Quote:
Originally Posted by Poindexter
I look at this from my perspective. If I haven't run in months, and I take a one mile run today, I will be lucky to do a 12 minute mile. After doing the 12 minute mile today, I can probably go 11:45 on Friday, and 11:30 on Saturday....Thus if a horse is a first time starter, or coming off a layoff or going a distance of ground for the first time (say 6F to 1 1/8) we don't know if he is in condition to win today. Somebody that studies workout patterns may have a really good idea(I am not that person so I can't tell you). I don't assume the horse will win or won't win, but I will not be surprised if he shows up his next race and improves off today's effort. Doesn't mean the connections aren't trying and maybe they aren't, but simple progression of a horses conditioning will make the horse get better until he is completely fit. Past figures are generally a good basis to determine what kind of improvement the horse may have in him 2nd or 3rd off the layoff. I think the area that thoroughbred racing is blatantly bad is with first time/2nd time starters. Over the years I have just pretty much learned to consider a second time starter with a poor debut race as a first time starter. I have seen 2nd time starters pop up with all kinds of eye opening wins and it doesn't always show up on the board before the race. Industry definitely seems to allow this to go on with regularity.
So in these areas it is buyer beware, also you have the horse that being conditioned for a stakes race and now he is in a nw2. He will likely be 3/5 and likely win because he is better than his competition, but, don't expect them to squeeze the lemon dry to win a small purse today when there is a large purse coming up.
Most of this stuff is common sense. If trainers are going much beyond this than you are getting into a big problem area.
|
Thanks for some more interesting and rational comments.
However, I believe you have misunderstood my previous response to Dilanesp. He suggested that racing workouts were a thing of the past. I questioned that statement by indicating that handicappers still refer to observations of entries having a 2nd or 3rd run after a layoff as a positive indicator for a potential winning run. So what were these same entries doing in their 1st and 2nd runs after the layoff that their pre-race workouts couldn’t accomplish?
As I mentioned your conditioning explanation sounds valid as it pertains to you as some sort of workout routine that demonstrates progressive all out runs. They actually sound more like some racing workouts only because horses aren’t generally asked to run all out in their pre-race workouts to determine how fast they might cover a certain distance.
But assuming your conditioning results are accurate how would feel about placing a substantial wager on yourself if you were facing others on Sunday who could typically run a mile in 11:00 flat? Would you bet a lot? Or nothing at all.
.
