Manner of victory....does it matter?

[Valuist]

First off, one is probably best off to make their own observations whether a horse is under a drive, ridden out, or absolutely geared down.

I don't know if there is a black and white answer to this one. There are some who are convinced that horses will run to their numbers, given the opportunity, trip and race dynamics. There are obviously many examples of this. The speed figure basically represents the horsepower, and given the chance, that reflects its ability.

But I have seen too much evidence to believe this is always the case. Far from it. One of the more common longshot winners is the horse who is coming off a win but with a mediocre speed figure. After all, the horse's job is to beat its competition and win; not to run a particular speed figure. I also have to believe there is a natural tendency to "let up" when one reaches the front late in the race. Anyone who has run track knows that. Its also the jockey's job to win; not run to a particular number.

Don't think there are any concrete answers to this dilemma.

[cj]

One of the more common longshot winners is the horse who is coming off a win but with a mediocre speed figure. After all, the horse's job is to beat its competition and win; not to run a particular speed figure.

One thing that helps me is looking at the pace/speed figure relationship. If the pace was slower than the speed figure, it is very possible there is more in the tank and the horse could have run faster. I love this angle with lightly raced horses, especially 2 year olds. You will often see a maiden special weight race with figures of say 50-60 and the winner came from off the pace, has maybe figures of 40-60. Many times these horses will step up and beat other runners that recorded 80s recently.

If the pace was faster, that isn't very often the case and looks can be deceiving. I tend to trust the figure.

[Valuist]

One thing that helps me is looking at the pace/speed figure relationship. If the pace was slower than the speed figure, it is very possible there is more in the tank and the horse could have run faster. I love this angle with lightly raced horses, especially 2 year olds. You will often see a maiden special weight race with figures of say 50-60 and the winner came from off the pace, has maybe figures of 40-60. Many times these horses will step up and beat other runners that recorded 80s recently.

If the pace was faster, that isn't very often the case and looks can be deceiving. I tend to trust the figure.

I would agree as the pace figure, in conjunction w/the final speed figure, gives a more complete view of the performance rather than strictly the end result based speed figure. I also would add that a win accomplished on a deep rail or wide on a good rail day would have to be upgraded.

One other point I left out from the original post. I mentioned that one should, if they spend time watching replays, label the manner of victory. I have gotten overlaid prices on winners I had listed as ridden out or geared down while the DRF and/or BRIS had them listed as driving.

[Tom]

Races that make me talk to myself are ones where a horse has run well up on the pace in, say 95-90, 93-89.....then, when racing close to a slow pace of say 85-90, 80-88, tires late and has no rally. Then, when they face a faster pace next time, they press it and finish better.

[LottaKash]

I feel that this is related to the topic at hand...

Not being able to get to the "live" trackside anymore with regularity....I sure wish that the track operators would see fit to show, in video, how the horses are finishing their races beyond the wire....I would always like to see how "all" the horses were finishing their races and perhaps then, lend a clue as to how they may have come out of those races....It certainly wouldn't hurt, I believe...

That is one thing, thru the years, that I always paid attention to, you know, after the race was run...How they look...

best,

[Valuist]

I feel that this is related to the topic at hand...

Not being able to get to the "live" trackside anymore with regularity....I sure wish that the track operators would see fit to show, in video, how the horses are finishing their races beyond the wire....I would always like to see how "all" the horses were finishing their races and perhaps then, lend a clue as to how they may have come out of those races....It certainly wouldn't hurt, I believe...

That is one thing, thru the years, that I always paid attention to, you know, after the race was run...How they look...

best,

I would add (some) tracks should do a better job with their post parades where the public is mostly seeing lead ponies.

[Hanover1]

I buy into this wholeheartedly....the trick here is recognizing what you are seeing. I knew guys who could fool you this way as well, for their own reasons. Goes to understanding connections and intent I suppose. Some of these guys were real tough to read.

[EJXD2]

The thing that amazes me is how people play both sides.

People unimpressed with Uncle Mo's Kelso assert that he had it all his own way, wasn't pressured, hand ride, etc. And that translates into an easy race and not an indicator of what to expect next out.

People unimpressed with Rachel Alexandra's Woodward assert that she was all out, had too many challenges, etc. A truly great horse, they say, should have dealt with the likes of Macho Again and Bullsbay in an easier fashion.

This type of thinking always seems to work against front runners because the appearance is that they regress at the end of a race while closers are just getting going (Ragozin debunks this by noting that it's just an optical illusion and often closers still run the opening quarter faster than their closing quarter).

Anyway, just some random thoughts that lead me not to put much stock in the manner of victory and as CJ said, to trust the fig.

[Valuist]

The thing that amazes me is how people play both sides.

People unimpressed with Uncle Mo's Kelso assert that he had it all his own way, wasn't pressured, hand ride, etc. And that translates into an easy race and not an indicator of what to expect next out.

People unimpressed with Rachel Alexandra's Woodward assert that she was all out, had too many challenges, etc. A truly great horse, they say, should have dealt with the likes of Macho Again and Bullsbay in an easier fashion.

This type of thinking always seems to work against front runners because the appearance is that they regress at the end of a race while closers are just getting going (Ragozin debunks this by noting that it's just an optical illusion and often closers still run the opening quarter faster than their closing quarter).

Anyway, just some random thoughts that lead me not to put much stock in the manner of victory and as CJ said, to trust the fig.

Uncle Mo's win was against a small field in the slop.

Rachel Alexandra was under constant pressure w/a fast pace the entire race. The fact that the race dynamics favored Macho Again and Bullsbay showed just how superior RA was to those older males.

[thaskalos]

But I have seen too much evidence to believe this is always the case. Far from it. One of the more common longshot winners is the horse who is coming off a win but with a mediocre speed figure. After all, the horse's job is to beat its competition and win; not to run a particular speed figure. I also have to believe there is a natural tendency to "let up" when one reaches the front late in the race. Anyone who has run track knows that. Its also the jockey's job to win; not run to a particular number.

Don't think there are any concrete answers to this dilemma.
I have always maintained that more can be learned about a horse when it LOSES a race, then when it emerges victorious...regardless of how visually impressive (or not) the victory may be.

Some horses - as you say - win while registering slow speed figures, but this doesn't prevent them from repeating their win, often at a higher class...and at the expense of much faster horses than itself.

But I have also noticed that these horses who win with what appears to be plenty in reserve, often run slower figures next out...eventhough this time they seem to be giving their all.

When I scan the past performances, it occures to me that the horses seem to run their highest speed figures NOT when they encounter stiff competition and have to give their all...but rather when they "toy" with their inferior competition, and draw out to runaway victories.

All in all...I believe that a horse's winning effort can fool us when we use that race to determine its current form...

[Elliott Sidewater]

Just a short comment before the baseball game begins - to me the cases where the manor of victory seem to mean the least, in general, are:

1) on the right part of a biased track
2) on a sloppy, muddy, or sealed surface, particularly when the horses are strung out at the finish
3) in short fields
4) when there has been an accident or breakdown during the running that affected contenders

Thaskalos, please read your PMs.

Thanks
Elliott

[thaskalos]

Elliott,

I have no PMs to read...

[Overlay]

Quirin found that involvement in a close duel for the lead (leading or trailing the leader by a length or less at each of either the last two or three calls of a horse's latest race; or leading by a clear margin at the quarter-pole or in the stretch, and then winning or losing by a neck or less) was a positive indicator for the horse's performance in its next start, irrespective of time between races, or speed/pace figures. (Not a guarantee of victory next out, but a positive angle with respect to condition and "heart".) I believe that that continues to apply.

[pondman]

One of the more common longshot winners is the horse who is coming off a win but with a mediocre speed figure. After all, the horse's job is to beat its competition and win; not to run a particular speed figure. I also have to believe there is a natural tendency to "let up" when one reaches the front late in the race. Anyone who has run track knows that. Its also the jockey's job to win; not run to a particular number.

Don't think there are any concrete answers to this dilemma.

I agree with your observation. If a horse is in against maidens and has the lead easy and nothing near, and on a winning pace, why would he ask for everything?

[classhandicapper]

One of the complications is that when horses cross the finish line they are not all uniformly tired.

Some are exhausted and already decelerating rapidly.

Some are a few strides away from being exhausted and decelerating rapidly.

Some could continue on at a similar rate of speed for awhile before becoming exhausted.

Different degrees of reserve energy mean changes in pace would impact the final time of each of those horses differently.

In many cases I think you almost can't know what you are dealing with until the horse is eventually tested against better company.

The one thing I feel fairly confident about occurs mostly in turf and synthetic racing.

If a horse was actually accelerating late in a race, in most cases it would be capable of running a faster final time if the pace was faster. The other thing that could be a clue is if the horse goes out extremely well after the finish and seems loaded with reserve energy. That usually means there was more in the tank.

[classhandicapper]

But I have also noticed that these horses who win with what appears to be plenty in reserve, often run slower figures next out...eventhough this time they seem to be giving their all.

When I scan the past performances, it occures to me that the horses seem to run their highest speed figures NOT when they encounter stiff competition and have to give their all...but rather when they "toy" with their inferior competition, and draw out to runaway victories.


Exactly. This is sort of what CLASS is about.

I think you have to differentiate between the horse that ran a fast final time and finished with reserve racing energy because its trip was easy and/or its competition inferior and the horse that is simply better than it's recent figures. That's a subtle distinction that is not always clear until after the fact.

If Secretariat stalked a bunch of ALW horses in an average pace for ALW horses and then ran hard for the last quarter, he would not run nearly as fast a final time as he's capable of even though he had an easy trip against weaker. He'd cross the finish line flying and nowhere near tapped of his energy reserves.

If a Grade 3 horse got the same trip, he might run a faster final time than he would in a Grade 3 or Grade 2 stake where he had to work harder to get and maintain his position.

[mountainman]

I have always maintained that more can be learned about a horse when it LOSES a race, then when it emerges victorious...regardless of how visually impressive (or not) the victory may be.

Some horses - as you say - win while registering slow speed figures, but this doesn't prevent them from repeating their win, often at a higher class...and at the expense of much faster horses than itself.

But I have also noticed that these horses who win with what appears to be plenty in reserve, often run slower figures next out...eventhough this time they seem to be giving their all.

When I scan the past performances, it occures to me that the horses seem to run their highest speed figures NOT when they encounter stiff competition and have to give their all...but rather when they "toy" with their inferior competition, and draw out to runaway victories.

All in all...I believe that a horse's winning effort can fool us when we use that race to determine its current form...

Sharp post. As I sometimes state on the air, I don't believe in "easy" wins. Horses invariably run their fastest when appearing to be well within themselves. Faced with the need to dig deeper-be it a less favorable raceflow, or simply stiffer competition- they will run slower. Thus if anything really remained in reserve (which I seriously doubt) through the late stages of a "geared down" score, it's not energy that can be called upon under future duress.

That's why I believe most horses reveal the outer boundaries of their abilities when they win-not when they lose.

[mountainman]

If Secretariat stalked a bunch of ALW horses in an average pace for ALW horses and then ran hard for the last quarter, he would not run nearly as fast a final time as he's capable of even though he had an easy trip against weaker. He'd cross the finish line flying and nowhere near tapped of his energy reserves.


Unless the alw horse was named Onion.

[classhandicapper]

Unless the alw horse was named Onion.

Only if he wasn't 100% and was racing on a dead rail. ;)

[mountainman]

Only if he wasn't 100% and was racing on a dead rail. ;)

How did I know you'd say that? lol

[classhandicapper]

How did I know you'd say that? lol

;)

This topic interests me because it's often difficult to know what a horse had left in the tank and whether he would run faster or slower under greater pressure. For most it's slower, but there are some lightly raced and other horses that due to race development and pace don't show their best until pressed.

[mountainman]

;)

This topic interests me because it's often difficult to know what a horse had left in the tank and whether he would run faster or slower under greater pressure. For most it's slower, but there are some lightly raced and other horses that due to race development and pace don't show their best until pressed.

For me, a wide margin win without an exceptional final time figure to match is the absolute kiss of death. The rare horse who will improve on that clocking against better company or a less favorable pace has probably improved to do so. Your own term "lightly raced" implies as much, sir.

[speculus]

I feel the most important thing is NOT the timing, or speed figure, or pace scenario, or the manner of victory. The most important thing is the ACTUAL SPEED with which the horse travels WHEN crossing the finish line.

I am sorry to be saying this, and hope I don't come across as rude, but that's the MISSING LINK in the speed riddle, and unless you have that last-stride speed in accurate measure, all your numbers may not have much meaning, really.

[thaskalos]

I feel the most important thing is NOT the timing, or speed figure, or pace scenario, or the manner of victory. The most important thing is the ACTUAL SPEED with which the horse travels WHEN crossing the finish line.

I am sorry to be saying this, and hope I don't come across as rude, but that's the MISSING LINK in the speed riddle, and unless you have that last-stride speed in accurate measure, all your numbers may not have much meaning, really.
Interesting thought...but isn't the "last-stride speed" just a byproduct of what transpired earlier on in the race?

What I mean is...won't the horses with the best last-stride speed be the ones who did the least amount of running during the early part of the race?

[Tom]

The horse with the best last stride speed might be finishing 6th. Take a few charts and calculate the finishing speed of all the horses. Use fps for the last 8th and see where the winner ranks.

[speculus]

Interesting thought...but isn't the "last-stride speed" just a byproduct of what transpired earlier on in the race?

What I mean is...won't the horses with the best last-stride speed be the ones who did the least amount of running during the early part of the race?

Yes, the last stride speed will surely be affected by how the horse ran earlier in the race, but unless you 'marry' the last-stride speed AND the fastest stride the horse has taken during the race (this could be ANYWHERE), and use it in an intelligently designed formula ALONG WITH the speed (as given by final time), your numbers will not have significance. In the absence of the last-stride speed and the fastest-stride speed, plain final time speed figure is lame.

[speculus]

The horse with the best last stride speed might be finishing 6th. Take a few charts and calculate the finishing speed of all the horses. Use fps for the last 8th and see where the winner ranks.

Tom, you are right. Even the last place finisher can have the best last-stride speed, but I am not saying that has the most significance as a stand-alone parameter, I am just saying that it is the missing link (along with the fastest-stride speed), and unless speed & pace handicapping can incorporate those vital missing links, they will continue to have limitations.

Also, there could be a great difference between the speed for the last 8th and the speed for the actual last stride.

[classhandicapper]

Tom, you are right. Even the last place finisher can have the best last-stride speed, but I am not saying that has the most significance as a stand-alone parameter, I am just saying that it is the missing link (along with the fastest-stride speed), and unless speed & pace handicapping can incorporate those vital missing links, they will continue to have limitations.

Also, there could be a great difference between the speed for the last 8th and the speed for the actual last stride.

I like the idea of looking at fastest stride speed in addition to just early speed. Not all horses do their fastest running in the first quarter. Sometimes the horse that can run the fastest over a shorter distance is actually a mid pack runner or even a closer. That's obviously true of turf and synthetic horses, but occasionally it's true of dirt runners also.

[speculus]

I like the idea of looking at fastest stride speed in addition to just early speed. Not all horses do their fastest running in the first quarter. Sometimes the horse that can run the fastest over a shorter distance is actually a mid pack runner or even a closer. That's obviously true of turf and synthetic horses, but occasionally it's true of dirt runners also.

The fastest stride has other profound implications on the speed picture when you consider that a horse's k value (that's my personal nomenclature) generally does not alter as long as he keeps racing fit. And this constant k value for a horse has a great bearing on what distance is suitable for the horse.

The k value is given by the formula: k = N^2/(D*t)

where N is the number of strides taken, D is the distance traveled & t is the time taken for it.

When distance is measured in meters & time in seconds:
For k>0.35 a horse will have a short stamina, you can say a sprinter
for 0.30 < k < 0.35 a horse could be classified as a miler
& for 0.25 < k < 0.30 a horse is generally a stayer

Speed can also be defined alternatively as

Speed = k * R^2 where R is the average stride (in feet or meters) the horse has taken over the trip.

R will keep on changing with the horse's health condition and fitness, getting better with improvement in condition and falling with unfitness.

[Valuist]

Just got nosed out of a nice Pic 4 at Keeneland due to a qualifier, Hoofit, who won the Phoenix. His last race was his only Poly start, which he won going away by over 3 lengths. He received an 82 for that Presque Isle win, which would put him well short of contender in a race like the Phoenix. But at 11-1 he was not easy to use.

[Tom]

where N is the number of strides taken, D is the distance traveled & t is the time taken for it.

How do get the values for these?

[speculus]

How do get the values for these?

I used to collect (actually count!) them from race videos when I developed this theory. Tedious, but you have to do it only once for each horse, later you can use equations involving his k value (constant) to generate all data related to the horse's other runs.