|
I spent 30 years trying to interpret trips in an objective manner that would produce consistent results. Everything...jockey pushing hard equals loss of pre-stretch energy, then looked for impressive stretch run despite...jockey needing little effort to maintain position or accelerate equals a car able to maintain speed while in neutral...widest horse on the turns has to have a better trip next time...etc.
Some years ago i came upon a database here documenting the expertise of the public even among small differences such as 3-1, 7-2, 4-1, etc. I became convinced of the comprehensive approach to the game, while still incorporating position on the straights and turns, and pace as critical factors.
I scarcely bother with intent watching of races anymore, and do a lot of inferring regarding pace and position from obvious published data. Mostly, I conform my judgements to the locked in percentages the public assigns. The favorite at 9-5 potentially loses roughly 70% of the time...I am viewing his previous trips negatively. The three odds ranked horses behind him win approximately 50% of the time cumulatively. I am interpreting their trips as positively as I can. The bottom of the field collectively wins the remaining 20% or so. If I can reject the favorite, then together with the favorite they still have a roughly 50% chance of winning.
I sat in many a grandstand long ago trying to judge the capability of horses based on their trips soon after the race was over. Had I known about the percentages in the game back then. That "winning favorites at the meet" percentage in the DRF masthead for that day's races never registered back then, and the idea of value rather than betting the "best horse" wasn't even a thought.
__________________
"I like to come here (Saratoga) every year to visit my money." ---Joe E. Lewis
|
