form can it be determined from a database

[jasperson]

Determining form is hard even looking at pp lines,but can it be determined from a database. Is form a yes or no answer or is there degrees of form? Here is how I am qualifing a horse on form.
1. lay off >45 days =not qualified
2. a 2nd or better in last race and back in same class =Q
3. a finish 3rd or better and within 3 lengths of the winner=Q
4. within 3 lengths of the leader at 2 calls=Q
5. within 3 lengths of the leader at 1 call and a class drop=Q
What are your ideas on form?
I attached the program output that I am using it on.

[TexasDolly]

I guess I don't understand the text file. It appeard that every winner had the lowest score . Was that score determined before the race ? Maybe you should explain the columns somewhat.
Thank you,
TD

[jasperson]

That race hasn't been run yet. That is the predicted finish.
Jack

[jasperson]

I am still working on the program. I didn't put the race date up there but it is for the 28th at lad.

[turninforhome10]

What type of races are you applying to this method?

[TexasDolly]

I see,that is the score you have calculated from your scheme.
How have previous scores performed that you have calculated ?
Thank you,
TD

[jasperson]

What type of races are you applying to this method?
All races that I download. I am using now to supplement my other more extensive program when the conditions change. I like playing off track and races where they are taking off the turf. You can see how knowing how the horse can perform on a muddy track can be an advantage.
Jack

[Overlay]

Why not use probabilities or impact values associated with varying degrees of form when looking at horses, rather than employing a go/no-go approach that eliminates a horse (either on the form factor or altogether) if it does not meet a certain standard (however that standard is derived)?

[Robert Goren]

Form is very tricky thing to measure from PPs. You know how the horse ran its last race and that is all. You have no idea how the horse came out of its last race or if something as happened to it since. It is reasonable to assume that the longer between races the more likely it is some thing bad has happened.

I am currently looking at the horse that the highest speed rating in last race. I do every thing by " pencil and paper" so my data base is limited, but my numbers show after 7 weeks there is drop off in win %. There is also a pretty good drop off if the horse ran 5th or worse. In sprint races, winners do not repeat very often except in starter handicaps and stake races. In routes my data shows they do. I am not sure why or if it just a fluke of the small sample size.

[jasperson]

Why not use probabilities or impact values associated with varying degrees of form when looking at horses, rather than employing a go/no-go approach that eliminates a horse (either on the form factor or altogether) if it does not meet a certain standard (however that standard is derived)?
My database calculates the IV for a horse that hasn't raced in 45 days as .65

[TexasDolly]

I am still curious to know how has the score has performed up to date. Please provide us with some numbers about the results of yesterday's races etc .
Thank you.
TD

[Overlay]

My database calculates the IV for a horse that hasn't raced in 45 days as .65
Right. Such a horse may win less than its "fair share" of races (as indicated by the impact value being below 1.00), but that also doesn't necessarily mean that the horse should be eliminated out of hand as having absolutely no chance of winning. When you blend that value with similar ranking data related to other major handicapping factors (such as speed, class, and pace) where the horse may compare more favorably to its competition, you can arrive at an assessment of the horse's overall probability of winning, and determine at what odds level the horse might become an acceptable betting risk, despite its subpar performance on the form factor.

[thaskalos]

IMO..."form" is basically a yes or a no, and few horses should be eliminated at the beginning of the handicapping process...especially if we are betting exotics.

The different "degrees" of form are best determined by speed and pace figures...not by how close our horse was to the winner -- or the pace-setter -- in the race.

An in-the-money finish can only be adequetly judged by determining how fast the race itself was run.

[PhantomOnTour]

IMO..."form" is basically a yes or a no, and few horses should be eliminated at the beginning of the handicapping process...especially if we are betting exotics.

The different "degrees" of form are best determined by speed and pace figures...not by how close our horse was to the winner -- or the pace-setter -- in the race.

An in-the-money finish can only be adequetly judged by determining how fast the race itself was run.
A) is the horse fast enough to compete?
B) do the race conditions and race flow favor him?
C) is he going to run one of his better races today?

Those are the basic questions...A & B are readily answered with pace and speed figs and an understanding of conditions....but C...hmmmm.
To me, form cycle analysis in conjunction with trainer intent is still a skill many lack.
How is he going to perform today ?

[thaskalos]

A) is the horse fast enough to compete?
B) do the race conditions and race flow favor him?
C) is he going to run one of his better races today?

Those are the basic questions...A & B are readily answered with pace and speed figs and an understanding of conditions....but C...hmmmm.
To me, form cycle analysis in conjunction with trainer intent is still a skill many lack.
How is he going to perform today ?

If the horse is "fast enough to compete", and "the race conditions and the race flow favor him"...then the horse must be considered a serious contender.

We are not mind-readers...so we can never be sure of the trainer's intentions.

If the horse is at the proper distance, surface, and class level...and has been racing regularly, then the assumption must be made that the horse is well-intentioned, IMO.

[Robert Goren]

Determining form is hard even looking at pp lines,but can it be determined from a database. Is form a yes or no answer or is there degrees of form? Here is how I am qualifing a horse on form.
1. lay off >45 days =not qualified
2. a 2nd or better in last race and back in same class =Q
3. a finish 3rd or better and within 3 lengths of the winner=Q
4. within 3 lengths of the leader at 2 calls=Q
5. within 3 lengths of the leader at 1 call and a class drop=Q
What are your ideas on form?
I attached the program output that I am using it on. What about a horse that meet these requirements and is taking a huge plunge in claiming price say from 40k to 10k?

[PhantomOnTour]

If the horse is "fast enough to compete", and "the race conditions and the race flow favor him"...then the horse must be considered a serious contender.
We are not mind-readers...so we can never be sure of the trainer's intentions.

If the horse is at the proper distance, surface, and class level...and has been racing regularly, then the assumption must be made that the horse is well-intentioned, IMO.
Exceptions abound though...what about that odd horse who wins and is then dropped in class? Surely he's fast enough and the conditions will suit him, but he should be viewed with skepticism.
What is his trainer telling us?

Any form cycle analysis is incomplete without considering the intent of the trainer. If you intensely follow one circuit you will get to know about the trainers and their intent before too long.
It is huge for me.

[Capper Al]

Jack,

I caterogerize form:


Not to win
Not Even In The Money
To win but dropped a postion from my selection method. For instance, the horse came close to being a NO TO WIN horse but just qualified to keep. If the horse was my top rated horse, he now becomes my second rated horse.

[cj]

To answer the original post, if it can be defined, a query can be written to research it. It just depends on the skill of the database designer and/or the query writer. When it comes to form, of course there are no guarantees.

That doesn't mean you can't find some very good items that indicate form is likely declining or on the rise. Most of those have little to do with trainer intent, but with analyzing horse performance in recent races.

[Solid_Gold]

What about a horse that meet these requirements and is taking a huge plunge in claiming price say from 40k to 10k?

I try not to back a horse dropping over 25% in price. It's been my experience that the trainer is merely trying to unload an unsound horse.

[PhantomOnTour]

During the month of July there will be many runners at Bel who are merely prepping for the Spa.
Pays to know which trainers do this regularly.

[cj]

During the month of July there will be many runners at Bel who are merely prepping for the Spa.
Pays to know which trainers do this regularly.

...and others really trying to win because they don't have races for them up north and/or the trainer wouldn't mind losing the horse before leaving.

[PhantomOnTour]

...and others really trying to win because they don't have races for them up north and/or the trainer wouldn't mind losing the horse before leaving.
True...and sorry for the thread drift.
And yes, i agree...it's about the horse in the massive majority of the time, but those trainers gems are just glorious.

[pondman]

What are your ideas on form?


I stay clear of pp form, with the exception of young horses which are either in or preparing for graded stakes, and there's a large enough pool. I'd alway go with the fastest 2 year old fillies in the BC. I avoid the daily grind of claiming races but I'll look at horses with recent maiden wins on the West Coast. You might find some way to make something out of 2nd place finishers at your local track, but you'll need to watch the odds, and play consistent. A horse returning to the same race, with form, won't bring in much money over time. I would rather sit and wait for a solid home runs, which I believe comes from avoiding the repeat pp trap and require knowledge of real class, seasonality and connections. I'd agree with the PhantomOnTour approach.