Do you use trainer stats? That is people handicapping. Do you handicap jockey connections? Do you follow owners? Do you see which owners and trainers dress up when they have a live one running? Do you know which trainers are superstitious and where lucky clothing when running a contender? Can you tell me the workout patterns of the winning horses of the trainers at your local or favorite track? Can you tell me which trainers like to give their horses a race at the track before trying to crack down? There are many other people factors that can be handicapped. Failing to account for the people factor ignores pertinent information.

All valid points here....I do like my jockeys but have heard numerous times how agents are really the ones who get the live mounts of course, so when I notice that jockey x has 2 mounts and both run, we like to say that jockey x CHOSE this one over that one , so therefore, the one jockey x remains on, must be the one with the better shot. Don't know how true this is or whether his agent really makes the call.....but to do all that you say for as many as 6 tracks would take a photographic mind or else I'd look like that crazy guy I see at my local who wears the same old clothes and sweaters all the time and is overburdened with notebooks galore, pouring over them and cursing all the time when his nags lose, regardless of all his record keeping and ledger wizardry....

Jockeys are allowed to talk to their agents. Absent political situations or contractual obligations the jockey would most likely make the call.

But my point remains that human handicapping is an integral if not the most important part of handicapping.

It is also the biggest reason why many full-time horseplayers are now only playing the horses part-time...if they haven't given up the game altogether. "Human handicapping" isn't why we originally fell in love with this game. If I want to handicap humans, then I'd rather do it at the poker table...where I can get a better look at them.

I've been doing this for over 40 years and handicapping people has always been part of the game.

Hall of Fame Jockeys
https://www.racingmuseum.org/hall-of-fame/jockeys

Hall of Fame Trainers
https://www.racingmuseum.org/hall-of-fame/trainers

If you mean that players are giving up the game because of their inability to handicap the humans, I would agree. But be it poker or racing, successful people tend to repeat their successful patterns or moves. It would be foolish to ignore.

Winning bets is why we originally fell in love with the game, not usually the love of horses or the desire to compute speed figures. In pursuit of winning bets handicapping humans is far more fun than just handicapping horses.

I don't agree. The appeal for me from my early beginnings in this game was the HORSE-handicapping aspect of it. I want nothing to do with a game that places the VETERINARIAN in higher emphasis than the horse itself. When it becomes a contest of one "super-trainer" against another...then I leave the track and head for the poker room. A gambler can "win bets" in all sorts of places these days...without having to deal with the nagging suspicion that he has been "robbed".

i agree with thaskalos
i want no part of having to deal with studying human behavior. i get a kick out of analysis of a field of racehorses, if there is monkey business going on, its a sure thing outsiders like us will get the short end of the stick.

I agree 1000% with this point. The more important I think the humans are in a race, the less likely I am to bet it.

A disclaimer is in order. I had no idea I was mentioned in this book a few times when I posted the link.

So you find no value in considering trainers and their tendencies? I couldn't imagine handicapping without considering the trainer. You write as if games and shenanigans are something new to racing. Owners and trainers have been cheating since the first bet was ever placed on a race.

Do you bet maidens, layoffs, claims, first-time anything, etc., etc.? In my view humans provide the edge for a bettor. There is a limit as to what you can do with speed figs and horse data only.

If the "human angle" provides such an edge for the bettor...then, why have some of the game's most renowned handicappers chosen to spend their time on the golf course instead of at the racetrack?

Of course. I said less likely. The humans always matter. I just don't like races where they are the overriding factor imo. I do just fine skipping those.

In this age of the uncoupled entry, multiple horses with same trainer it is difficult to gauge intention human...is the second horse a rabbit. or some other kind of team player...?

I wish they would go back to the entry rules of yesteryear but they decoupled to increase field size...a coup for trainers...it becomes a case of the "tragedy of the commons"....with the rational being something like, " hey, trainer X works it to his advantage... Why shouldn't I...?"