Multiple Entries

[RainMan]

The most frustrating races for me to handicap are those where trainers have entered multiple runners - I actually skip as many of these as possible because I catch myself trying to read between the lines as to why each horse was entered. Some have said to focus more on the higher odds entrant but this seems like an old wives tale - I realize that there are excetions.
Other than races where another is entered to be a rabbit this practice of multiple entries just makes no sense to me and am surprised that owners go along with it.
Actually seems to be more common place now-a-days and with the shortage of horses I doubt the tracks would go to coupled entries as long as a trainer's horses have different owners.
Finally, are there any stats on winning % for trainers with muliple runners in races - Chad Brown for instance has a 25% career winning % with Turf runners but is there a stat for winning % for Turf Races won not Turf Horses that won.
Would appreciate in advance any insight on which trainers excel with multiple entries and which seem to win most often with their lower odds horse - expecially if it is the favorite.

[AndyC]

Originally Posted by RainMan

The most frustrating races for me to handicap are those where trainers have entered multiple runners - I actually skip as many of these as possible because I catch myself trying to read between the lines as to why each horse was entered. Some have said to focus more on the higher odds entrant but this seems like an old wives tale - I realize that there are excetions.
Other than races where another is entered to be a rabbit this practice of multiple entries just makes no sense to me and am surprised that owners go along with it.
Actually seems to be more common place now-a-days and with the shortage of horses I doubt the tracks would go to coupled entries as long as a trainer's horses have different owners.
Finally, are there any stats on winning % for trainers with muliple runners in races - Chad Brown for instance has a 25% career winning % with Turf runners but is there a stat for winning % for Turf Races won not Turf Horses that won.
Would appreciate in advance any insight on which trainers excel with multiple entries and which seem to win most often with their lower odds horse - expecially if it is the favorite.

It seems like you have a lot of questions that could resolved by doing some research.

[MooseDog]

West Coast perspective...with small fields, often a second horse is entered to make the race go, so if you see a 5-6-7 horse field it's likely, but not always the case that one is better meant than the other.

The "rabbit" thing is not much of a thing out here any more. In fact in a recent race two horses with the same trainer, different owners dueled each other into the ground.

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by RainMan

The most frustrating races for me to handicap are those where trainers have entered multiple runners - I actually skip as many of these as possible because I catch myself trying to read between the lines as to why each horse was entered. Some have said to focus more on the higher odds entrant but this seems like an old wives tale - I realize that there are excetions.
Other than races where another is entered to be a rabbit this practice of multiple entries just makes no sense to me and am surprised that owners go along with it.
Actually seems to be more common place now-a-days and with the shortage of horses I doubt the tracks would go to coupled entries as long as a trainer's horses have different owners.
Finally, are there any stats on winning % for trainers with muliple runners in races - Chad Brown for instance has a 25% career winning % with Turf runners but is there a stat for winning % for Turf Races won not Turf Horses that won.
Would appreciate in advance any insight on which trainers excel with multiple entries and which seem to win most often with their lower odds horse - expecially if it is the favorite.

It's a good thing that you see it and recognize it.

Unfortunately, or fortunately it's yet another thing in racing to understand.

have to see it, and understand it. Then have to understand the significance in this race in terms of whether or not it is important and how important it happens to be for this race.

I can list a bunch of things w/ common scenarios, and then some smaller rare scenarios, and some specific things to consider for these situations, but I'm not going to do that right now.

You are on the right track with trying to read between the lines, and are on the right track with realizing/admitting that some of these situations are outside your area of expertise. Your 'circle of competence'.

With playing the ponies, you have to demand yourself to understand the significant things in a race, or pass the race for another opportunity. If you don't demand understanding of things like intent or odds behavior or pace scenario, etc.. etc.. for roughly the handful of highly significant things that happen to be going on in this given race, then you have to accept you are gambling for entertainment and are likely going to lose faster this way. Just depends how much you want to work to learn the game and how serious you want to be in terms of patience and being selective for value that you know to exist.