Trainer Intent

[shoelessjoe]

I had put this on a another site and got in a friendly discussion about trainer intent.I had put this horse up early Sunday morning and was trying to explain how this trainer when he runs the horse for 20,000 and then drops him to 16,000 running 6 fur the horse would win.Today's race was for 16000 at 6 fur and I thought the trainer was ready to strike again[which he did at 10-1].The two gentlemen seem to believe that every time a trainer runs a horse that they are trying to win with them .I decided to post here to get opinions on this.

[Overlay]

This reminds me of an example that Ainslie discussed in Theory and Practice of Handicapping, where he turned around the old adage about not betting on a horse to do something that it had never done before, and suggested looking for instances where a horse was entered under conditions (with respect to distance and class) where it had won previously, even if its recent form is unimpressive (since that would improve the horse's odds), provided that it had been active enough to indicate an acceptable degree of basic fitness. (It also seems to me somewhat similar to the criteria Quirin used to distinguish excusable bad races from true "failures".) In any event, I think it would argue in favor of the proposition that, while trainers might not enter a horse in a race with the specific intent of losing (and certainly wouldn't refuse the purse if the horse did win), there can be training objectives in mind that would have greater importance than winning that particular race.

[asH]

It's a claim protect mode, up until Jun19, the trainer had been running him on or near the lead, with good results in consistency and energy, then after, while working on changing his running style, protected him in the higher priced claim...the addition of Husbands would have made my eyes widen...10-1? look for him to stretch out next

[Charlie D]

Trainer Intent



His main aim is the Breeders' Cup and the boss hasn't overdone him for this race so he is probably a little bit heavier than he normally is.


In other words, Ravens Pass has not been prepared to run to his optimum in QEII and we are using this race as a work out for BC mile

Trainers use races as work outs all the time, imo, they are no better than the drug cheats

[onefast99]

Trainer Intent






In other words, Ravens Pass has not been prepared to run to his optimum in QEII and we are using this race as a work out for BC mile

Trainers use races as work outs all the time, imo, they are no better than the drug cheats
This is something that has to be changed. I never understood why a trainer uses a race where people are betting on his/her horse as a tune-up for an upcoming race. If I was a steward and had knowledge a trainer did this the horse and the trainer would get 30 days for the first offense and harsher penalties for any offense thereafter.

[skate]

gees'


trainer intent is at least 1/2 the game.

i dont get the drug issue being in here.

if one expects a horse to win everytime, think again.

good topic.

[Show Me the Wire]

This is something that has to be changed. I never understood why a trainer uses a race where people are betting on his/her horse as a tune-up for an upcoming race. If I was a steward and had knowledge a trainer did this the horse and the trainer would get 30 days for the first offense and harsher penalties for any offense thereafter.

Sometimes the racing secretary has to fill a race to make it go. You can't penalize the trainer for helping the track fill a race.

[shoelessjoe]

Onefast,You cant put the blame on the trainer for doing this it's something that you have to figure out by looking at the pp's.

[Charlie D]

gees'


trainer intent is at least 1/2 the game.

i dont get the drug issue being in here.

if one expects a horse to win everytime, think again.

good topic.






Manager/coach intent is not part of the equation when i handicap soccer, Rugby League etc , so why should trainer intent have to be part of the thoroughbred handicapping equation???



Shoes apologies mate, took your thread in another direction here

[Show Me the Wire]

because racing is really a futures commodities market and not solely a sport.

[Charlie D]

Yes your right, it's not a sport, because in sport this kind of stuff would be jumped on


Maybe this is the reason Sports betting has become so popular with the betting public

[Pace Cap'n]

Horseracing is not a sport. However, each race is a sporting proposition.

[ranchwest]

This is something that has to be changed. I never understood why a trainer uses a race where people are betting on his/her horse as a tune-up for an upcoming race. If I was a steward and had knowledge a trainer did this the horse and the trainer would get 30 days for the first offense and harsher penalties for any offense thereafter.

The condition book is waiting to be your friend.

[Charlie D]

I don't think it's sporting for someone to disguise their intention and the more i see it happen, read about what they are doing, the less interested i become in betting on it

Who loses another customer??? horse racing



Anyway, enough, rant over

[ranchwest]

I don't think it's sporting for someone to disguise their intention and the more i see it happen, read about what they are doing, the less interested i become in betting on it

Who loses another customer??? horse racing



Anyway, enough, rant over

It just takes some work. Figuring out trainers generally isn't rocket science, but it does take some dedication to the task.

[jotb]

This is something that has to be changed. I never understood why a trainer uses a race where people are betting on his/her horse as a tune-up for an upcoming race. If I was a steward and had knowledge a trainer did this the horse and the trainer would get 30 days for the first offense and harsher penalties for any offense thereafter.

No disrespect here onefast99 but I'm surprised to hear this coming from you since you are an owner. There is trainer intent constantly happening each day. You have trainers that bring back horses off the shelf and for the most part they need one or two races. The racehorse will get more out of a race then he or she will get in the mornings. The trainers intent is to make sure the racehorse is fit enough to win in the appropriate distance and race condition. I know you know this already and you might be thinking this was not about layoff horses but I just wanted to address trainer intent in this fashion.

If you had a horse that runs it's best distance (8.0F) and the trainer's intent was to run your horse in a stake race (8.0F) but the stake was not for another 6 weeks. If you have a horse that really does not like to train in the morning and your trainer thinks it might be best to run your horse once before the stake and not at the horses preferred distance (6.0F) just because the trainer wants the horse tight enough for the stake but informs you that your chances of winning this race will be slim. My question is, would you allow that trainer to run your horse in this type of race?

Best regards,
Joe

[Bruddah]

is the single most underated hadicapping factor in Thoroughbred racing. Also, the single most unspoken and understood.

If a trainer is prepping a future Secretariat, and doesn't want to wring the lemon dry today, He won't be pressing for the win. It happens all the time, especially in 3yo races. If that bothers you, then you haven't learned the basics and nuiances of reading PP's. (JMHO) :)

[raybo]

This is why I have spent so much time over the past 30 years analyzing current condition, preferred distances, etc.. To me, it's part of the game. If every horse in every race was in it to win, our jobs would be so much easier, however, the payouts would be very much lower.

[Premier Turf Club]

Trainer Intent






In other words, Ravens Pass has not been prepared to run to his optimum in QEII and we are using this race as a work out for BC mile

Trainers use races as work outs all the time, imo, they are no better than the drug cheats

Charlie,

At least in the U.K. they might tell you they're prepping.

[turfbar]

I had put this on a another site and got in a friendly discussion about trainer intent.I had put this horse up early Sunday morning and was trying to explain how this trainer when he runs the horse for 20,000 and then drops him to 16,000 running 6 fur the horse would win.Today's race was for 16000 at 6 fur and I thought the trainer was ready to strike again[which he did at 10-1].The two gentlemen seem to believe that every time a trainer runs a horse that they are trying to win with them .I decided to post here to get opinions on this.


I disagree with you, pertaining to this race, I do believe in trainer intent,but....
back to this race there were 5 other horses dropping class in this race besides your pick (Garzon),those horses won at higher levels than todays class ,so I think you were just lucky to pick the right horse. Do you think those other trainers had no intent to win?

Turfbar

[Charlie D]

It just takes some work. Figuring out trainers generally isn't rocket science, but it does take some dedication to the task.


No it's not rocket science

Funny thing is though, when someone does express a view about the dodgy things in racing, a lot of people seem think the person expressing the view is a pocket talking muppet who does not know how to handicap a horse race

[TEJAS KIDD]

Ive posted on this subject before under a thread FORM REVERSALS (back in January) As a horse owner, I understand what goes on with the condition book. I think trainer intent is a part of the handicapping equation, but I don't believe it happens as often as players suggest. It's more of having to run a ready horse in the wrong spot because the right spot hasnt come up. Maybe dirt sprints for 16k male sprinters only gets offered once a month at WO. The horse has to keep running in the wrong spot to stay fit. It's hard for a trainer and owner to sit and wait on a fit and ready horse (stall doors may get damaged). It looks to me as if this horse in question doesnt like 7 furlongs (as evident by his 3 failures at the distance, even at the 16k claimer level). Maybe he was just not good enough to compete for 20k but the owner/trainer ran him there to keep in fitness while waiting for the 16k to come back at the 6f distance. I dont think they planned not to try for 20, but that they were forced to run in that spot until the right spot came along.

[bettheoverlay]

The other drop down horses in the 16K claimer may have been showing negative trainer intent.

The #4 was dropping from a 3rd at 20k in his last on a long steady decline in class. #5 was dropping from 40K but his previous 2 were at 16K where he threw in the bit in the stretch in one and beaten 16 lengths in the other. #9 won a stakes last year, took a year off, his return race in a 40K claimer he was beaten 15 lengths. #10 had close up in the money finishes in his last 3 at higher classes, in 2 of them the beaten favorite, a classic negative form factor for me. #11 won 3 back at 25K, claimed out of that race by a trainer who usually improves them, ran abysmally at two higher claiming prices at fairly low odds, dropped below his claiming price in perhaps an effort to get rid of him.

The #2 was dropping back to his proper level as he had done before.

[Charlie D]

It's more of having to run a ready horse in the wrong spot because the right spot hasnt come up


A good point TK

Elimination of these type of horses is good way to find the "true" contenders

[Tom]

My take on it is threat I would use the horse's 16K pace lines to evaluate him.
Dropping or not, he still has to face today's field. The 16K races look like what I expect of him today. I would forgive all the races at the higher levels. This guy is 2 for 3 at today's class. My big ??? is what is the distance? If it is 6F, I'm fine with it, but at 7F, I have concerns.

[Charlie D]

1c of 22 or above
2c of 45 or above


now you can add in Class if you want,

where does he fit here???

as Shoes says 16k - Todays Class

Distance, where does he fit??

won twice at 6f - todays distance


this horses "picture" is now forming



How the horse Match's Up against the opposition i do not know, but he would be a very good contender if my projected pace was 22 - 45

[skate]

Manager/coach intent is not part of the equation when i handicap soccer, Rugby League etc , so why should trainer intent have to be part of the thoroughbred handicapping equation???





Welp, it doesn't have to be any part of HC.
It is a big part of mine. The way i see it, horse vs human, games. The human should be out there to win the game. The horse is out there for fun. So, when the horse is in best of form, which is about 1 of every 4 races, his/her chance improves. Trainer is aware that the horse on average wins about 20% at best.
If you want to use a particular horse or two, for an example, then you do not look at the average.

The trainer makes money when the horse wins. The trainer knows the horse will win about 20%, while the human, on average, wins 50%.

I can only give my opinion. Many cappers will not look at trainer intent, which is good.

[skate]

is the single most underated hadicapping factor in Thoroughbred racing. Also, the single most unspoken and understood.

If a trainer is prepping a future Secretariat, and doesn't want to wring the lemon dry today, He won't be pressing for the win. It happens all the time, especially in 3yo races. If that bothers you, then you haven't learned the basics and nuiances of reading PP's. (JMHO) :)

very good Bruddah:cool:

[Charlie D]

Welp, it doesn't have to be any part of HC.
The way i see it, horse vs human, games. The human should be out there to win the game. The horse is out there for fun.
.

The horse is racing for prize money provided by bettors, so it should be out there to obtain the best poosible finishing position it can under todays race conditions


That means being sent to races fit and ready to run by it's trainer

[shoelessjoe]

Turfbar,Bettheoverlay beat me to it on my explanation.I did though have the 10 as my other main contender.He had caught the lead at the top of the stretch and faded to 3rd for 25,000 k and then the trainer took him to PID for 2 races before bringing him back to Woodbine.This horse was at least in shape and I felt need the drop to 16000k.Your right I was lucky to hit that horse at 10-1 and the 3-10 exacta for $144.00 but at this point I will take all the luck I can get.


For all of you who dont believe in trainer intent please do me a favor and start betting at Charles Town.

[cnollfan]

I don't think that sports teams try equally hard to win each game either. They are not intentionally throwing the game, but some weeks they don't care as much as other weeks. I think intent is as much a part of sports handicapping as it is of horse race handicapping. The Kentucky Derby = Super Bowl. Both teams intend equally to win, as do all the horses. But the average week, there are several games in which one team is more likely to care more than the other. And in the average horse race, while almost all of the connections would be pleased to win, some of them are trying harder than others.

[turfbar]

The way I see it ,there were six dropping, pared down to 3 contenders the 2,5 and 10. The 2 was the overlay, for you an excellent bet. Congrats !!!!!!

T

[ranchwest]

No it's not rocket science

Funny thing is though, when someone does express a view about the dodgy things in racing, a lot of people seem think the person expressing the view is a pocket talking muppet who does not know how to handicap a horse race

Did you have second thoughts about what you posted?

[Charlie D]

Did you have second thoughts about what you posted?

Sorry ranchwest, not sure what you mean


can you tell me what your refering to please

Cheers

[JustRalph]

I would like to see trainers have to make a statement of "intent" or current form when they enter the race. Come up with some kind of rating system, wherein the trainer says the horse is in form or not etc. The DRF puts a number or letter in the form, direct from the trainers mouth.

A) in form expect best performance

B) In form........good expected form?

C) Training well, Expected performance unknown

D) Unknown expected performance (Maids, New Trainers etc)

E) First Time starter

This is just off the top of my head...............

[john del riccio]

This is something that has to be changed. I never understood why a trainer uses a race where people are betting on his/her horse as a tune-up for an upcoming race.

Brian,

Are you kidding ? this is, and has been a part of the game forever ?
and most times, its obvious that its a prep race and the horse shouldn't be bet with found money. Many trainers simply cant get a horse sharp enough to win off a layoff for example, and need to get them racing fit by racing them. Especialy distance horses on dirt.

John

[raybo]

Trainers shouldn't have to tell a good handicapper if their horse is ready to run. That's part of the handicapper's job. Don't forget, trainer's and owners have been known to bet on their own horses.

If you had non-public information about a horse you were going to wager on, would you announce it to the public? I don't think so.

The form cycle of horses, especially cheaper ones, helps determine when the horse must race. Sometimes there just isn't a good fit for the horse when it needs to run. Also, there's nothing like a "test under fire" (race), to get a horse ready to make some money or to see exactly where he is in his form cycle. You can only do so much training (workouts), eventually you have to race the horse, or you might as well sell him.

[Tom]

Brian,

and most times, its obvious that its a prep race and the horse shouldn't be bet with found money.
John

It's the ones that win that are my concern. Do they paint some numbers on a roulette wheel and put clear tape over the slots until they dry, but still take bets?

[ranchwest]

I would like to see trainers have to make a statement of "intent" or current form when they enter the race. Come up with some kind of rating system, wherein the trainer says the horse is in form or not etc. The DRF puts a number or letter in the form, direct from the trainers mouth.

A) in form expect best performance

B) In form........good expected form?

C) Training well, Expected performance unknown

D) Unknown expected performance (Maids, New Trainers etc)

E) First Time starter

This is just off the top of my head...............

Do you have any idea what a can of worms this would open? What steps would be taken for enforcement? Some trainers are better qualified than others to make this evaluation -- are you going to fine the guy who is too ignorant or unqualified to understand the condition of his horse?

[bettheoverlay]

In yesterday's NYBred turf stakes at Belmont the #1 was making his turf debut, as was the #2 Big Truck who had run in the Derby. The #1 was 7/2 ML and had alot of early speed with the highest Bris Turf Pedigree # in the field. Had good speed figures as well. Looked like a contender at 7/1 odds one minute to post. In the race he set or prompted the pace to the stretch call, weakening to get beat by 5L.

In the paddock pre show, Jan Rushton pointed out that the connections had stated (to her?) that they were aiming toward a richer NYBred dirt stakes down the road and wanted a spot to keep the horse running against 3yos and that todays race was the only one that fit the bill. The implication was that todays race was being used as a conditioner. Lots of bettors who wagered on the horse probably weren't aware of that useful tidbit.

[JustRalph]

Do you have any idea what a can of worms this would open? What steps would be taken for enforcement? Some trainers are better qualified than others to make this evaluation -- are you going to fine the guy who is too ignorant or unqualified to understand the condition of his horse?

I don't find that a problem at all. I could easily identify trainers who don't know what the hell they are doing. My database would make it happen. No problem at all.

Now, the enforcement part would be up to the Stewards. At least it would be something that could be tracked.

But I agree, enforcement would be a bear. It would be revealing as hell though in some ways. Hell, they can't enforce the rules they have now.

This reminds me of a discussion about hidden workouts I had a few years back. Some trainers still do this, I am told. Why they should be allowed to get away with that is a problem if you ask me.

[skate]

The horse is racing for prize money provided by bettors, so it should be out there to obtain the best poosible finishing position it can under todays race conditions


That means being sent to races fit and ready to run by it's trainer

Yep, and that condition only comes about 20% of the time. Figure that the horse is running at its best, sure is, but that best will win about 20% of the time.
Trainer most likely knows this and i most likely know this, horse might not.

We are talking (for a horse to win) about the horse coming into form. Although it is most always very likely for the trainer and the horse to give "ITS" all, it is very unlikely for the horse to have enough to win more than 20%.

Sure, they are out there to win, form will bring about most wins.

The human on your team losses, so , you say what? he didn't try?

[cnollfan]

In yesterday's NYBred turf stakes at Belmont the #1 was making his turf debut, as was the #2 Big Truck who had run in the Derby. The #1 was 7/2 ML and had alot of early speed with the highest Bris Turf Pedigree # in the field. Had good speed figures as well. Looked like a contender at 7/1 odds one minute to post. In the race he set or prompted the pace to the stretch call, weakening to get beat by 5L.

In the paddock pre show, Jan Rushton pointed out that the connections had stated (to her?) that they were aiming toward a richer NYBred dirt stakes down the road and wanted a spot to keep the horse running against 3yos and that todays race was the only one that fit the bill. The implication was that todays race was being used as a conditioner. Lots of bettors who wagered on the horse probably weren't aware of that useful tidbit.

As far as I am concerned, those bettors who spent the time to listen to Jan Rushton's paddock pre show, were willing to factor those comments into their betting, and who eliminated the #1 because of those comments, deserve whatever profits they can glean from that. It's just as valid a handicapping method as many others. I don't do it personally for several reasons, but I don't object to people who do.

What's going to happen when trainer intent is mandated and some horse that the trainer says is only out for exercise wins for fun? To me, the art of handicapping is reading between the lines to interpret condition and intent.

[cj's dad]

I always thought the two biggest tipoffs that a horse was not in the race to win but to get ready for the next outing was a sprinter entered in a distance race (for endurance purposes) and a router entered in a sprint )to sharpen it's speed). is the single most underated hadicapping factor in Thoroughbred racing. Also, the single most unspoken and understood.

If a trainer is prepping a future Secretariat, and doesn't want to wring the lemon dry today, He won't be pressing for the win. It happens all the time, especially in 3yo races. If that bothers you, then you haven't learned the basics and nuiances of reading PP's. (JMHO) :)

[shoelessjoe]

Here is another good example.Im not saying this should be your main way of handicapping but it's something that should be considered in the handicapping process.This race was at Philly going 1 mile 7500 n1y.He won 2 races back at Philly going 1 mile 5000n1y.The trainer then takes him up to Del where he runs 5th for 5000n2y.Today he is coming back 5 days later back to Philly and wins at 4-1.While a lot of you might think he is going up in class today he actually isnt.If you read Davidowitz's book Betting Thoroughbreds he explains hows it's easier for a horse to go up one in class at the existing condition then to actually move up to n2y in the same class.

[onefast99]

Brian,

Are you kidding ? this is, and has been a part of the game forever ?
and most times, its obvious that its a prep race and the horse shouldn't be bet with found money. Many trainers simply cant get a horse sharp enough to win off a layoff for example, and need to get them racing fit by racing them. Especialy distance horses on dirt.

John
I never discussed a particular distance but since you brought it up a distance horse going in a sprint is obvious, how about the younger horses who may be looking at a turf race next out and the trainer decides to put him in just to get a "feel" for the racetrack, that to me is what should be eliminated. The harness horses have non-betting qualifiers maybe that is what some of the thoroughbred tracks should card on dark days! I am sure you bet on a horse that was using a particular race as a tune-up at least once if not more in your betting days.

[onefast99]

Here is another good example.Im not saying this should be your main way of handicapping but it's something that should be considered in the handicapping process.This race was at Philly going 1 mile 7500 n1y.He won 2 races back at Philly going 1 mile 5000n1y.The trainer then takes him up to Del where he runs 5th for 5000n2y.Today he is coming back 5 days later back to Philly and wins at 4-1.While a lot of you might think he is going up in class today he actually isnt.If you read Davidowitz's book Betting Thoroughbreds he explains hows it's easier for a horse to go up one in class at the existing condition then to actually move up to n2y in the same class.
He won today on a track with three inches of water on it. It is apparent to me something may have gone wrong during the Delaware race maybe a saddle slipping or breakage of equipment. I would of thrown out the Delaware race completely.

[shoelessjoe]

Your right about winning on a sloppy track but whose to say he wouldnt have won if the track was fast.Usually if the saddle slips or there is broken equipment the DRF will note that.I believe the trainer just ran him there for a workout with the intention of running him back in this race.

[Tom]

Why go to all the expense of shipping to another track for a workout race?

[shoelessjoe]

I play Charles Town quite a bit why do they take horses at Laurel to run up the track and then bring them back to CT and win.In this instance first of all Philly is not that far from Delaware.Maybe the trainer had another horse he was taking to Del to try and win so he decided to take this horse as well.Also he could have wanted the horse to run in a 1 mile race close to the date of this race he won and Philly did not have one carded.If you look through the DRF daily you will find these situations pop up quite often of running a horse at a different track then bringing him back to where he won.

As much as you know about racing you probably already know this.