choice of what I know to be tainted by multiple variables NOT reported, and when repeated interviews of those who work the horses for a living tell me another story, I will choose their point of view.

[classhandicapper]

You asked the wrong questions. So you got the anwers you wanted instead of the answers that would have demonstrated that WOs matter.

[46zilzal]

You asked the wrong questions. So you got the answers you wanted instead of the answers that would have demonstrated that WOs matter.
Strange I didn't see you there as I posed multiple questions as to the relevance of speed vs. fitness or race readiness. Expressed in various ways the answers were all in the same ball park.

[bigmack]

I will choose their point of view.
And therein lies the genesis of your misdirection on a number of fronts. Select picking of certain opinions to adjudge to the world your "facts".

[classhandicapper]

Strange I didn't see you there as I posed multiple questions as to the relevance of speed vs. fitness or race readiness. Expressed in various ways the answers were all in the same ball park.

We discussed this to death on the other thread.

The question to ask is not whether a fast work or any other work matters.

What you want to ask is whether a lightly raced horse that usually works in 102h suddenly starts working in 59.3H is likely to show some improvement on the racetrack also.

What you want to ask is whether a horse that typically shows speed and tires that suddenly starts showing stamina in his longer works is likely to carry that speed further in his races soon also.

What you want to ask is whether that 2YO FTS that just outworked a NW1 ALW winner while in company is likely to come out of the box running and win quickly.

What you want to ask is whether the horse that usually works every 5 days is likely to have some problems if he's been paid off for 8 weeks and the WO record shows a 4 week gap.

It's not the WOs that matter. It's the changes in form that are sometimes signaled by the changes in the WO line that matter.

[njcurveball]

I guess anything posted here is fodder for people to attack.

Different opinions are what make this a great game.

I hope other people learn that

NO good post goes unpunished here.

[PaceAdvantage]

NO good post goes unpunished here.

Oh come on.....

[jotb]

46zilzal you seem to spend some time on the backside and have an idea of what's going on in regards to works in the morning and I would think since you spent so much time trying to make a point about this that everyone on here is going to agree with you but that's not going to happen. Here's why?

You have Jeff P that uses workouts as part of a handicapping tool and because he spent the time to collect all this info it helped him find some angles or thrends that helped him make some profits from it and we already know he's not the only one in the world that thinks the same way.


This should not be a win or lose or right or wrong battle because both of you have some type of edge regarding workouts and that should be as far as it goes and hopefully someone on this board will learn something from the both of you.


I've spent plenty of time on this board (may not post as much as others) and have read a numerous amount of threads on here. I guess most of you know by now that I spend my days on the backside and I really don't share many things about the backside unless I think it could be helpful to someone that might be interested. If it was not for the occasional PM from someone that wanted to hear about the backside, I probably wouldn't speak to the majority of you. I'm not trying to be sarcastic here but it seems to me that the majority of people on the board are very familiar with how the backside works. We have guys on here that been following the horses for 30 to 40 years so between the books, movies, and people you encounter over those years the knowledge should be there already.

Like I said before, I've been on the backsides at many racetracks and I'm sure If I wanted to, I could share some things you would never think in your wildest dreams this really happened or happens in horse racing but I can assure it has and will continue but if I did share stories would anyone believe me or for a second stop and say how the hell did I get involved in this game or better yet stop you from spending anymore time in the game. The answer is absolutely no. If you been around for 20 years or more spending most of your living life playing this game it's 1-1 money no matter what anyone says to you it will only make you more determined to succeed at this game. It's in the blood so whether you spend your days on the backside or the frontside we are basically all on the same mission.

Best regards,
Joe

[skate]

i dont discount either (or any) of the above opinion.


but i will stick with the best capping stat of all times and forever and ever...
Odds, babe.:cool:


everything stated above is fine and dandy, data, talks with people in the know, but if they do not relate well (really well) to the odds;) forget the dat without the stat:jump:


oh yeh, you DO need additional info, other than odds, but the key (to me) be ODDS ALWAYS.


you can continue to add all or none of your capping info, but how Good it becomes in relation to your capping, will depend on the ODDS.

[Jeff P]

Just in case someone jumped in here without having had the chance to read the other thread...

I never said any one analysis has merit over another, but rather posed the position repeatedly that the data the handicapper receives to evaluate is not accurate to the state of fitness the horse.And I've freely admitted that the data is flawed to some degree... for exactly the reasons you stated.

But in spite of that... two things are going on:

1. An analysis of historical data samples clearly shows that workout speed DOES have statistical significance in predicting the winner.

2. An analysis of historical data samples clearly shows that workout speed is also overlooked by the public as they bet the races. IMHO, the betting public KNOWS that workout data is flawed. So they react by consistently overlooking it when they bet the races.

Therefore, a third thing is going on:

3. Players who are smart enough to realize this can use their knowledge of workout speed to improve their bottom lines.



Take my tongue in check example about saddle cloths for a second. Let's say for the sake of argument I record saddle cloth color into a database along with all of the other pieces of information about a horse... odds, finish position, payoffs, etc. And let's say for the sake of argument that I discover - for whatever reason - that the public actually hates orange colored saddle cloths. In fact let's say for the sake of argument that their hatred of the color orange is strong enough to be reflected in the betting... so much so that it becomes possible to grind out profits simply by backing horses with orange colored saddle cloths.

Now you know and I know that using saddle cloth color as the foundation for one's handicapping is flawed. The reality is that a horse with an orange colored saddle cloth has an almost equal chance of winning a race as a horse with a red one.

But within the context of the example I just presented... is using saddle cloth color (or any factor for that matter) - if affects the way the public bets the races to the point where opportunity is created for the savvy player - is using that factor to improve your bottom line really flawed?

-jp

.

[Greyfox]

In an effort to get at the heart of the relevance of workouts in evaluating a horse's race ability, I spent the last week interviewing exercise riders, gate crew, trainers, a clocker, and the track vet in order to get their impressions of the relevance.

.

Were these interviews at an "A Level track" or Hasting's Park bull ring?

[bellsbendboy]

Workouts have and continue to be a major part of my game, and I have earned solid profits the last decade or so.

Errors in the timing or distance of a given workout are ubiquitous, yet competent handicappers can glean solid information by learning to read between the lines. The actual time of any work and subsequent frequency are largely irrellevant. What is important is the schedule the horse is on. I would guess, some ninety plus percent of all thoroughbred winners are on "schedule".

Trainers, owners, pedigree, age, surface, equipment, length of meet, condition book and even weather affect schedules.

I do not think any posts here are wrong per se; as handicappers believe what they want, and disregard the rest, and thats what makes the pari-mutuel aspect entertaining. I would disagree with classcapper however and opine that the previous thread did not scratch the surface of whats important in workouts and why. BBB

[Tom]

Tainted data. Given the choice of what I know to be tainted by multiple variables NOT reported, and when repeated interviews of those who work the horses for a living tell me another story, I will choose their point of view.

Perhaps you asked the wrong people. If you want to find out if workouts are a good tool to predict fitness, you need to ask people who use the data ( bettors) not those who collect it. You can choose whomever you wnat to listen to, the data may be flawed in xome cases, but thefact remains, some of of out here are using it and profiting by it. I will always choose those who present data over opinioin any day.

I get a chuckle over people who tell other people it won't work while they do it every day.

[Good4Now]

you don't know what "he never turned a hair" means.

If you did you might get somewhere with works on a horse by horse basis.

IMHO otherwise a wink is as good as a nod...

If you think it helps use what you've been using!

[Tom]

Another know it all?:rolleyes:
When you "guys in the know" start showing hard data as Jeff did, you might have some credibility, but until then, just more ignorance on parade!

[nobeyerspls]

I never said any one analysis has merit over another, but rather posed the position repeatedly that the data the handicapper receives to evaluate is not accurate to the state of fitness the horse.

Tainted data. Given the choice of what I know to be tainted by multiple variables NOT reported, and when repeated interviews of those who work the horses for a living tell me another story, I will choose their point of view.

Ok 46, you had three choices:
1. Stand on an open hill in a thunderstorm, holding a lightening rod in your hand.
2. Walk through the hood at 1AM in a KKK outfit.
3. Start another thread on workouts.

You had to pick the most dangerous!

I find myself in both camps because I have found trainers that purposely record slow works so as to assure a price and others who get get a horse fit by ponying or two-minute licking and thus showing no works at all.
When I raced, my trainer told me to ignore the workout times. He was more interested in how the horse finished the work, i.e. still on the bit at the end, than the recorded time.
Having said that, I look at works to tell me if a horse is ready this time when the pp's show that he wasn't last time. I caught a nice 9-1 this way recently at Saratoga but instead of redboarding let's use a live example in real-time. A horse named Grand Merger runs in the 5th today at Saratoga. She's listed at 12-1 because her last attempt off a layoff were dismal. She shows some decent works with the 2nd one back the second fastes of twenty-one.
Since she has some back class and is bred on both sides for the distance, I'll bet her. Without those works I would pass.
Maybe both you and the database guys could look at her and tell me what you think
Nice being neutral here, makes me feel like Switzerland.

[skate]

of historical data samples clearly shows that workout speed DOES have statistical significance in predicting the winner.

2. An analysis of historical data samples clearly shows that workout speed is also overlooked by the public as they bet the races. IMHO, the betting public KNOWS that workout data is flawed. So they react by consistently overlooking it when they bet the races.

Therefore, a third thing is going on:

3. Players who are smart enough to realize this can use their knowledge of workout speed to improve their bottom lines.



... is using saddle cloth color (or any factor for that matter) - if affects the way the public bets the races to the point where opportunity is created for the savvy player - is using that factor to improve your bottom line really flawed?

-jp

.


and i certainly agree with all that dat.

and what affects a player (bet) even more than any other capping points are the odds.

a player will bet a horse with lower odds, just because they are lower, while the reverse should be true. with your example a player will bet the orange cloth or the lower odds horse, which in turn gives opportunity.

the only duly fixed quantity without variation would be the odds.
to declare any other capping stat as an inevitable would be wrong and misleading.
if you refer to "just winning the race" the opposite would be true.

[46zilzal]

A asked this question at the website I moderate and the first responder is a long time horse owner who frequents workouts first hand regularly.


The question:I am of the belief that times of workouts do not directly correlate with a horse's racing improvement/form. I have found that frequency of works is a more important factor that time alone as the schedule of each individual horse varies so much (working in company with different equipment, heavy exercise riders etc.).

Would appreciate other's inputs.

His comments:"IMO, spending enough time around the backstretch and ownership side, I take most workouts very lightly. I have seen horses' "mistaken identity, or times elongated either because of poor visibility or stopwatch operator error, etc. I definitely agree with you as I, as well, look at frequency of works versus amount of bullets or close to. How many workouts have you seen by top trainers and/or top horses near the bullet time that day? Hardly any if you ask me."

Others to follow

[bellsbendboy]

hey nobeyers as far as Grand Merger goes here is my analysis of her work pattern. Note the blinkers on today!

First always go back as far as you can. She was offered as a two year old in training last year and worked a furlong in a shade less than eleven seconds. Blinkers on, would be a good guess.

She was RNA @ 475K and won a restricted stake for her breeders, before coming unglued in the Demoiselle.

Given time, she returned this class late spring and was a no show at seven poles. Three weeks later she also had no time getting blown away again, at a flat mile.

Off since June 8, this full sister to Stephen Got Even has had a six pack of works that are somewhat revealing. Since she was only off a few weeks, I would doubt her problems are physical in nature. Kimmel has a veternarian degree and can turn one around as well as anyone.

All six works are at a half mile, which is not unusual for three year old fillies that have some issues. They are perfectly spaced with the July 23rd move especially impressive as she outworked a couple of stables mates easily, and, probably had the blinkers on, perhaps Gomez as well! An A.P. Indy first time blinkers is always something to look at as they run with their head down, have little speed and generally, will run all day. I did not take more than a token look at the others as this class of race is not one of my favorites, but I would rate her a chance if she looks good on the track. BBB

[socantra]

The question:I am of the belief that times of workouts do not directly correlate with a horse's racing improvement/form. I have found that frequency of works is a more important factor that time alone as the schedule of each individual horse varies so much (working in company with different equipment, heavy exercise riders etc.).

Would appreciate other's inputs.


I've always appreciated researchers who give you the answer they are looking for along with the question. It saves everyone so much time.

[cj]

A asked this question at the website I moderate and the first responder is a long time horse owner who frequents workouts first hand regularly.


The question:I am of the belief that times of workouts do not directly correlate with a horse's racing improvement/form. I have found that frequency of works is a more important factor that time alone as the schedule of each individual horse varies so much (working in company with different equipment, heavy exercise riders etc.).



You shouldn't give your opinion when asking a question if you want unbiased responses.

[Tom]

I just love all the "opinions" that Jeff's data disproves.....with DATA.:lol:

[46zilzal]

Response number 2
(I want to be sure here to agree that regularity of work is in general a better indication of condition than time which is USUALLY an indication of a training style or philosophy - is it Baffett, Violette, or Mott? - these being SPEED, SPEED if high intention, Speed if it's inherent, representations in my opinion - others will differ no doubt)

[46zilzal]

I've always appreciated researchers who give you the answer they are looking for along with the question. It saves everyone so much time.
bull crap. No one forces anyone to answer in any way.

It is no different than posing a question akin to: I like electric shavers because of the ease of operation and no mess. What do you think about the way to shave?

Exactly the same proposition.

response 3
IMHO, (starting on a lie there) the first element of analysis is the conditioner. Let me back up and state that actually first is what you state about what we can't know if we weren't there is undeniably true. I would accept no rebuttal to your two detailed posts of the chaos and non uniformity of exercise events. No one would deny that who has been around the game.

[Jeff P]

instead of redboarding let's use a live example in real-time. A horse named Grand Merger runs in the 5th today at Saratoga. She's listed at 12-1 because her last attempt off a layoff were dismal. She shows some decent works with the 2nd one back the second fastes of twenty-one. Since she has some back class and is bred on both sides for the distance, I'll bet her. Without those works I would pass. Maybe both you and the database guys could look at her and tell me what you think Nice being neutral here, makes me feel like Switzerland.
It's just one race, but I have an opinion about it - so I'll post what I see:

First, this is kind of a paceless affair. #5 GATTINARA looks to be the clear lone speed and also looks (my opinion) to have a combination of form (4th in WoBrill) and has (my opinion) speed and pace figures good enough to win this on or near the lead.

#2 PAPAS KARA looks to be her main threat. This one ranks 1st in WoBrill, and (IMHO) has enough other positives in her record to make her dangerous.

BTW, I see #7 GRAND MERGER as really being up against it today. Despite having the 2nd best significant work (WoBrill) it is my opinion that she doesn't have the early, late, or final time based figures to be competitive in here. I view blinkers on as a negative.

For anyone interested here is a link to the JCapper reports for this race:

HTML Report
http://www.jcapper.com/helpdocs/SAR_R5_08162007.html

Live Play Module Report (in ML MOde)
http://www.jcapper.com/helpdocs/SAR_R5_08162007b.html

Good Luck,


-jp

.

[46zilzal]

It's just one race, but I have an opinion about it - so I'll post what I see:

First, this is kind of a paceless affair. #5 GATTINARA looks to be the clear lone speed and also looks (my opinion) to have a combination of form (4th in WoBrill) and has (my opinion) speed and pace figures good enough to win this on or near the lead.
Good try just not today. Might come down though lugging out down the stretch. Then again one came out the other came in.

[nobeyerspls]

Good try just not today. Might come down though lugging out down the stretch. Then again one came out the other came in.

The seven ran half a race and then quit badly. Must be some serious problem. I made a small win/place bet and used her in exotics with the #2 and #3. The latter was scratched at the gate so the race was mostly refunds. I thought that the winner came out on the #2 strong enough to be dq'd but they left them up.
This was a lousy example for this thread as the horse had the good works that one side values and the series of works that you hold to be important.

[skate]

I just love all the "opinions" that Jeff's data disproves.....with DATA.:lol:

as the data sayith.

all those using the data, play the same horse, thus lowering the odds. no more winners, just lower odds.

which in turn creates an opportunity;) , not more wins, just more money.

that all i see

[46zilzal]

Works are a tertiary factor at best to actual race performance.

Work out frequency, as an factor is knowing overall fitness and health is what I have been promoting.

[skate]

oh, good english:lol: :D

[skate]

Strange I didn't see you there as I posed multiple questions as to the relevance of speed vs. fitness or race readiness. Expressed in various ways the answers were all in the same ball park.


you didnt see someone there and you think it strange that someone was able to figure out what you were trying to say, after you told us what you were trying to say. or maybe you havnt told us what it is you want us to know.:lol:

how can anyone comment, if you didnt explain?

now if you wanted to know if speed and fitness are related, all you had to do was ask them "IF THEY HAD A FRIGGIN CLOCK".:cool: :bang:

[skate]

it goes like this


he clocker, what is the clock used for?


then you can tell him that the time is not relevant:lol: