Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board


Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Handicapping Discussion (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Judging Horse Fitness by race and workout data (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=151292)

Gakiss2 03-30-2019 12:10 PM

Judging Horse Fitness by race and workout data
 
1 Attachment(s)
I am trying to find a way to score a horse's fitness level based on the pattern of Races and workouts it has had in the past 90 days. I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the matter. I have basically been going by bits of wisdom and advice I've heard from various sources and would like to hear more points of view.

I start with a table showing whether an activity is a Race or a Workout, the distance, and the days since the race I am looking at. I also make a chart so I can get a visual sense of the pattern of 'work'. It is attached. I could easily add speed of the race or work and am open to ways to use that additional data in this endeavor.

90 days: Seems history beyond that wouldn't matter much to today's race. On the other hand maybe 60 or even 40 days makes more sense.

I've always heard that a race less than 9 days back is bad, the horse can't recover that fast.

And the above does not apply to a work out? In fact we often see well meant horses with a workout just a few days back.

It is necessary to 'maintain' a horses' fitness. its not enough to have raced them or worked them recently, you also need to work them with one or the other every = fill in the blank= days. I've been going by every 15 days but am not put off much if there is a regular pattern closer to every 30 days. And how much of a factor is this pattern?

I am also interested in the relative general worth of a race vs. a work out in the above calculations.

I've heard a horses last race either improved the horse's fitness or degraded it. Great advice only I don't have much to go on as to which it is. I would imagine a contentious pace battle might be the latter while a boring merry-go-round trip near the back of the field still has some benefit.

I am trying to eventually get to a useful algorithm.

All input / advice welcome.

Robert Fischer 03-30-2019 02:49 PM

That sounds great.

It's tough to do, and the information isn't complete.
Not only is it incomplete, trainer styles and data can be very trainer-specific. There's a horse today in the 11th race @ Gulfstream, #5, who's training data speed has changed dramatically (significantly slower), but the horse is in fact thriving, and the major factor is actually trainer change.

Some barns publish consistent data and run a bunch of horses predictably.

The Kentucky Derby and Triple Crown coverage alos offers a window for a glimpse of how top horses are prepared for racing. (walks, gallops, gate-schooling, works, etc...)

DRF Formulator is a must have. Ability to play around with statistics such as layoffs between races.


I think it's a great idea, interested in how it moves forward and your presentation of the fitness. :ThmbUp:

Gakiss2 03-30-2019 05:23 PM

Thanks for the feedback
 
Thanks for the input. I had always been leary of making much of workout time since I suspect they can run the horse pretty much at whatever speed they like and sometimes it is better for them to hide form.

One thing I have always wondered about and am hoping maybe you or someone can answer. It is legal / allowed for a trainer to run a horse on a private course and not make that public? The cynic in me would suspect some would to that as well to hide form. Any info is appreciated.

so far my model is very basic.

3 pts for a race within 15 days, 2pts for a race within 21 days, 1 for a race within 28 days and 0.5 pts for less than 38 days then -1 for longer than that.

2 pts for a 7 day pattern, 1 for a 14 day pattern and 0.5 for a 21 day pattern. -1 point for no pattern. I consider a pattern at least 3 recent 'events' (race or WO) with gaps less than 30 days.

Then there are large demerits for a race less than 9 days or 3 races in the last month. I am taking these on faith based on something I read, somewhere.

I see lots of situations where a horse hasn't raced in a couple months but the trainer has run them through a pattern of workouts such as described above. I can't help but think that is less valuable toward fitness than the horse that has actually raced a couple of weeks ago. On the other hand I don't think the lack of the recent race (given a reasonable work program) would cause me to count that horse out of the win on that alone. I am hoping to learn how to 'measure' these situations.

On a more positive note this project has already helped my bottom line! I have spent so much time fiddling with Excel that I didn't place as many losing bets as usual :D

Gakiss2 03-30-2019 05:26 PM

Good Call on GS #11
 
I had to go back to check on the horse you mentioned and sure enough it won. Luckily he is the first leg of a Pick 3. 5 / 3 / 1, 4, 7, 8, 9

eqitec 03-30-2019 08:59 PM

Judging Horse Fitness by race and workout data
 
1 Attachment(s)
We are somewhat on the same wavelength in attempting to use race & workout data (which I call the "form cycle") to judge horse fitness. Attached is an extract of an info graphic for the horse you cited from today's 11th at GP (Restoring Hope) that I've designed to give me a quick overview of the horses training and racing history, to the extent they can be seen.

In comparing the training methods between Baffert & Servis, you couldn't have happened upon a more extreme example, which the info graphic helps to point out.

What helps me most is, after viewing these by the 1000s, I have a good idea of the trainer patterns leading up to their winning races. What can be seen from the Restoring Hope form cycle example, Bafferts training vs. Servis' training, are entirely consistent with their usual methods for getting their horses ready to win.

But, as you have referenced, Servis trains extensively off tracks at the farm, and, I suspect, is not reporting all workouts done there to Equibase. There were 241 days between RH's last race on 6/9/18 and it's first published WO on 2/5/19 at PMM. From that point it worked 4 more times at PMM in slow 3 & 4Fs up to today's win, as can be seen from the graphic. I suspect RH was worked up to racing fitness somewhere else before the first published work on 2/5, which was followed by maintenance WOs for relaxation purposes after that up to today's victory.

I do another calculation of a horse's #F worked & raced per day for the form cycle leading up to the race I am handicapping. The graphic shows that calculation to be 0.3 F per day for RH starting from the 2/5/19 date of it first published work after the 241 day layoff. This #, 0.3 F per day is very low for a horse that wins. Most often its in the 0.4 - 0.7 range. If this record was for any other trainer, I'd consider it to be a negative indicator, but not for Servis's horses.

There are about 300 tracks and off-track training centers, so it would be impossible for Equibase to know who is and isn't reporting completely or correctly. In doing some research I talked to a Florida-based trainer whose workouts were being reported from an off-track training center as being over a track labeled as "Gd" 100% of the time, even during periods of drought in the region. He told me he thought the "Gd" label meant that his training location was "a nice place to train", like a "Gd" cup of coffee. Either he was playing dumb or was. Equibase could have/should have observed the same pattern I observed and done something about it for the sake of the integrity of its published information. Based on our conversation, this trainer has changed his WO reporting to accurately state the track's condition.

Such is the depressing state of the integrity of data supplied to the entire industry.

JohnGalt1 03-31-2019 02:05 PM

I try to limit my bets on horses that are in the top tiers in class and pace/speed if they are racing fit.

I can see when the horse ran, the class of races the horse ran in. and the speed it showed.

Even if workouts are shown, are some missing, miss-timed, with a light or heavy weight jockey. And of course we don't know if between workouts the horse was only hot walked or galloped every few days between official workouts.

Not knowing if a horse off a lay off is fit is my biggest challenge because of lack of knowledge of what I don't see. or know.

I will lose races to horse with class and speed off a two month layoff with on or two 3f workouts thinking the trainer is giving the horse a "training" race for the next race.

Even trainers like Jason Servis who's lay off horses always lack workouts where I know his horses are as fit as any in the race, I still don't know for sure IF they are fit if I saw more info.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Example race-- Oaklawn Thursday 9/28 Race 5
6f $10 claiming nw3
:12: Serengeti (6-1 ML) last raced 12/18/18
workouts 3/22 3f 2/26 4f(a month ago)
Trainer Chris Hartman 90+days away 74 races 16% Very acceptable. This trainer usually shows work on these typed=s of layoff horses--why not this one?

The ten races showed one stake Best Pal 8/12/17, one stake, turf sprint, 5 allowance races, on $50k claiming race and maiden special race.

I ignored it since I didn't know if it was in racing fitness, though it was a standout with it's class and speed from it's past races, and that's what got it home wire-to-wire @ 2-1 if I remember.
Even if I did expect it to tire in the lane.

Some of you, and I know some at my track, that ignore workouts, assuming that all horses are fit or it wouldn't be entered, would've had that horse.

I couldn't trust it, because I've seen too many slower and less classy horse beat horse who tired in the stretch.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

In the olden days this was a non concern for me. Horses ran every 2-4 weeks, mostly because there were more claiming races, and horses were more fit and we could follow their form cycles.

Very few horses today race often enough to HAVE form cycles.

I realize we have to speculate when we use our class, speed and form judgements, the speed number was set in the previous races, and we have to project if the class, speed and form from the past will defeat the numbers from the competition today.

If a race is filled with horses with recent races, fitness is not the question but by where are the horses in their cycles?

I still hate guessing if my horse off a layoff is fit.

Gakiss2 03-31-2019 09:58 PM

Thank You for the feedback - Some responses
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by eqitec (Post 2447149)
We are somewhat on the same wavelength in attempting to use race & workout data (which I call the "form cycle") to judge horse fitness. Attached is an extract of an info graphic for the horse you cited from today's 11th at GP (Restoring Hope) that I've designed to give me a quick overview of the horses training and racing history, to the extent they can be seen.

In comparing the training methods between Baffert & Servis, you couldn't have happened upon a more extreme example, which the info graphic helps to point out.

What helps me most is, after viewing these by the 1000s, I have a good idea of the trainer patterns leading up to their winning races. What can be seen from the Restoring Hope form cycle example, Bafferts training vs. Servis' training, are entirely consistent with their usual methods for getting their horses ready to win.

But, as you have referenced, Servis trains extensively off tracks at the farm, and, I suspect, is not reporting all workouts done there to Equibase. There were 241 days between RH's last race on 6/9/18 and it's first published WO on 2/5/19 at PMM. From that point it worked 4 more times at PMM in slow 3 & 4Fs up to today's win, as can be seen from the graphic. I suspect RH was worked up to racing fitness somewhere else before the first published work on 2/5, which was followed by maintenance WOs for relaxation purposes after that up to today's victory.

##
Yes, I had suspected that some trainers do that. Thank You for confirming. Of course there are other fitness maintenance activities besides Workouts I assume (because I do NOT have a horse training background and have no idea). But those other activities could explain SOME of that but I agree, not all.

##


I do another calculation of a horse's #F worked & raced per day for the form cycle leading up to the race I am handicapping. The graphic shows that calculation to be 0.3 F per day for RH starting from the 2/5/19 date of it first published work after the 241 day layoff. This #, 0.3 F per day is very low for a horse that wins. Most often its in the 0.4 - 0.7 range. If this record was for any other trainer, I'd consider it to be a negative indicator, but not for Servis's horses.
##

I hadn't thought of #F per day. I think I will add that to my view.

##


There are about 300 tracks and off-track training centers, so it would be impossible for Equibase to know who is and isn't reporting completely or correctly. In doing some research I talked to a Florida-based trainer whose workouts were being reported from an off-track training center as being over a track labeled as "Gd" 100% of the time, even during periods of drought in the region. He told me he thought the "Gd" label meant that his training location was "a nice place to train", like a "Gd" cup of coffee. Either he was playing dumb or was. Equibase could have/should have observed the same pattern I observed and done something about it for the sake of the integrity of its published information. Based on our conversation, this trainer has changed his WO reporting to accurately state the track's condition.

Such is the depressing state of the integrity of data supplied to the entire industry.


##

I made a couple comments above where you see ##. As I mentioned above I do NOT have a horse training background. I live less than 5 miles from the Keeneland track but so far have only experienced the 'Fan' / 'Bettor' side of the business. I suppose that is why I have so many questions.

So one question I'd like to raise relative to your approach. Just how far back does it make sense to go. I am thinking that a horse that underwent excellent conditioning a year ago has lost all that mojo so that it matters ,only or at least much much more, what has he done Lately. I ask out of ignorance. I have been using a 8 week window but that time frame is a guess. Do you think that window makes sense? Too long, too short. Does it make sense that the works that were further away are worth 'less' to the horse?

Thank You again for the feedback

Gakiss2 03-31-2019 10:14 PM

Thank you for the feedback
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnGalt1 (Post 2447382)
I try to limit my bets on horses that are in the top tiers in class and pace/speed if they are racing fit.

I can see when the horse ran, the class of races the horse ran in. and the speed it showed.

Even if workouts are shown, are some missing, miss-timed, with a light or heavy weight jockey. And of course we don't know if between workouts the horse was only hot walked or galloped every few days between official workouts.

Not knowing if a horse off a lay off is fit is my biggest challenge because of lack of knowledge of what I don't see. or know.

I will lose races to horse with class and speed off a two month layoff with on or two 3f workouts thinking the trainer is giving the horse a "training" race for the next race.

##

I have the same frustration. Also, among the horses that seem to be contenders, I think if I can detect a horse that has gotten the short straw w.r.t fitness either because the trainer was not good or too busy with Sea Biscuit, then I can start trimming down my pool of real contenders. This is really valuable for Horizontal (P3,P5) bets as I am sure you know.


##

Even trainers like Jason Servis who's lay off horses always lack workouts where I know his horses are as fit as any in the race, I still don't know for sure IF they are fit if I saw more info.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Example race-- Oaklawn Thursday 9/28 Race 5
6f $10 claiming nw3
:12: Serengeti (6-1 ML) last raced 12/18/18
workouts 3/22 3f 2/26 4f(a month ago)
Trainer Chris Hartman 90+days away 74 races 16% Very acceptable. This trainer usually shows work on these typed=s of layoff horses--why not this one?

The ten races showed one stake Best Pal 8/12/17, one stake, turf sprint, 5 allowance races, on $50k claiming race and maiden special race.

I ignored it since I didn't know if it was in racing fitness, though it was a standout with it's class and speed from it's past races, and that's what got it home wire-to-wire @ 2-1 if I remember.
Even if I did expect it to tire in the lane.

Some of you, and I know some at my track, that ignore workouts, assuming that all horses are fit or it wouldn't be entered, would've had that horse.

##

That doesn't make sense to me because I see race after race where it is clear the horse is there primarily as a part of the trainers plan to get it ready for another race in the near future. You see horses that haven't run less then 7 1/2 F in the last 8 months suddenly in a 5 1/2 F race. Sometimes you can catch one of these rare sprints in their PPs from 8 months ago and they did miserably.

##

I couldn't trust it, because I've seen too many slower and less classy horse beat horse who tired in the stretch.



&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

In the olden days this was a non concern for me. Horses ran every 2-4 weeks, mostly because there were more claiming races, and horses were more fit and we could follow their form cycles.

Very few horses today race often enough to HAVE form cycles.

I realize we have to speculate when we use our class, speed and form judgements, the speed number was set in the previous races, and we have to project if the class, speed and form from the past will defeat the numbers from the competition today.

##

You mention class. If a horse is underclass but shows very high early pace numbers then, naturally, you'd worry he would run in front of the other classier horses possibly making it to the beginning of the last turn before being nothing more than in the way. If you had good confidence the horse was very very fit then you might have found a good price.

Sure I'm not telling you anything you don't already know.

##
If a race is filled with horses with recent races, fitness is not the question but by where are the horses in their cycles?

I still hate guessing if my horse off a layoff is fit.


##
Hoping I can make some progress on this subject. I'll share what I find.

Gakiss2 04-01-2019 10:11 AM

New thought - question
 
When judging if a layoff horse can score first out we look at past performance where the horse has been in a similar situation. If a horse came out swinging from a 50 day layoff a year ago but now has a different trainer, can we count on a similar performance?

In other words, is the ability to win off of a layoff have more to do with the horse or the trainer????

JohnGalt1 04-01-2019 04:44 PM

I used to ignore European turf shippers because of no posted workouts like those that show up for Breeder's Cup races figuring that the 5f workouts for American horses showed they were fit and Eros were an unknown.

I read in many handicapping books and articles that we should assume all horses in stakes races are fit. So all Euro shippers should also be assumed to be racing fit.

This I now do.

Class of horse and race can sometimes overcome this.

My example above on the:12: did show a much classier horse, and even if I did not bet it to win, could and maybe should've used in horizontals. And if I thought it could've beat my two win bets, maybe passing would be the prudent choice, even if my lower class horses that had recent races would've won.

eqitec 04-02-2019 09:41 AM

Judging Horse Fitness by race and workout data
 
1 Attachment(s)
I'm mostly interested in a horse's current form cycle and pretty much discount its previous cycles as irrelevant to today's race.

I look for "break" dates in the horses races and workouts histories in an attempt to see the beginning date of its current form cycle. Usually these break dates are easy to see, such as in the example posted below.

The break date could have been 4 weeks ago or 4 months ago. I don't set any arbitrary cut off date parameter. I want to see how the horse has raced and trained since the break point. My seconds per furlong calculation takes the data from the horse's last break point forward to get a result.

eqitec 04-02-2019 09:46 AM

Judging Horse Fitness by race and workout data
 
In my opinion, it's much more the trainer and much less so the horse, maybe 95% trainer and 5% horse.

Gakiss2 04-02-2019 09:50 AM

Stakes Races
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnGalt1 (Post 2447911)
I used to ignore European turf shippers because of no posted workouts like those that show up for Breeder's Cup races figuring that the 5f workouts for American horses showed they were fit and Eros were an unknown.

I read in many handicapping books and articles that we should assume all horses in stakes races are fit. So all Euro shippers should also be assumed to be racing fit.

This I now do.

Class of horse and race can sometimes overcome this.

My example above on the:12: did show a much classier horse, and even if I did not bet it to win, could and maybe should've used in horizontals. And if I thought it could've beat my two win bets, maybe passing would be the prudent choice, even if my lower class horses that had recent races would've won.

I do hate to make assumptions but on a practical level that one makes a LOT of sense. It would be difficult to imagine someone dull enough to spend the money shipping an unfit horse to the US to run in a Stakes Race.

From another thread someone added a thought to this from the other end of the spectrum and that is Low Claiming races where it could be that the horse could perform poorly by being overworked.

Its a tough puzzle to be sure. On one level it is basically a box to check to prevent betting heavily on questionable horses. I am hoping to get to a point that I can start to use some methods to pick apart borderline contenders from non-contenders. A borderline OK horse with really good fitness pattern may be a good price. A horse that just barely makes the contender list and ALSO shows a poor fitness pattern. maybe just drop him off the contender list completely.

I like to do horizontal bets and like to find that horse that just fits into the contender list but does have a realistic chance of winning.

how cliche 04-03-2019 10:47 AM

There's a few items I'll address from this thread.

Not all 2k mi+ plane shipments are equal.
West to east is easy. South to north is easy.
The east to west and north to south are tough. I like to see five weeks acclimation time for those. Might be the reason the east coast runners don't win when the cup is held at SA. It makes runners like Improbable and Omaha Beach coming up plays against on the double ship most of the time. Must verify who went west before heading east again.

Layoff runners aren't equal. You're onto something when looking for competent long break trainers. Also look for what stage of their career they're in. Improvement happens a lot from 2 to 3 and 3 to 4. Less often from 4 to 5. 5 and up it's washy.

Workout spacing is every bit as important as workout speed. A lone fast drill in a vacuum has less value than a weekly schedule of slow ones. Also short drills often mean less. Signals more often are found at 5f+.

My $0.02

rubicon55 04-03-2019 10:54 AM

Hi GAKISS, you may find some useful info from Joe Takach who is into horse physicality, form and if a horse is fit by appearance. Here is his link: http://www.joe-takach.com/

Jeff P 04-03-2019 05:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gakiss2 (Post 2447752)
When judging if a layoff horse can score first out we look at past performance where the horse has been in a similar situation. If a horse came out swinging from a 50 day layoff a year ago but now has a different trainer, can we count on a similar performance?

In other words, is the ability to win off of a layoff have more to do with the horse or the trainer????


If someone had asked me this same question 30 years ago my answer (instantly) would have been horse.

Fast forward to today's game and my answer (sadly) has to be trainer.

If I look at data for layoff horses with the data broken out by trainer, I can't help but notice there are trainers out there who are (How am I supposed to describe this delicately?) working miracles compared to the stats of the better trainers from (say) 30 years ago.

The odd thing (to me) is that when the horses of these trainers show up to race again after extended layoffs I can't help but notice:
  • Many are carrying some serious muscle mass (that they didn't have before the layoff.)

  • Many don't have the workouts in their past performance records (in terms of fast times, distance, or spacing) that would have suggested condition or readiness to compete after an extended layoff in the game as it existed (say) 30 years ago.

My point is the game has changed. Imo, the extended layoff horse of today's game is very different than the extended layoff horse of yesteryear.

Imo, it pays to:
  • Learn to judge condition visually.

  • Familiarize yourself with trainer stats. Be aware of who excels with layoff horses. Imo, you have to at least consider the how and why. Imo, you also need to be aware of who has subpar stats with layoff horses.


-jp

.

Gakiss2 04-04-2019 10:19 AM

Thank you for the feedback
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by how cliche (Post 2448464)
There's a few items I'll address from this thread.

Not all 2k mi+ plane shipments are equal.
West to east is easy. South to north is easy.
The east to west and north to south are tough. I like to see five weeks acclimation time for those. Might be the reason the east coast runners don't win when the cup is held at SA. It makes runners like Improbable and Omaha Beach coming up plays against on the double ship most of the time. Must verify who went west before heading east again.

Layoff runners aren't equal. You're onto something when looking for competent long break trainers. Also look for what stage of their career they're in. Improvement happens a lot from 2 to 3 and 3 to 4. Less often from 4 to 5. 5 and up it's washy.

Workout spacing is every bit as important as workout speed. A lone fast drill in a vacuum has less value than a weekly schedule of slow ones. Also short drills often mean less. Signals more often are found at 5f+.

My $0.02

Very insightful information, Thank You
I had no idea about the difference to ship one direction or the other. And I think you are talking about shipping inside the US. Any thoughts on shipping from Europe etc.?

So I am taking it that you think the success from a long layoff comes from the Trainer and not so much the horse.

I will absolutely include the age when evaluating layoff runners.

I like to think about WHY the layoff. What I understand is that a horse hits a peak, peels off a few good performances (wins??) and then has to 'rest' for 50 or so days. A long layoff probably means the horse was getting some additional re-hab such as for an injury. The only thing I know to look for in that case are recent works which are usually slow-ish so not much revealed there except, yes, they can still 'run'. I'd guess the trainer doesn't want to reveal the success or failure of the re-hab.

Very appreciative of the insight. You've given me a couple ideas to include in my fitness metric.

Care to weigh in on the value of tracking 'Furlongs per day' as a fitness measure. I thought it would be good to seek a range so I can flag underworked and overworked horses.

Gakiss2 04-04-2019 10:35 AM

Physicality
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by rubicon55 (Post 2448467)
Hi GAKISS, you may find some useful info from Joe Takach who is into horse physicality, form and if a horse is fit by appearance. Here is his link: http://www.joe-takach.com/

I could certainly use some education training in that area. About the only track I actually go to is Keeneland - Which is opening today! - and I have tried gaging a horse by its appearance since you really can get pretty close at Keeneland but so far that has only complicated and frustrated my attempts at handicapping. I am 100% sure it is because of my lack of training and skill in the area.

If nothing else I could formulate a fitness score based on data then look at the horse to see if my results make sense.



Also, I tried the site and followed the link for the video but found Amazon to be out of them. if you hear of a lead to get the DVD then please let me know, I am interested.

Gakiss2 04-04-2019 10:44 AM

Layoff Trainers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff P (Post 2448533)
If someone had asked me this same question 30 years ago my answer (instantly) would have been horse.

Fast forward to today's game and my answer (sadly) has to be trainer.

If I look at data for layoff horses with the data broken out by trainer, I can't help but notice there are trainers out there who are (How am I supposed to describe this delicately?) working miracles compared to the stats of the better trainers from (say) 30 years ago.

The odd thing (to me) is that when the horses of these trainers show up to race again after extended layoffs I can't help but notice:
  • Many are carrying some serious muscle mass (that they didn't have before the layoff.)

  • Many don't have the workouts in their past performance records (in terms of fast times, distance, or spacing) that would have suggested condition or readiness to compete after an extended layoff in the game as it existed (say) 30 years ago.

My point is the game has changed. Imo, the extended layoff horse of today's game is very different than the extended layoff horse of yesteryear.

Imo, it pays to:
  • Learn to judge condition visually.

  • Familiarize yourself with trainer stats. Be aware of who excels with layoff horses. Imo, you have to at least consider the how and why. Imo, you also need to be aware of who has subpar stats with layoff horses.


-jp

.


Thank you for your insight. The deeper I get into this it sometimes seems more like a trainer contest than a horse race. Some advice I haven't really followed yet but made sense to me is to stick to a circuit and get to know the habits of the trainers. Heck, maybe we should all buy past performances for the Trainers then glance at the horses stats as a last minute double check.

Trainer stats = Horse fitness?? Not quite ready to go there but your advice to look closely at Trainer reputation, stats is well received. And yes, I do need to improve on my ability to judge condition visually.

rubicon55 04-04-2019 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gakiss2 (Post 2448668)
I could certainly use some education training in that area. About the only track I actually go to is Keeneland - Which is opening today! - and I have tried gaging a horse by its appearance since you really can get pretty close at Keeneland but so far that has only complicated and frustrated my attempts at handicapping. I am 100% sure it is because of my lack of training and skill in the area.

If nothing else I could formulate a fitness score based on data then look at the horse to see if my results make sense.



Also, I tried the site and followed the link for the video but found Amazon to be out of them. if you hear of a lead to get the DVD then please let me know, I am interested.

Sent you a PM.

Gakiss2 04-06-2019 05:37 AM

Furlongs per day
 
Summary of discussion points so far in looking for a way to score furlongs per day and other fitness aspects as related to Handicapping.

Some thoughts gleaned from this forum and other sources:

Generally more race and more workout is better than less.
Horses can be overraced (< 3 races in 31 days).
Ideal Furlongs per day (WO and Race) is 0.4 to .08 - eqitec.
Previous race less than 9 days ago is a negative.
about 50 days is normal 'resting' layoff.
DSLR more than 60 is a negative.
DSLR 9 ~ 21 is ideal, Next best is DSLR 21 ~ 28.
A recent workout < 15 days ago is helpful.
A pattern of workouts and races is best. approx. 7 day pattern is best, Next best are 14 day and 21 day pattern respectively. These can't be strict, a day or three variation is to be expected.

Some thoughts that are Trainer focused:
Some trainers can greatly minimize the affect of a Long Lay Off.
Some workout activity is under-reported, trainers can benefit from 'hiding form'.
Some trainers are better at getting/keeping horses fit than others. Can they be scored, graded?

Physicality is an area of handicapping that can be employed when you have the opportunity to see the horse. In person at the track is best but a lot can be determined by watching satellite, internet feed.

I appreciate any feedback / debunking / dispelling of Old Wive's Tales, Old 'Capper's Tales, Old 'Capper's Wives(Husband's) Tales or etc.

Gakiss2 04-06-2019 06:46 AM

Fitness Scores Keeneland Race 1
 
1 Attachment(s)
Fitness score calculated based on:
DSLR - Bonus if 9 ~ 21
Recent Workout - Bonus if < 15 days
Workout Pattern - Best 7days, then 14 then 21
Furlongs per day - best is 0.4 ~ 0.8
User bonus - Trainer is good or other adj needed

Gakiss2 04-06-2019 03:36 PM

Hit a BOMB at Keeneland - High Fitness Score
 
There were others with good fitness scores but they had lower odds so I bet :8: Lantiz and hauled in a Score $47.20 for a $1... Now why didn't I bet $2 on that one.:headbanger:

Gakiss2 04-06-2019 03:38 PM

Fitness scores
 
1 Attachment(s)
Forgot to attach the score matrix

eqitec 04-09-2019 05:38 PM

Furlongs Per Day-Correction
 
2 Attachment(s)
IMO

Ideal furlongs per day should be 0.4-0.6 for eastern tracks. Avg.=4.8.
Ideal furlongs per day should be 0.5-0.7 for western tracks. Avg.= 5.5.

Re: Physicality Observations of Fitness

This is very difficult to do, especially for races with full fields and/or at expansive paddocks such as SAR where it's impossible to get close to all the horses running. For those horses for which up close observations are not possible, you have about 5 seconds for each as they pass by on the way to the track.

I'm experimenting with a paddock inspection app and workflow as shown on the two images below for use on my iPad to score up to 12 physicality traits recommended by the experts for each horse, as shown on the images. These analytics are then merged with all my other handicapping analytics, but never so much as to account for >3% of all factors (unless the horse goes total bonkers in the paddock and doesn't get scratched.)

steveb 04-10-2019 04:52 AM

some great reading in this thread thanks.

Tom 04-10-2019 10:58 AM

Two things-

Barry Meadow/Ken Masa describe a "quality workout" in the book Skeptical Handicapper that shows strong results when combined with certain other factors or rce situations, especially maidens.

There was a booklet on form factors by Tom Hambleton that was a point system for a horse/s condition. Search for a discussion on it at PaceAdvantage. It was called, Form Factors.

Good thread!:ThmbUp:

Gakiss2 04-10-2019 12:38 PM

keeneland
 
I like the concept of checking off the characteristics. Just reading through some articles on physicality it seemed like some we're 'red flags' while others we're more indicative of alertness / awareness which could be more of an 'enhance. Not sure how to combine all these characteristics into a score.

So now it's your job to go look at all the horses and report back to us.... Just kidding. I know that's a lot of work even for just one race.

I think fitness has a lot to do with the trainer. However I don't think it's a simple as looking for a high trainer win percentage. Maybe we should be looking at trainer past performance s.

My algorithm is coming along. I may fine tune with your addtl detail on F per day. I am limiting to furlongs in the last 50 days. I thought about weighting race furlongs differently than wo furlongs but have not so far. Some trainers seemingly don't do wo at all and just race every couple weeks. Not sure how to score that against a more balanced plan of similar frequency, thoughts?

FakeNameChanged 04-10-2019 01:02 PM

Good thread
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Gakiss2 (Post 2446865)
I am trying to find a way to score a horse's fitness level based on the pattern of Races and workouts it has had in the past 90 days. I am interested in hearing your thoughts on the matter. I have basically been going by bits of wisdom and advice I've heard from various sources and would like to hear more points of view.

I start with a table showing whether an activity is a Race or a Workout, the distance, and the days since the race I am looking at. I also make a chart so I can get a visual sense of the pattern of 'work'. It is attached. I could easily add speed of the race or work and am open to ways to use that additional data in this endeavor.

90 days: Seems history beyond that wouldn't matter much to today's race. On the other hand maybe 60 or even 40 days makes more sense.

I've always heard that a race less than 9 days back is bad, the horse can't recover that fast.

And the above does not apply to a work out? In fact we often see well meant horses with a workout just a few days back.

It is necessary to 'maintain' a horses' fitness. its not enough to have raced them or worked them recently, you also need to work them with one or the other every = fill in the blank= days. I've been going by every 15 days but am not put off much if there is a regular pattern closer to every 30 days. And how much of a factor is this pattern?

I am also interested in the relative general worth of a race vs. a work out in the above calculations.

I've heard a horses last race either improved the horse's fitness or degraded it. Great advice only I don't have much to go on as to which it is. I would imagine a contentious pace battle might be the latter while a boring merry-go-round trip near the back of the field still has some benefit.

I am trying to eventually get to a useful algorithm.

All input / advice welcome.

Ruffian1-Who I believe was a trainer in Md. circuit, posted this enlightening post a while back on how to value workouts.

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/s...97#post2250497 post #16-

"I realize that handicappers need all the info they can get. However, in the case of workouts, you get such a small portion of info, it is IMO, not worth the effort.

Case in point, two horses workout within minutes of each other , by themselves, and everything is equal.

Horse one works a 1/2 mile in :50.
He goes splits of 14,13,12,11.
That is a very solid workout.

Horse two works a 1/2 mile in :49.
The splits are 11,11,13,14.
That is a very disturbing workout.

They both run against each other five days later. Logic seems to say that the horse that worked 49 outworked the horse that worked in 50.
That logic would be dead wrong.

Unless you can see the circumstances of each work, like one worked at dawn before the track was chopped up or right after the break and the other worked at 9:45 and the track was cuppy , dry and all cut up. Or were they in company? Or what was the objective of the work? The list goes on and on.

Another is when you see a bunch of 1/2 mile works and the horse is off a layoff going much further than a half a mile. Is he fit? If you know the trainer, you have a better shot of figuring that out than going by times and distances of works.

Often times a trainer can work a horse a mile but wants to emphasize relaxing so the horse will go 1/8ths in 15, also called a two minute lick, for two or three 1/8ths then go 14 and THEN work a half in :50. You see the 1/2 in :50 but there is so much more to the story. (Clockers will not start timing a horse that is going at a 2 minute click. They wait until the horse picks up speed before timing it.)And if that horse was horse number one I spoke about earlier, that is a great work.

My best advice would be to understand the trainer and what they typically do. Some love bullets, some hate bullets.

Learn the trainers habits and the picture will become clearer.

Hope that helps."


His take on how track superintendents alter the variant/condition of a track was also spot on, IMHO.

Gakiss2 04-10-2019 01:37 PM

Judging workouts
 
Thanks for the feedback. First off I got a lot out of the link you shared regarding previous discussions on the forum. Only there was a link to another article in that which must be now dead. http://www.mnpaddockreport.com/ Any chance you know another source I can find it?

I want to say I didn't really put a lot into the times and other reported detail about the work. I had always assumed trainers mostly want to darken form wherever they can get away with it and workouts is an area that is very possible as you detailed. And it doesn't mostly matter whether its deliberate form darkening or just what can get lost in the detail of what actually took place. But, you could say most of the same about looking at a race in the past performances. There is a bit more detail and context reported there but you could miss a lot unless you watched the race yourself.

So I certainly believe that you can get a lot more from actually watching a race and a workout and a paddock check. Those activities will always trump looking at data and past performances and etc. My aim for this project is to accomplish some of the analysis with the data that we can get to in a PP. And of course that can always be enhanced with actual observation.

My basic idea is that maybe you can get an idea of the amount of work done by the horse in an amount of time to at least allow you to discount horses which, at least per data alone, don't seem to be getting the exercise they need and maybe their performance should be downgraded. Or alternatively, you see a strong pattern indicating the horse should be in good shape and maybe has a chance to run just a bit outside his ability.

Again, thank you for your insights.

Gakiss2 04-11-2019 12:32 AM

KEE Friday 4th Race
 
Some top picks including their fitness scores. First 3 are my picks for the race, what I would put in a Pick 3/ Pick 4. The Next two are contenders I'd bet with good odds. Last two aren't awful and they have high fitness scores.

Main purpose is to show fitness score in action in a selection matrix and to see how the fitness score looks compared to other factors.

Comments, critiques welcome.

Gakiss2 04-11-2019 12:34 AM

Matrix with Fitness scores
 
1 Attachment(s)
And now the attachment:bang:

ultracapper 04-11-2019 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer (Post 2446926)
That sounds great.

It's tough to do, and the information isn't complete.
Not only is it incomplete, trainer styles and data can be very trainer-specific. There's a horse today in the 11th race @ Gulfstream, #5, who's training data speed has changed dramatically (significantly slower), but the horse is in fact thriving, and the major factor is actually trainer change.

Some barns publish consistent data and run a bunch of horses predictably.

The Kentucky Derby and Triple Crown coverage alos offers a window for a glimpse of how top horses are prepared for racing. (walks, gallops, gate-schooling, works, etc...)

DRF Formulator is a must have. Ability to play around with statistics such as layoffs between races.


I think it's a great idea, interested in how it moves forward and your presentation of the fitness. :ThmbUp:

Not to mention circuit styles. Acceptable workout patterns seem to me anyhow to be different at different circuits. In SoCal a work every 7 or 8 days between races is not unusual for a well meant horse. It's almost a requirement. I know that's not the same at other comparable tracks east of the Mississippi.

Gakiss2 04-11-2019 11:47 PM

Training Styles
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ultracapper (Post 2451575)
Not to mention circuit styles. Acceptable workout patterns seem to me anyhow to be different at different circuits. In SoCal a work every 7 or 8 days between races is not unusual for a well meant horse. It's almost a requirement. I know that's not the same at other comparable tracks east of the Mississippi.

In the process of my attempt to build an algorithm for fitness I created a chart which graphically lays out the dates and distances of the works and races. After while you do see very different 'styles' emerge. Often I see about 4 works placed about a week apart after a long layoff. I take that as better then no or very few spaced out works after a long lay off but shouldn't rate as high as a pattern of consistent works with some recent races worked in. I do notice that some trainers will have a very steady weekly work pattern then stop two or three weeks before the race where others will keep the steady weekly pattern right up to a few days before race day. There are other trainers that almost never have the horse do a work out. And this is common in cheaper claimers so it really doesn't seem like an elaborate scheme to work the horses 'in the dark'. Some others in this thread have mentioned that east coast varies form west coast. I don't yet have enough experience to weigh in so I will take the advice as I can get it.

eqitec 04-12-2019 02:29 PM

Layoff Trainers
 
1 Attachment(s)
Re: "...maybe we should all buy past performances for the Trainers"?

Having often had a similar inclination, I developed a Trainer Profile reporting system. An example from 9/17 for the aforementioned Jason Servis is shown below. I have a few hundred of these and find them very useful as a reference point when I am not sure about a trainer's tendencies.

Hopefully it's self-explanatory. If not let me know.

Gakiss2 04-12-2019 03:56 PM

Lots of detail
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by eqitec (Post 2451905)
Re: "...maybe we should all buy past performances for the Trainers"?

Having often had a similar inclination, I developed a Trainer Profile reporting system. An example from 9/17 for the aforementioned Jason Servis is shown below. I have a few hundred of these and find them very useful as a reference point when I am not sure about a trainer's tendencies.

Hopefully it's self-explanatory. If not let me know.

I could pretty well follow the information being presented. Tons of detail. Any chance you would be willing to share these trainer profiles? Or maybe you could put them in a book and sell them? I can see where a horse player might find something like this valuable.

So some other thoughts. Could trainers be put in buckets representing training 'style' then just give each a label much in the same way we put horses in a category like Presser or Front Runner. Like anything else, the devil is in the details but there could still be value in that.

We are all used to a trainers Win% and the PP providers often give us 'situational' win percentage as well. I glance at that but to it lacks context. I feel you really need to understand trainer intention.. Could there be a way to track the Trainer's win percent when he really 'intends' to win. And then the second part of that is to figure out when he / she 'intends' to win. For that I try to be mindful of 'angles'.

And from the trainer profiles you have, I do understand the concept of trainer's having a style and the varied results. But do you see any generalized conclusions from your profiles such as we have been discussing and I have been trying to capture in my algorithm? Generalized is not as powerful as trainer specific but generalized is much easier to put into to an excel formula :)

Thank You very much for your input
BTW Just won a P3 at Keeneland based at least in part on Fitness Score.

eqitec 05-02-2019 08:40 PM

Furlongs Per Day
 
1 Attachment(s)
Here is a summary of "Workouts Since Last Race" for the Derby including furlongs per day calcs.

The Avg. Sec./Furlong calc is based on the each horse's single fastest workout since their last races (after WO Par adjustments have been applied.)

Gakiss2 05-08-2019 04:39 PM

Derby Winner
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by eqitec (Post 2459552)
Here is a summary of "Workouts Since Last Race" for the Derby including furlongs per day calcs.

The Avg. Sec./Furlong calc is based on the each horse's single fastest workout since their last races (after WO Par adjustments have been applied.)

Looks like Maximum Security should win.

:pound:

Sorry, couldn't resist


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:36 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.