PDA

View Full Version : Handicapping N2Ls


Norm
04-11-2008, 06:01 PM
I tend to be one of those eccentric fellows who believe that each different kind of race requires a distinct handicapping procedure that addresses the idiosyncrasies of the race type under consideration. After all, you wouldn't handicap the Kentucky Derby the same way as the 3rd at AQU (would you ?). A few years back, I was evaluating the unique requirements for winning that ubiquitous race, the N2L. I was trying to determine whether N2Ls should be handled like an extended maiden race or maybe a low grade claimer. I felt that I needed to know how many races it took for a horse to win it's first post-maiden race. Some horses win a maiden race because they are learning how to be racehorses, others win by default and have learned nothing except a short-cut to the feed box. With this goal in mind, I surveyed 2,000 individuals to get my answer. The results were not shocking, but helped me understand a bit more about the nature of an N2L.

I have just completed a "maintenance" survey, 500 individuals, to see if the numbers were still in line after these several years. They are; there were only minor variations in the third decimal place of the percentages. Rather than have the reader suffer through any conclusions I have reached from this, I thought I would just present the results and let each 'capper come to his own conclusions. The column on the left is the race following a maiden win in which a second win occurred. The middle column is the percentage of all horses who have won in that race. The third column is the cumulative total.

1 18%
2 16% 34%
3 14% 48%
4 13% 61%
5 10% 71%
6 07% 78%
7 05% 83%
8 03% 86%
9 04% 90%
10 03% 93%
11+ 07% 100%

There is often a touch of humor in the cold, hard numbers of these surveys. I found one individual who won a maiden race and then, 43 races later, won his second race. Wow, what a patient owner !

misscashalot
04-11-2008, 07:40 PM
I tend to be one of those eccentric fellows who believe that each different kind of race requires a distinct handicapping procedure that addresses the idiosyncrasies of the race type under consideration. After all, you wouldn't handicap the Kentucky Derby the same way as the 3rd at AQU (would you ?). A few years back, I was evaluating the unique requirements for winning that ubiquitous race, the N2L. I was trying to determine whether N2Ls should be handled like an extended maiden race or maybe a low grade claimer. I felt that I needed to know how many races it took for a horse to win it's first post-maiden race. Some horses win a maiden race because they are learning how to be racehorses, others win by default and have learned nothing except a short-cut to the feed box. With this goal in mind, I surveyed 2,000 individuals to get my answer. The results were not shocking, but helped me understand a bit more about the nature of an N2L.

I have just completed a "maintenance" survey, 500 individuals, to see if the numbers were still in line after these several years. They are; there were only minor variations in the third decimal place of the percentages. Rather than have the reader suffer through any conclusions I have reached from this, I thought I would just present the results and let each 'capper come to his own conclusions. The column on the left is the race following a maiden win in which a second win occurred. The middle column is the percentage of all horses who have won in that race. The third column is the cumulative total.

1 18%
2 16% 34%
3 14% 48%
4 13% 61%
5 10% 71%
6 07% 78%
7 05% 83%
8 03% 86%
9 04% 90%
10 03% 93%
11+ 07% 100%

There is often a touch of humor in the cold, hard numbers of these surveys. I found one individual who won a maiden race and then, 43 races later, won his second race. Wow, what a patient owner !

Good figures.

Do you have figures on
the winners # of days away from its previous race to its winning race?

also drops from 25NW2L to 15NW2L etc

where this winner finished in its last race? 2nd 3rd etc?

was it a fav in its previous race?

garyoz
04-11-2008, 08:05 PM
Sometimes the connections don't want to run out of a condition, but rack up in the money finishes, especially with State Breds. Gets to be a tougher game when you run out of your conditions.

stu
04-11-2008, 09:38 PM
Two other ideas:

for N2L claimers consider horses with the least number of losses

also consider horses which earned the highest speed figure in their maiden victories

rufus999
04-11-2008, 09:49 PM
Rather than have the reader suffer through any conclusions I have reached from this, I thought I would just present the results and let each 'capper come to his own conclusions.


I am more interested in hearing your conclusions. Isn't that the purpose of statistical analysis. To defend an argument with irrefutable evidence? I handicap lots of N2L's and ,frankly, I'm tired of listening to myself think.:D

rufus

Norm
04-12-2008, 11:20 PM
I am more interested in hearing your conclusions. Isn't that the purpose of statistical analysis. To defend an argument with irrefutable evidence? I handicap lots of N2L's and ,frankly, I'm tired of listening to myself think.:D
rufus
Irrefutable evidence? . . . that's a tough one. :) One aspect that became clear is that horses 1 to 5 races removed from their maiden win will yield to speed / pace analysis. Horses 6 or more races removed require a class drop to be competitive. Beyond 10 ? . . . well. you would need a really compelling reason to back one of those with only a 7% chance of winning.

The Bit
04-13-2008, 03:03 PM
Good stuff.

I'd be real interested to see what happens when you add into the equation horses who make the lead by the first call in their 1st, 2nd or 3rd start after a maiden win.

BlueShoe
04-22-2008, 09:01 PM
Rather like those awful bottom level or near botoom level n2l claimers.If 11 of them look impossible and the 12th merely terrible,may have a good bet.Have found that a class drop is a powerful move.If a runner shows an okay race in its 2nd or 3rd race back,a bad last race,and a drop from both its last and the good race,this runner is usually very live at this lower level.

Dave Schwartz
04-22-2008, 11:39 PM
Here are a few interesting things I queried about N2L claiming sprints when I searched for highest $Net in top 3 ranks over the last 1,000 such races in my database:


CS.N2L.Older.
1559-rSp2f1y
---------------------------
WIN BETS
Field1 Field2 Starts Pays Pct $Net IV PIV
--------------------------------------------------------
1st 1,147 211 18.4 $1.81 1.60 1.07
2nd 1,054 166 15.7 $1.89 1.36 0.98
3rd 1,031 168 16.3 $2.12 1.42 1.10
FH 2,386 248 10.4 $1.60 1.00 0.95
RH 3,480 208 6.0 $1.27 0.55 0.81

Total 9,098 1,001 11.0 $1.59 1.00 0.96

top 3 3,232 545 16.9 $1.93 1.47 1.05


Above is "rank, best 2f pace rating in the last year." The top 3 combined for only a 3.5% loss. Pretty darned good for no handicapping.


CS.N2L.Older.
1562-rSpEP1y
---------------------------
WIN BETS
Field1 Field2 Starts Pays Pct $Net IV PIV
--------------------------------------------------------
1st 1,109 223 20.1 $1.91 1.75 0.98
2nd 1,055 174 16.5 $1.86 1.43 1.06
3rd 1,022 158 15.5 $1.98 1.34 1.07
FH 2,327 261 11.2 $1.61 1.07 1.03
RH 3,585 185 5.2 $1.29 0.47 0.76

Top 3 3,186 555 17.4 $1.92 1.51 1.03


Above is "rank, best 4f pace rating in the last year." The top 3 combined for only a 4.0% loss. Again, pretty darned good for no handicapping.



CS.N2L.Older.
79-rFT02
-----------------------
WIN BETS
Field1 Field2 Starts Pays Pct $Net IV PIV
--------------------------------------------------------
1st 1,105 246 22.3 $1.68 1.93 0.97
2nd 1,037 199 19.2 $2.04 1.67 1.07
3rd 1,053 171 16.2 $1.98 1.40 1.13
FH 2,293 206 9.0 $1.37 0.86 0.87
RH 3,610 179 5.0 $1.46 0.46 0.85

Top 3 3,195 616 19.3 $1.90 1.67 1.04


This time it is FT, Best of last 2. Again, a 5% loss is not very bad. This time the empahasis is on NOT playing the top horse, which is probably dependant upon price.



CS.N2L.Older.
79-rFT02+1-rPubCh
--------------------------------
WIN BETS
Field1 Field2 Starts Pays Pct $Net IV PIV
--------------------------------------------------------
1st 1st 434 149 34.3 $1.58 2.90 0.96
1st 2nd 219 49 22.4 $1.64 1.93 1.01
1st 3rd 146 18 12.3 $1.21 1.06 0.74
1st FH 194 24 12.4 $2.14 1.16 1.21
1st RH 112 6 5.4 $1.97 0.47 0.99

Total 1,105 246 22.3 $1.68 1.93 0.97


Looking closer at those FT:BL2=1 ranked horses, where the 2nd factor is PubCh rank, we see that they are playable beyond 3rd choice.



CS.N2L.Older.
79-rFT02+201-PubCh
---------------------------------
WIN BETS
Field1 Field2 Starts Pays Pct $Net IV PIV
--------------------------------------------------------
1st 3/5 57 29 50.9 $1.54 3.77 0.95
1st 8/5 231 90 39.0 $1.74 3.17 1.04
1st 5/2 279 60 21.5 $1.41 1.87 0.85
1st 9/2 210 37 17.6 $1.58 1.56 1.00
1st 6 114 11 9.6 $1.34 0.86 0.77
1st 9 74 10 13.5 $2.53 1.28 1.47
1st 15 77 8 10.4 $2.71 0.98 1.60
1st 24 33 0.0 $0.00 0.00 0.00
1st 35 17 0.0 $0.00 0.00 0.00
1st Above 13 1 7.7 $7.45 0.81 5.86

Total 1,105 246 22.3 $1.68 1.93 0.97


Looking at the same factor (rank=1) and actual odds, we find that the sweet spot (i.e. profit) begins in the group above 6/1 and ends at 15/1.



Regards,
Dave Schwartz

Dave Schwartz
04-22-2008, 11:54 PM
This time, let's look at what goes well with those top 3 "contenders" chosen by using "Best 2f pace rating in the last year."




Field Rank Starts Pays Pay% $Net IV PIV ExW PExW
1558 rSpSR90 1-1 583 170 29.2 $2.32 2.43 1.31 69.8 129.7
1570 r2f01 1-1 774 232 30.0 $2.20 2.55 1.26 91.1 183.4
149 rcLstRc 1-1 704 236 33.5 $2.18 2.80 1.29 84.3 183.0
1518 rSpEP30 1-1 698 217 31.1 $2.16 2.61 1.30 83.3 166.4
187 rf90 1-1 692 195 28.2 $2.14 2.37 1.24 82.4 157.5
1616 rtDst 1-1 491 159 32.4 $2.12 2.67 1.26 59.6 126.0
1525 rSpSR30 1-1 518 160 30.9 $2.12 2.55 1.38 62.7 116.2
1556 rSpPW90 1-1 704 195 27.7 $2.10 2.32 1.25 83.9 155.8



Some very promising stuff.

Just so we are clear... These are the horses that ranked 1st in their field for each factor and ranked in the top 3 for "best 2f in the last year."

In order, they are:
+Best Stretch Run in the last 90 days.
Best 2f rating in the last race. (What we call "BL1.")
*Last Race Performance.
Best EP rating in the last 30 days.
*Best "total form cycle" in the last 90 days.
+Best trainer rating at the distance (sprint).
+Best Stretch Run in the last 30 days.
+Best "total energy rating" in the last 90 days.


Notes:
"+" means not easy to duplicate
"*" means proprietery to HSH.


Long and the short of it is this:

Of the 3 horses with the best "2f pace rating in the last year"...
>bet the horse with the best Stretch Run in the last year.


Of course, there is more than one way to skin a, uh... horse, but this is a start.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

Suppositionist
04-23-2008, 04:28 AM
Does your analysis factor in those that went to a higher class after breaking their maiden, then returned to N2L? I mean, a horse could break its maiden in a high level maiden claiming race then go to Alw1X for three races and not clear that condition then back N2L and clear it. Would your analysis say that this horse cleared N2L in its first attempt after its maiden win or its fourth? If fourth, then it really isn’t a valid analysis as it allows comparing apples to oranges because many who clear it on there fourth attempt raced only against lower N2L types while others tried harder Alw1X horses and actually cleared the condition the first time they attempted doing so.

Just wondering.

I find N2L to be the next logical condition for Maiden claimers. Some may attempt Alw1X but it takes a horse who shows phenomenal improvement to make that transition and be competitive (state breds excluded). Either that, or they were grossly under assessed by their connections to begin with (it happens). On the other hand some who cleared Maiden Special Weight and logically should contend in Alw1X can’t really hang with the local Alw1X types and really belong in N2L. It just depends. I sometimes like looking at the season and track which they cleared the maiden condition. Those who clear in spring or summer at better tracks will handicap higher than those who clear it in fall or winter or at a lesser track even if the purse value of the race was the same. Now some horses just aren’t ready for spring or summer and they can be very high quality horses, but as a general rule, good trainers try to have the better horses ready for prime time, spring and summer, early fall.

S

llegend39
04-23-2008, 08:23 AM
try this link:
http://www.sportsbettingacumen.com/horse-racing-articles-cheap-claiming-races.asp

john del riccio
04-23-2008, 09:18 AM
The most effective approach I have found for the N2L races is to find the horse that has never raced in a race as low as todays level, has raced recently, and has a pace figure edge on the field.


John

Fingal
04-23-2008, 11:03 AM
Against a field of those that have proven that they can't break through to the next level, I'll always give an extra look at the fresh face that just broke their MDN.:ThmbUp:

Dave Schwartz
04-23-2008, 11:49 AM
Does your analysis factor in those that went to a higher class after breaking their maiden, then returned to N2L?

No, just speed analysis.

Norm
04-23-2008, 12:44 PM
The most effective approach I have found for the N2L races is to find the horse that has never raced in a race as low as todays level, has raced recently, and has a pace figure edge on the field.

John
I think we are on the same page, or at least similar. I like a horse who

1) is not more than 6 races removed from his maiden win
2) is dropping to a new low class
3) in his last race, ran the first quarter in :23 or less for a sprint or :24 or less for a route
4) is the only horse who meets the first three criteria.

In effect, the horse has not yet developed the losing habit, is meeting the weakest field of his career thus far and has just shown some early speed.

Suppositionist
04-23-2008, 04:13 PM
No, just speed analysis.

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the reply, but to be honest, your analysis blew by me like an allowance horse passing a tiring claimer in the stretch. It looked pretty complex and I really didn’t take the time to figure out what it all meant. I was asking Norm if his survey took the level they started at into consideration but I suppose that might be a valid question regarding your analysis, I just can’t say for sure. I should have been more clear about who I was asking, sorry.



S

Dave Schwartz
04-23-2008, 06:15 PM
No problem. Nevertheless, a workable strategy.


Dave

russowen77
04-23-2008, 06:45 PM
No problem. Nevertheless, a workable strategy.


Dave
Thank y'all for educating me about possible winners. My ROI in these races is better than anyother. They are my favorite races to find my beloved seconditis and 3rd horses.

We had a mare around this circuit several years ago that busted her maiden on a DQ. She started like 40 times and never won a second race. She also always at least made barn money and was second about 60% of the time. All I would do was put any horse that hadn't run on top and key her. She made me and her connections a lot of money.

It was fun to watch. She would charge up and get about a neck behind and be happy as a clam on a no dig beach.

I couldn't figure out a winner to save my soul but lots of times you can cash some serious exactas but getting who was second.

If I can get two of those types in a race it is time to break out the ALL, xx, xx tris.

cnollfan
04-23-2008, 08:35 PM
I am a big fan of horses moving into N2L conditions from less restrictive conditions, the less restrictive, the better. You would think with the conditions now reported in DRF and other pp's that these horses would get heavy play, but often they don't.

A recent example was Seth the Candyman, winner of the 1st at Santa Anita Sunday at 28-1. That was a 12,500 N2L claimer. His previous race was March 31 in the 8th, an open 10,000 claimer in which he was competitive (3rd at the pre-stretch and stretch call). The other nine horses in that race had combined to win 31 races lifetime or an average of more than three wins per horse.

thelyingthief
04-29-2008, 10:09 AM
an interesting footnote to this discussion: at Woodbine, horses may win both in the N2L and N3L allowance brackets yet remain eligible for nx1. very few of these horses win these races at first or second outing.

tlt

by the by, i was under the impression this discussion focussed on the allowance n2L group, not the claiming brackets. is this incorrect?