form vs. condition

[completebill]

I have a two-part question:
1) To me, form and condition are inextricably intertwined. Can any of you suggest any meaningful (and, hopefully, quantifiable) differentiation, or some way to quantify the effect one might have on the other?
2) Can any of you make suggestions or observations on which of the available computer handicapping programs might best handle these two factors?
I know the many expert handicappers regularly found on this excellent Forum will provide some meaninful insight. THANKS!---Bill

[Intrepid]

Htr has form cycle and work out figures.

[DJofSD]

I'm not sure I know the difference between form and condition.

[Jeff P]

A lot of players think of Form as what a horse looks like on paper... recent sharp or bullet works within x number of days and/or improved performances in recent races.

In my own head I view condition as what a horse looks like in the flesh... a horse in condition looks very different from a horse out of condition.

I'm talking about muscling, coat, attitude displayed by body language attributes such as chin on the chest, an arch to the neck, ears cocked forward, tail slightly elevated... things like that. If you learn what to look for it really can help your bottom line... not so much (my opinion) by looking for horses in condition and backing them - but more so looking at the condition of horses you are about to bet and passing on those that are obviously not in condition.

Most programs out there contain factors related to Form.

Very few of the horses ranked tops in Form by most programs show up on race day in absolute top condition in the flesh.

How a horse feels on race day is tied to a myriad of factors that never show up in past performance data. Injuries and illnesses happen. And it's almost never disclosed to us. Horses recover from injury and illness just like we do. Again, the truth is almost never disclosed to us.

Example: A horse that throws in a clunker of a race is given some time off. Question: What caused the bad race? Has he recovered... FULLY? As bettors we almost never know the truth. Instead, we try to fill in the blanks with info interpreted from past performance data.

Given the misinformation that we are spoon fed and given and that injured horses race all the time, it's actually amazing how accurate software can be at predicting race outcomes.

I hope I explained that in a way that makes sense.


-jp

.

[BELMONT 6-6-09]

Good points JP on the horses's viewing before the race as the major indicator of fitness at the moment of the race. Myself since I am unable to view the post parade during the week I rely on the following general indicators to hopefully put the percentages in my favor for establishing a horse in condition(as best I can using the PP's)

(1) A workout within the last ten days especially if the horse has races within 21 days.

(2) A high percentage trainer in that they generally legal ly or illegally keep their charges in top form and have mastered the condition book to place there horses in races where they can win.

(3) A good last race where the horse stayed within 5 1/2 lengths throughout the race including all calls. (turf races and real legitimate excuse races are the exceptions)

(4) The Quirin revelation where horses that show 2 or more wins within their last 6 races are able to keep sharp form intact from race to race or has the ability to run to win when properly placed.

(5) Obviously avoiding and/or treading lightly with bottom level claiming events that are generally filled with walking wounded.

I am sure there are other factors that place the percentages in the bettors favor in avoiding the tailing off selection.

Zappi

[completebill]

I think I have minor disagreement w/ Jeff on "Form". I view form as the analysis of the horse's current position in a performance cycle. It can usually be charted.
A good example is "The Sheets". they chart the performance ratings of a horse, looking for patterns of improvement or decline in performance. This is an expression of "Form".
Another, and simple, example is the horse that runs good race/bad race. It's useful to predict today's performance.
Another example is a horse coming off a lay0ff. He runs a comeback race, followed by an improved 2d race back, possibly signifying improving form. We then can (perhaps) look for a peak performance 3d back, hopefully being somewhere near it's best race, assuming a fully mature animal. Charting form cycles may lead us to then expect a "bounce", followed by a series of improving races. It may well be useful to try to extrapolate expected performance today by examining the form cycle(S).
Students/proponents of form analysis believe that they can analyze these form patterns of improvement or decline to predict today's effort.
I agree with Jeff that "condition" refers more to physicality. Leaving aside visual observations on race day (which I prefer to treat as a separate subject), form is often "calculated" by observations of both workouts and races. The variables are length of workouts, frequency/spacing, and speed of workouts. The workout speed is a variable affected by trainer intention and by visual observation, if and when possible, of the effort being expended by the horse (perhaps by means of commercially available workout reports), when available as well as actual reflection of CONDITION.
Analysis reveals, also, that total work/race VOLUME per given unit of time is imortant in evaluation of condition (total furlongs on the track per ----days).
I'm looking for the best way to quantify these factors, and to relate current Condition to the current Form cycle, and am interested in the best software for these purposes, as well as your opinions on the subject.