Horse psychology and racing performance

[Vigorish]

For some confounded reason, I have often assumed that the thoroughbred more or less will run to its current ability. It is as though I treat the horse as a race car. With proper maintenance, a good pit crew, and a skillful driver, the important determinant in separating the winners and losers is differences in horsepower.

But of course, two equally skilled horses may perform quite different for reasons of mood, emotional reactions, and general temperament. Some horses are 'lazy' and need to be 'encouraged' to put forward something resembling a creditable performance. Other horses are stubborn and fight the rider. Some horses are overly panic-prone and freeze when boxed in. Alternatively, other high-strung horses like Twirling Candy, tend to get easily spooked by shadows or birds flying overhead.

I do not profess to know much, or really anything, about horse psychology. However, it is widely acknowledged that horses are herd animals of the flight kind. Their first instinct is to flee from a threatening situation. Furthermore, horses, like other animals, have their own unique pecking orders. There is a lot of easily accessible material that explains how horses evolved their unique behaviors. Furthermore, behavioral modification research has enabled experts to move beyond generalizations about horse behavior. I am struck by how much research focuses not only on the psychology of the horse, or the psychology of the competition rider, but on the complex interplay between the two.

What interests me as an aspiring handicappers, is potential ways of classifying different horses who exhibit predictable behavioral patterns. A nuanced appreciation of an overanxious horse, for example, may cause an astute horseplayer to hone in on the starting position, field size, and probable pace. If an otherwise talented horse, who has a tendency to give up when boxed in or slightly bumped, is afforded a clean trip, he might outrun his odds by a lucrative margin.

Basically, I am wondering if anybody has any insights they would like to share on improving one's handicapping by considering the psychological variables of either the horse, rider, or both. Most of the handicapping literature I have examined, which is admittedly a bit dated, does not have much to say about horse psychology. There seems to be multiple applications for this line of evaluation.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by Vigorish

It is as though I treat the horse as a race car. .

Improve your handicapping?

1. Horses are not race cars. If they were, handicapping would be much easier.

2. The surface, among other variables such as post, rider, distance, weight and competition, changes almost every time an animal is entered in a race.

Ideas?

What is today's Pace?

Can this runner either set that pace or overcome it?

Does this runner have enough stamina to overcome the pace and the distance?

There are usually several horses in a race that can win, given the proper trip.
Successful handicappers have to determine "the shape of the race."
Who is likely to compete on the front?
Who can stay with that compete level?
Who can overcome the type of battle that may be going on up front?
Is the horse that you are betting really intended to do that in today's race?

Those are tough questions.
Theoretically, every horse in a race has a chance, perhaps small for some, to win.
In reality, that very seldom happens for those with very low chances.
You've mentioned "horse psychology" whatever that is.
Once you've narrowed down who you think might be contenders, it doesn't hurt to watch their behavior in the Paddock and the Post Parade.
In that regard you might be interested in some of the articles written by
Joe Takach at http://www.joe-takach.com/

[Vigorish]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

Improve your handicapping?

1. Horses are not race cars. If they were, handicapping would be much easier.

2. The surface, among other variables such as post, rider, distance, weight and competition, changes almost every time an animal is entered in a race.

Ideas?

What is today's Pace?

Can this runner either set that pace or overcome it?

Does this runner have enough stamina to overcome the pace and the distance?

There are usually several horses in a race that can win, given the proper trip.
Successful handicappers have to determine "the shape of the race."
Who is likely to compete on the front?
Who can stay with that compete level?
Who can overcome the type of battle that may be going on up front?
Is the horse that you are betting really intended to do that in today's race?

Those are tough questions.
Theoretically, every horse in a race has a chance, perhaps small for some, to win.
In reality, that very seldom happens for those with very low chances.
You've mentioned "horse psychology" whatever that is.
Once you've narrowed down who you think might be contenders, it doesn't hurt to watch their behavior in the Paddock and the Post Parade.
In that regard you might be interested in some of the articles written by
Joe Takach at http://www.joe-takach.com/

Greetings Grey Fox,

Thank you for the feedback. I like to think that I grasp the core fundamentals of handicapping, although I am a slight loser at the game. I may have done a poor job of articulating my concern. One criticism I have with respect to my own handicapping, as well as the handicapping done by others, are simplifying assumptions that fail to really grasp the individual and group psychology of the equine participants.

What I am trying to do is take my handicapping beyond the fundamentals of identifying pace, track bias, pedigree, speed figures, class, etc. I think the knowledge that I am trying to acquire is in the hands of skilled trainers, who have a very nuanced understanding of why different horses act in different ways depending on their unique personality variables, past conditioning, pedigree, and rank in a social hierarchy. For example, a herd mare asserts her dominance with aggressive behaviors and signals. Such a mare may intimidate a competitor into running a flat race, even though today's challenger has superior speed. The traditional ways of handicapping a horse race may fail to consider these dynamics. For another example, a particular trainer might do extremely well with high-strung horses who prematurely waste all of their energy. Perhaps the trainer has a discernible routine of giving the horse a layoff, adding blinkers, and switching to a veteran jockey who is good with ill-tempered horses. I can think of many applications where a nuanced understanding of horse behavior can improve one's handicapping. For example, physicality handicappers routinely assess a horse's demeanor and may detect uncommon aplomb in a first time starter. This behavior could cause the handicapper to more positively appraise this maiden's chance of winning today's race.

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Vigorish

Greetings Grey Fox,

Thank you for the feedback. I like to think that I grasp the core fundamentals of handicapping, although I am a slight loser at the game. I may have done a poor job of articulating my concern. One criticism I have with respect to my own handicapping, as well as the handicapping done by others, are simplifying assumptions that fail to really grasp the individual and group psychology of the equine participants.

What I am trying to do is take my handicapping beyond the fundamentals of identifying pace, track bias, pedigree, speed figures, class, etc. I think the knowledge that I am trying to acquire is in the hands of skilled trainers, who have a very nuanced understanding of why different horses act in different ways depending on their unique personality variables, past conditioning, pedigree, and rank in a social hierarchy. For example, a herd mare asserts her dominance with aggressive behaviors and signals. Such a mare may intimidate a competitor into running a flat race, even though today's challenger has superior speed. The traditional ways of handicapping a horse race may fail to consider these dynamics. For another example, a particular trainer might do extremely well with high-strung horses who prematurely waste all of their energy. Perhaps the trainer has a discernible routine of giving the horse a layoff, adding blinkers, and switching to a veteran jockey who is good with ill-tempered horses. I can think of many applications where a nuanced understanding of horse behavior can improve one's handicapping. For example, physicality handicappers routinely assess a horse's demeanor and may detect uncommon aplomb in a first time starter. This behavior could cause the handicapper to more positively appraise this maiden's chance of winning today's race.

I am by no means an expert in "horse psychology"...and my "physicality handicapping" skills will not even allow me to distinguish a Secretariat from a field of $5,000 claimers. But I have read extensively about this game...and I have seen respectable people voice the opinion that horses can intimidate each other with a mere "look".

If I actually believed this...then I wouldn't even try to figure it out.

I would simply look for another game to play...

[lamboguy]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I am by no means an expert in "horse psychology"...and my "physicality handicapping" skills will not even allow me to distinguish a Secretariat from a field of $5,000 claimers. But I have read extensively about this game...and I have seen respectable people voice the opinion that horses can intimidate each other with a mere "look".

If I actually believed this...then I wouldn't even try to figure it out.

I would simply look for another game to play...

when horses go to a race and see the other horses, they know if they are overmatched. that's why you see horses sometimes stumble out of the gate due to nervousness and being over anxious.

building up confidence is very important in training horses. that's why if you enter horses you always try to find the right spot that the horse belongs in.

[eurocapper]

I have myself come to believe the drug use equalizes much of that (since that's what it's for, to create consistency). The physical condition is probably more important (there might be issues building up that have not yet become obvious). So going to the track might be one edge in this game.

[sammy the sage]

my, my, my...how many of ya'll have SUCH SHORT memories...or don't read as much as you claim

The "Horse Whisperer" has correctly identified the LAST 3 Derby winners...in his FINAL so-called picks/horses to WATCH in THAT race...

All by PSYCHOLOGY alone....

[iceknight]

Understanding Horse Psychology (on amazon ) is a book that I have been reading slowly. It is only 63 pages long with many pictures but I have still done only 20 pages so far.


update: I should add though, this is written more for someone who wants to become a better horseman or a better rider. Not much discussion on the racing or handicapping aspect of it. But those inferences are for a handicapper to make themselves.

However, there are many books that are a short read on this. you can also find these books at a local thrift store or local used bookstore for 2-3$ usually.

Psychology is useful to some extent, but I do not place too much credence in that field (more so when it comes to the human based ones..)

[Ocala Mike]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

Successful handicappers have to determine "the shape of the race."

Sometimes, that is all I look for. No other method that I know of comes up with JUST CALL KENNY in Sat.'s Spectacular Bid Stakes at GP. Only horse in the race with late foot, but didn't have "the number."

[DJofSD]

Originally Posted by Vigorish

For some confounded reason, I have often assumed that the thoroughbred more or less will run to its current ability. It is as though I treat the horse as a race car. With proper maintenance, a good pit crew, and a skillful driver, the important determinant in separating the winners and losers is differences in horsepower.

But of course, two equally skilled horses may perform quite different for reasons of mood, emotional reactions, and general temperament. Some horses are 'lazy' and need to be 'encouraged' to put forward something resembling a creditable performance. Other horses are stubborn and fight the rider. Some horses are overly panic-prone and freeze when boxed in. Alternatively, other high-strung horses like Twirling Candy, tend to get easily spooked by shadows or birds flying overhead.

I do not profess to know much, or really anything, about horse psychology. However, it is widely acknowledged that horses are herd animals of the flight kind. Their first instinct is to flee from a threatening situation. Furthermore, horses, like other animals, have their own unique pecking orders. There is a lot of easily accessible material that explains how horses evolved their unique behaviors. Furthermore, behavioral modification research has enabled experts to move beyond generalizations about horse behavior. I am struck by how much research focuses not only on the psychology of the horse, or the psychology of the competition rider, but on the complex interplay between the two.

What interests me as an aspiring handicappers, is potential ways of classifying different horses who exhibit predictable behavioral patterns. A nuanced appreciation of an overanxious horse, for example, may cause an astute horseplayer to hone in on the starting position, field size, and probable pace. If an otherwise talented horse, who has a tendency to give up when boxed in or slightly bumped, is afforded a clean trip, he might outrun his odds by a lucrative margin.

Basically, I am wondering if anybody has any insights they would like to share on improving one's handicapping by considering the psychological variables of either the horse, rider, or both. Most of the handicapping literature I have examined, which is admittedly a bit dated, does not have much to say about horse psychology. There seems to be multiple applications for this line of evaluation.

This is a topic of interest and one that's been discussed on this board before.

I'll take a divide and conquer approach: there are basic equine behaviors and there are the on-track situations.

The basic behaviors include the herd instinct but there is more about an individual animals behavior that is important to understand. You can learn these while observing horses at the track but it is much easier (and probably quicker) to go elsewhere. The local stable or breeding farm. Best is watching horses while at pasture. You'll learn to observe some fundamentals about both the physicality and the behavior: what does the coat look like, the eyes, the ears, the mouth and nostrils, the tail? What condition are the hoofs? How well defined are the muscles? How does it behave when with other horses? What can you see about it's stride when it walks, trots, canters or gallops? Does it go straight? How well balanced it is when in motion?

There's a lot more.

On-track is both paddock inspections and while on track. Lots and lots to see and learn. Some of which could help your wagering activity today while other observations might make a difference down the road.

I'm too lazy to look it up but a good reference is a book co-authored by Bonnie Ledbetter and CJ -- Horses talk it pays to listen. I'm not sure if that's the title or if I'm confusing it with another book.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by DJofSD

I'm too lazy to look it up but a good reference is a book co-authored by Bonnie Ledbetter and CJ -- Horses talk it pays to listen.

CJ?
I think the cohost on a video with Bonnie was Chris McCarron.
Co-author of a book with her was Tom Ainslie.

[DJofSD]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

CJ?
I think the cohost on a video with Bonnie was Chris McCarron.
Co-author of a book with her was Tom Ainslie.

Yes, CJ.

Back in the days when he competed, that's how he was referred to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_McCarron

[Boca Poppy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIYEOj4_aKs

[DJofSD]

That's a great video. Wish I knew more Spanish.

A great demonstration of the trust that can be built between a horse and rider.

[elhelmete]

Narrowing this down to one question: is "seconditis" real, and is it a psychological phenomenon (versus, say, a horse that's poorly spotted all the time)?