Going with the "No Works" angle

[Rob_in_MN]

I regularly play the cheaper claiming tracks - Penn, CT, DED, EVD and HOO. Lately I've seen quite a few horses coming in with no posted works. Delta this Wed. is a good example.

My obvious inclinations are to examine the trainer's overall performance with maidens and realize that the trainer most likely has indeed worked the horse in a private session.

I have had great success with the 1 work angle. Usually I find that if a MSW has a single work that is above average for his class pars the trainer intention is the horse is ready to roll. The angle works very well at CT in particular.

But...any thoughts from the board on straight maidens posting no works?

[ratpack]

I guess it is a state by state factor because I know in Calif you must have 3 official Published works before your horse can run in a Mdn race. I am not sure about layoff horse.

[andicap]

Do you keep class pars for workouts? I've never heard of that before. Or do you mean the works themselves are faster than the class pars for a race?

In NY, timing (how often, not how fast) and lengths of the works are most important. Sometimes the speed is a good sign but you've got to know trainer. Some work 'em fast, some work 'em slow.

A few can work them on farms away from the track but you've got to know who they are. Mostly, horses are showing several works in maidens or off layoffs and you hate to see long gaps in the works.

Before the Form started publishing 8 or 9 workouts trainers could give a horse a fast work ad then 4 or 5 slow ones to hide the fast bullets from the public.
Harder to do now.

[ratpack]

Remember 15 years ago, a horse must a have 3f blow-out 3 to 5 days before a race. Things sure have changed.

I do not keep these kind of records but I read about a method some time ago for those who access to charts and back PP and are willing to put in the work.

Check the PP of a horse that wins, then go back and note date and times of all the works before that win.

What that is suppose to tell you is a pattern of trainer intent. If you see a trainer working a horse at a fast 3F 3 days before a win, or a slow 5F before a win etc.

There may even be some yearly books out on your local circuit.

[Valuist]

Are you talking about strictly first time starters or any maidens?

[ratpack]

Originally Posted by Valuist

Are you talking about strictly first time starters or any maidens?

I believe it is FTS in Calif.

[JackS]

I agree with andicap. Spacing between recent works for FTS would be more important to me than the speed of works and often even the "bullets".
I suppose bullett works may be as effective or even more effective than a string of recently and closley interveled works, but doubt that they have the same value since bullett works are so obvious to everyone.
I have the feeling that the cheapest claimers are often not worked because of the inability of many of these horses to put together the equivilent of two races without the possibility of breaking down or using up any form they may be presently in. A very good sign with these horses is a recent work which at least indicates a degree of health and firmness and also a degree of confidence by the trainer.

[pmd62ndst]

Statistically Speaking:

Average Horse wins 12.2%.
Average Horse with no works in three months: 11.5%
Average Horse with at least one bullet in last three months: 15.8%
Average Horse with all bad workouts in last three months: 9.5%

Average Maiden wins 11.8%
Average Maiden with no works in three months: 10.3%
Average Maiden with at least one bullet in last three months: 15.9%
Average Maiden with all poor workouts in last three months: 7.6%

Average FTS wins 8.6%
Average FTS with no works in three months: 4.8%
Average FTS with at least one bullet in last three months: 13.8%
Average FTS with all poor workouts in last three months: 1.5%

- This study reviewed 808,692 entries over the past 23 months.
- One bullet in last three months required at least 10 others worked out that day. (1 out of 2 doesn't count)
- Bad Workout means coming in the bottom 10% of the workouts for a particular day with at least 10 others worked out that day.

To me, poor workouts are worse then no workouts.

PMD

[BillW]

PMD,

Does your data include the total population or just the horses that show works in the last 3 months?

[JackS]

PMD- Thanks for the stats. For me an acceptible workout would be one that finished in the top 50% for that day rather than one based on time.
Fast works are nice and must be considered.

[Rob_in_MN]

"Do you keep class pars for workouts? I've never heard of that before. Or do you mean the works themselves are faster than the class pars for a race?"

I chart workout performances for 3 distances for all maiden races on a day's card - 3f, 4f, and 5f. If I don't - I feel like I'm just really missing something. Keep in mind I'm usually playing MSW23k, Mdn10 or Md 5k races.

Generally speaking I'm able to tell that at CT any work under 49.1 going 4f is a quick drill for a MSW and that a 50.1 is relatively keen speed for a Mdn 10k. Not all that scientific in approach.

Penn is just as consistent even though they clock about 3/5th's of a seconds faster per 6f. Obviously there are the occassional head scratchers when a horse with no gate works who's gone 4f in 54.1/53.1/55 in his last 3 drills gets the lead and wires. The consistency of the 4f drills is usually the best indicator for me.

I appreciate all the insight from the board. I like the angle for charting specifically maiden races and then going back and looking at the PP's for the winner's worktab. It's also great to see the statistical angles.

[JackS]

Distinctions between no gate and bg, hg probably should be made. I've been using a flat 1sec. decrease in time for both. My preference would be breezing from the gate vs. handily from the gate since horses riden handily are being urged.
A tie breaker between the two would be bg.

[46zilzal]

Just because they are NOT published does NOT mean the animal is not being exercised regularly

[Steve 'StatMan']

Originally Posted by 46zilzal

Just because they are NOT published does NOT mean the animal is not being exercised regularly

Exactly! Horses can work elsewhere. Horses can be unintentionally misidentified (exercise rider doesn't know name, says wrong name, wrong name relayed from the 'gapper' to the clockers, wrong spelling of name entered into database), or are missed because so many horses are working out, and they don't have to wait for an available clocker.

I've heard of one instance where a workout was listed for a horse who had died a few days before the alleged workout. (The horse had died in a training accident at a private training track).

Often when a horse is missing the 'required' workout upon entry, the stewards may ask the trainer, who may recall the information, or at least will tell them a horse 'worked' in a time (real, estimated or imagined). The information is announced over the P.A. System (no help to off-track bettors where there is no sound) and maybe flashed on the T.V. screen once or twice if the bettors are lucky.

Didn't Seattle Slew slip in under the public's radar because the workouts were under a different name (Seattle Sue)? Let me know if I'm right or wrong on that point.

[JackS]

Historically pretty lax everywhere. The larger stables have their own training tracks off in the boondocks or at the ranch.
Calif. has tightened up in recent years but don't know how tight. Not sure if anything has changed for the rest of the country.
Until there is a revolution, we'll have to go with what we know and normally thats the printed info in the Form.