NATIONAL TURF

[exiles]

A friend at the local OTB decided to give NATIONAL TURF a try for todays caryover at CARYOVER DOWNS oops i mean PENN NATIONAL OF WHERE THE TURF MEETS THE SURF DEL MAR . he wants to use ist time starter Halfapoundarosa but WO report gave the horse 2 C GRADES esentially saying the horse could't run a lick, of course the horse wins easily friend out of the pick 6.

[andymays]

A friend at the local OTB decided to give NATIONAL TURF a try for todays caryover at CARYOVER DOWNS oops i mean PENN NATIONAL OF WHERE THE TURF MEETS THE SURF DEL MAR . he wants to use ist time starter Halfapoundarosa but WO report gave the horse 2 C GRADES esentially saying the horse could't run a lick, of course the horse wins easily friend out of the pick 6.


Overall the workout comments I've seen from of few Clockers haven't been all that good lately. The workouts from a few clockers I looked at today at Del Mar were way off. Sometimes they help and sometimes they don't!

http://www.dmtc.com/handicapping/andyh/

http://www.dmtc.com/handicapping/hreport/

[Imriledup]

They can't win em all, i'm sure they had a glowing report on the Sadler firster monster who won with Rosario today, i mean, that horse was so good there's no way they didn't love him.

[firstoffclaim]

Harrington did not list a free pick today for some reason. He is pretty good, but its not the end all to handicapping a winner. I'd say that it is a worthwhile adjunct to your own handicapping.

[exiles]

They can't win em all, i'm sure they had a glowing report on the Sadler firster monster who won with Rosario today, i mean, that horse was so good there's no way they didn't love him.

They graded the last 2 works as c+ comenting to wait till they stretch the horse out essentially saying don't use the horse. i' m pretty sure they put you on a lot of losers and talk you off a lot of winners.

[andymays]

They graded the last 2 works as c+ comenting to wait till they stretch the horse out essentially saying don't use the horse. i' m pretty sure they put you on a lot of losers and talk you off a lot of winners.


You have to handicap the races on your own first and get the contenders and use the workouts to make adjustments to the contenders. If you over emphasize the workouts your're asking for a disaster from my experience!

[exiles]

You have to handicap the races on your own first and get the contenders and use the workouts to make adjustments to the contenders. If you over emphasize the workouts your're asking for a disaster from my experience!


Well said, its been my experience too, that's why i don't waste my money on WO reports, the horses they grade high, are way overbet, and seldom do they win or run well,the ones they grade low jump up and win, and you don't use them because the WO report graded them very low, like yesterdays 5th where the first time out winner was graded C C C W/ VERY NEGATIVE COMMENTS. and the winner of the 7th also ist time out was graded low w/ negative comments. and that's where you need WO info ist time starters and layoffs, they failed big time yesterday, i,m only commenting because when National Turf puts you on a 2-1 winner they start emailing and tooting their horn of (how the report put you on the winner) how about yesterday where the WO REPORT essentially said not to use 2 of the winners in the p6 sequence, both ist time out. WORK OUT REPORTS = WASTE OF MONEY.

[andymays]

Well said, its been my experience too, that's why i don't waste my money on WO reports, the horses they grade high, are way overbet, and seldom do they win or run well,the ones they grade low jump up and win, and you don't use them because the WO report graded them very low, like yesterdays 5th where the first time out winner was graded C C C W/ VERY NEGATIVE COMMENTS. and the winner of the 7th also ist time out was graded low w/ negative comments. and that's where you need WO info ist time starters and layoffs, they failed big time yesterday, i,m only commenting because when National Turf puts you on a 2-1 winner they start emailing and tooting their horn of (how the report put you on the winner) how about yesterday where the WO REPORT essentially said not to use 2 of the winners in the p6 sequence, both ist time out. WORK OUT REPORTS = WASTE OF MONEY.


I wouldn't say they are a waste of money. They can be valuable if taken in the proper context.

One thing I can tell you from my experience is that the workout comments on workouts that are 4 furlongs or less are good to ignore unless they are negative. Mostly every Horse should be able to work 3 or 4 furlongs fairly well. The best ones to pay attention to are 6 furlongs and longer in my opinion. Here's one from yesterday from a well known clocker.

Del Mar
6th Race:
MISS SILVER BROOK, time tells the
story, exploded over the Poly
8/24 45.1 (SUPER)

This one ran 4th which was about how it looked in the form.

[exiles]

I wouldn't say they are a waste of money. They can be valuable if taken in the proper context.

One thing I can tell you from my experience is that the workout comments on workouts that are 4 furlongs or less are good to ignore unless they are negative. Mostly every Horse should be able to work 3 or 4 furlongs fairly well. The best ones to pay attention to are 6 furlongs and longer in my opinion. Here's one from yesterday from a well known clocker.

Del Mar
6th Race:
MISS SILVER BROOK, time tells the
story, exploded over the Poly
8/24 45.1 (SUPER)

This one ran 4th which was about how it looked in the form.

Andymays, Thanks for your insight.

[andymays]

Andymays, Thanks for your insight.


:ThmbUp:

[pandy]

I wouldn't say they are a waste of money. They can be valuable if taken in the proper context.

One thing I can tell you from my experience is that the workout comments on workouts that are 4 furlongs or less are good to ignore unless they are negative. Mostly every Horse should be able to work 3 or 4 furlongs fairly well. The best ones to pay attention to are 6 furlongs and longer in my opinion. Here's one from yesterday from a well known clocker.

Del Mar
6th Race:
MISS SILVER BROOK, time tells the
story, exploded over the Poly
8/24 45.1 (SUPER)

This one ran 4th which was about how it looked in the form.


I'll throw in my 2 cents here because I used Andy's reports for several years but I stopped the first summer that Del Mar went to Poly and haven't been back. That summer horses were working fast in the mornings and running poorly. First of all, as for Miss Silver Brook, she is a morning glory, she has always impressed the clockers and was once well regarded due to her stellar works.

Andy is a very good clocker, but let me say that one summer I bought Toby Turrell's sheet to compare his workout comments to Harringtons and I was amazed how many times they disagreed, so this is not an exact science.

Overall, the reports were better years ago because too many people have access to them now and the horses with high grades get overbet. Also, you have to be careful not to let it throw you off of horses you like. Plenty of horses with C or C+ workout ratings win. There are simply a lot of horses that don't work great but know how to win.

Also, one thing that is overlooked in regard to workouts is what the work does for the horse. For instance, when Giacomo won the Derby, Sheriffs usually breezes his horses but he put two hard and fast works into Giacomo. Andy gave these works C+ which is not good for a Derby contender. But because of the two fast works, I listed Giacomo as a potential longshot in exotics because I figured that Sheriffs was using the fast works for conditioning. Not that I bet Giacomo, I didn't, but I did list him as a potential longshot bomb due to the fast works, because I've seen a lot of horses wake up at prices when they go from working slow to fast.

The point is, even if a horse doesn't look pretty during a quick work, that doesn't mean that the horse didn't get something out of that work. To me, improved speed in a race or a work is a good sign and can tip off longshot winners. Not all horses look pretty on the track in the morning or afternoon, but a professional racehorse is going to try hard regardless.

[andymays]

I'll throw in my 2 cents here because I used Andy's reports for several years but I stopped the first summer that Del Mar went to Poly and haven't been back. That summer horses were working fast in the mornings and running poorly. First of all, as for Miss Silver Brook, she is a morning glory, she has always impressed the clockers and was once well regarded due to her stellar works.

Andy is a very good clocker, but let me say that one summer I bought Toby Turrell's sheet to compare his workout comments to Harringtons and I was amazed how many times they disagreed, so this is not an exact science.

Overall, the reports were better years ago because too many people have access to them now and the horses with high grades get overbet. Also, you have to be careful not to let it throw you off of horses you like. Plenty of horses with C or C+ workout ratings win. There are simply a lot of horses that don't work great but know how to win.

Also, one thing that is overlooked in regard to workouts is what the work does for the horse. For instance, when Giacomo won the Derby, Sheriffs usually breezes his horses but he put two hard and fast works into Giacomo. Andy gave these works C+ which is not good for a Derby contender. But because of the two fast works, I listed Giacomo as a potential longshot in exotics because I figured that Sheriffs was using the fast works for conditioning. Not that I bet Giacomo, I didn't, but I did list him as a potential longshot bomb due to the fast works, because I've seen a lot of horses wake up at prices when they go from working slow to fast.

The point is, even if a horse doesn't look pretty during a quick work, that doesn't mean that the horse didn't get something out of that work. To me, improved speed in a race or a work is a good sign and can tip off longshot winners. Not all horses look pretty on the track in the morning or afternoon, but a professional racehorse is going to try hard regardless.


I agree with everything you said. It is true that often Clockers will have conflicting opinions on the same work. Overall I think Bruno De Julio is the best but he doesn't do it full time. He has been a little off lately like most of them! If you read Bruno's comments on Miss Silver Brook you will see that he says the big work was typical. Therefore it shouldn't be seen as a wake up call!

Miss Silver Brook 08/24 DMR/FT 4F 45.0h
huge gallop out on top of huge speed--58 flat on our watch. Typical for her

The workout I used for an example above in post #8 was Toby. He made it seem like a wake up work. He should have included the words typical or something to that effect in my opinion.

[Imriledup]

I'll throw in my 2 cents here because I used Andy's reports for several years but I stopped the first summer that Del Mar went to Poly and haven't been back. That summer horses were working fast in the mornings and running poorly. First of all, as for Miss Silver Brook, she is a morning glory, she has always impressed the clockers and was once well regarded due to her stellar works.

Andy is a very good clocker, but let me say that one summer I bought Toby Turrell's sheet to compare his workout comments to Harringtons and I was amazed how many times they disagreed, so this is not an exact science.

Overall, the reports were better years ago because too many people have access to them now and the horses with high grades get overbet. Also, you have to be careful not to let it throw you off of horses you like. Plenty of horses with C or C+ workout ratings win. There are simply a lot of horses that don't work great but know how to win.

Also, one thing that is overlooked in regard to workouts is what the work does for the horse. For instance, when Giacomo won the Derby, Sheriffs usually breezes his horses but he put two hard and fast works into Giacomo. Andy gave these works C+ which is not good for a Derby contender. But because of the two fast works, I listed Giacomo as a potential longshot in exotics because I figured that Sheriffs was using the fast works for conditioning. Not that I bet Giacomo, I didn't, but I did list him as a potential longshot bomb due to the fast works, because I've seen a lot of horses wake up at prices when they go from working slow to fast.

The point is, even if a horse doesn't look pretty during a quick work, that doesn't mean that the horse didn't get something out of that work. To me, improved speed in a race or a work is a good sign and can tip off longshot winners. Not all horses look pretty on the track in the morning or afternoon, but a professional racehorse is going to try hard regardless.

I would have to think that certain trainers (Eurton cough cough) are conciously aware that their workouts will appear in print. If you want to put a horse in a claiming race that's good (again, cough cough Eurton) you have to make sure your horse doesn't look good in the mornings yet, at the same time, is getting enough out of the works to be fit enough to win first time out.

Also, on the reverse end of the spectrum, you would have to think that if a trainer wants to LOSE a horse via claim box, he's going to work that horse to make him look very good to clockers, so the reports get out there and wallah, you get claimed.

[exiles]

Andymays and Pandy, summing up your posts, they reenforce my opinion that WO REPORTS are very little help in the handicapping proces

[andymays]

Andymays and Pandy, summing up your posts, they reenforce my opinion that WO REPORTS are very little help in the handicapping proces


To sum it all up...

They help when they help and they don't when they don't! :D

[Imriledup]

I'll tell you what would be a good addition to a workout service is to have a special report to list which trainers have won with horses who have had 'less than stellar' works according to that publication's clocker. If you , as a handicapper, know that a certain trainer seems to always get one over on their own clocker, this would be good information to have, that way, you can say "Even thought we sort of think this horse trained by Peter Eurton stinks, Pete has won quite often with horses that we thought stunk in the mornings"


now, i'm just using Eurton as an example and this might not be the case with this particular trainer, but you get the gist i'm sure.

[andymays]

I'll tell you what would be a good addition to a workout service is to have a special report to list which trainers have won with horses who have had 'less than stellar' works according to that publication's clocker. If you , as a handicapper, know that a certain trainer seems to always get one over on their own clocker, this would be good information to have, that way, you can say "Even thought we sort of think this horse trained by Peter Eurton stinks, Pete has won quite often with horses that we thought stunk in the mornings"


now, i'm just using Eurton as an example and this might not be the case with this particular trainer, but you get the gist i'm sure.


Warren Stute was a guy who used to win off ugly works. Bruno De Julio will usually make a note like that if a Trainer works them ugly and then they run well. I like that type of opinion in a workout comment.

[exiles]

I'll tell you what would be a good addition to a workout service is to have a special report to list which trainers have won with horses who have had 'less than stellar' works according to that publication's clocker. If you , as a handicapper, know that a certain trainer seems to always get one over on their own clocker, this would be good information to have, that way, you can say "Even thought we sort of think this horse trained by Peter Eurton stinks, Pete has won quite often with horses that we thought stunk in the mornings"


now, i'm just using Eurton as an example and this might not be the case with this particular trainer, but you get the gist i'm sure.

Very good sugestion, Andy Harington are you listening?

[Imriledup]

Very good sugestion, Andy Harington are you listening?

Bob Selvin might be listening! :ThmbUp:

Bob posts here, maybe this is something they can add to their report, how certain trainer's do and what is their ROI on certain types of comments. That way, people will know which trainers have a +ROI with 'bad' wkt comments and which trainers never seem to win with bad workout comments. This would be good stuff to know imo. This way, any trainer trying to manipulate the system by making good horses look bad in the mornings, this report would sniff that out.

[big frank]

You could look at all the works you like ,,, but i had this horse because of his pedigree and the fact Alex Solis was on ,,, that to me tipped off trainer intent