The Baffert bias

[burnsy]

Just start by saying the guy is a great trainer. Probably the best in this generation or period of time. But there are thousands of horses bred every year and everyone is trying to get the best horses. The point is statistically the chances of getting the fastest horse in consecutive years is pretty slim.

The bias this Triple Crown season was remarkable. His 3 horses showed promise but they were not winning. Yet, they took all the hype and burned a lot of money. Improbable is something I can’t understand. This is a horse that constantly burns energy before the race and is not bred to afford that going two turns. But it’s Bob Baffert so they love him. Even after he says the horse is “one of the good ones”, which in his terms is not biggest boost of confidence.

Reading what people say on the internet is a good way to feel out the bias. I’m not talking about track bias. I’m talking about people’s fandom and vibe. Betting is not just a bunch of figs and numbers . You do have to be good at math but it helps to know what people think too. And when they keep making a horse favorite and he isn’t performing like one....... that’s a bias.
Right now, his 3 big horses are not on top of this class. They showed signs of that through the preps. But people make excuses and continue to bet over bet horses. When WOW draws the one hole, he gets the trip and the jump..... Pimlico ain’t Churchill. The rail is golden.
I suppose Game Winner may show up for the Belmont. Depending on who else does, he’s no cinch. But by the power of observation, you can sit back and watch him be over bet. And read the million reasons why on the internet. But there’s only really one....... Bob Baffert.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by burnsy

The point is statistically the chances of getting the fastest horse in consecutive years is pretty slim.

The problem (for me) with our "classic distance races" is that the true classic distance horses (10F-14F) don't fit into our prep program.

We will continue to have horses like Country House, racing against horses like Hidden Scroll, coming in 6th or 7th in "derby prep races" , because that is NOT Country House's distance......a true stamina horse will never excel at the shorter distances like we card, because they do their best running in the stretch, and they need at least 1-1/4 miles to even show who they are.

So, U.S. cappers will just continue to say stuff like "CH is distance challenged" after these prep races........when the exact opposite is true. These stamina horses are not going to be running 1st and 2nd in our prep races. It's not what they do.

We are breeding for speed and so there's really no big surpise that ex-quarterhorse trainers (baffert, lukas) have so much success here.

My interest in classic distance horses has pretty much drifted away to euro racing and even japanese dirt horse races where they START their known stamina horses in 9F maiden races, not 6F maiden races.


As for baffert, he gets sent the best breedings. He does not alway have success with head cases like Improbable, or Solemini, a really talented horse who just wasn't brought along correctly (IMHO). improbable has not been anything close to a "happy horse" for most all of his 3 year old time, but when you have a big barn with others waiting in the wing, you don't HAVE to fix them.

If improbable was in a smalller barn, with a trainer who only had ONE TC prospect and it was him, I really think something could have and would have been done with him. Unfortunately, whatever problems he is having haven't been addressed at all properly.

I have to wonder what would have happened had he ended up with a different trainer. Bob is good at some stuff, but not at everything.

[burnsy]

You are so right. Others have noticed too. Many of these horses are fast early and stagger home. I posted my Derby horses here and the one I didn’t have was Country House. I knew Shugs horse could run like that and Tacitus but my big mistake was over looking Country House. I was about as sour and sick as a bettor can be after the dq in the Derby. And Country House was the reason besides being taken down . But by your theory of capping..... he belonged in the mix. I paid dearly.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by burnsy

YMany of these horses are fast early and stagger home.

Again the problem is that we really don't HAVE any kind of program in the U.S. for the true classic distance horse. Making them run in 6F maidens and 1-1/16th prep races is just going to make them look like no-hopers.

Unfortunately for true fans of thoroughbred classic distance horses, most everyone I know of that ilk has lost interest in U.S. racing.

We don't breed for it, we don't card for it.

Game Winner had terrible figs for the Derby in that respect. He should have only raced in the Belmont. Ditto, Country House, and CoH. When the only "preps" you get for races 10F and over are one race at 1-1/8 and the rest much shorter than that, (spend your entire 2 year old and most of your 3 year old career running at the wrong distances) it's hardly the correct "trajectory" to excel at 1-1/2 miles. It's almost a joke, really.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by clicknow

Again the problem is that we really don't HAVE any kind of program in the U.S. for the true classic distance horse. Making them run in 6F maidens and 1-1/16th prep races is just going to make them look like no-hopers.

Unfortunately for true fans of thoroughbred classic distance horses, most everyone I know of that ilk has lost interest in U.S. racing.

We don't breed for it, we don't card for it.

Game Winner had terrible figs for the Derby in that respect. He should have only raced in the Belmont. Ditto, Country House, and CoH. When the only "preps" you get for races 10F and over are one race at 1-1/8 and the rest much shorter than that, (spend your entire 2 year old and most of your 3 year old career running at the wrong distances) it's hardly the correct "trajectory" to excel at 1-1/2 miles. It's almost a joke, really.

Guys won like 16 triple crown races and finished second in another 10. Seems like the public is just using common sense when you have a group of horses with not much separating them.

The fact that his horses take more money than they should to me provides opportunity and not complaint.

Improbable is distance challenged, something less apparent to the type of bettor that plays these big days.

[burnsy]

Originally Posted by clicknow

Again the problem is that we really don't HAVE any kind of program in the U.S. for the true classic distance horse. Making them run in 6F maidens and 1-1/16th prep races is just going to make them look like no-hopers.

Unfortunately for true fans of thoroughbred classic distance horses, most everyone I know of that ilk has lost interest in U.S. racing.

We don't breed for it, we don't card for it.

Game Winner had terrible figs for the Derby in that respect. He should have only raced in the Belmont. Ditto, Country House, and CoH. When the only "preps" you get for races 10F and over are one race at 1-1/8 and the rest much shorter than that, (spend your entire 2 year old and most of your 3 year old career running at the wrong distances) it's hardly the correct "trajectory" to excel at 1-1/2 miles. It's almost a joke, really.

I agree, but when so many do it, you can win with it. With the horses you mentioned it doesn’t always work . They are pace dependent and get burned. Some of what you say are the reasons why I liked MS. His slow pace was a plus to me because he can rate and actually run faster late in a race. You understand this but many people don’t know how hard it is or rare it is now when a horse can actually accelerate or even “maintain “ in later stages of a classic race. It just doesn’t happen enough anymore

[delsully]

Originally Posted by clicknow

So, U.S. cappers will just continue to say stuff like "CH is distance challenged" after these prep races........when the exact opposite is true. These stamina horses are not going to be running 1st and 2nd in our prep races. It's not what they do.

Do you have an example of someone saying this? Because I’d never want to listen to anything else they had to say about handicapping.

[five-eighths]

I think you are probably right about Everfast wanting more distance, but I’m not seeing it in the PP’s. Ran 7 straight times at 8.5f, only once did he make up ground from 2c to finish was the Holy Bull where he finished 2nd at 128-1.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by five-eighths

I think you are probably right about Everfast wanting more distance, but I’m not seeing it in the PP’s. Ran 7 straight times at 8.5f, only once did he make up ground from 2c to finish was the Holy Bull where he finished 2nd at 128-1.

We all lose exotics wagers when a horse like this jumps up suddenly and there is no way to really predict it using any logical basis.

FWIW some of the "pedigree heads" like Laurie Ross said a while back put him on her "yes" list for the distance.....but that kind of analysis only helps eliminate horses who CAN'T get the distance. And since one also has to use track performance, there were certainly better runners to choose from.

I'm kind of tinkering with some value wagering, i.e. putting longshots 2nd in a "saver exacta" It happens quite a lot during the Oaklawn meet, that a longshot will run in Place position. I did well doing that last 2 years by tracking my hit rate using that. It's rather uncanny how often it happens during the meet there.

[HalvOnHorseracing]

Originally Posted by burnsy

Just start by saying the guy is a great trainer. Probably the best in this generation or period of time. But there are thousands of horses bred every year and everyone is trying to get the best horses. The point is statistically the chances of getting the fastest horse in consecutive years is pretty slim.

The bias this Triple Crown season was remarkable. His 3 horses showed promise but they were not winning. Yet, they took all the hype and burned a lot of money. Improbable is something I can’t understand. This is a horse that constantly burns energy before the race and is not bred to afford that going two turns. But it’s Bob Baffert so they love him. Even after he says the horse is “one of the good ones”, which in his terms is not biggest boost of confidence.

Reading what people say on the internet is a good way to feel out the bias. I’m not talking about track bias. I’m talking about people’s fandom and vibe. Betting is not just a bunch of figs and numbers . You do have to be good at math but it helps to know what people think too. And when they keep making a horse favorite and he isn’t performing like one....... that’s a bias.
Right now, his 3 big horses are not on top of this class. They showed signs of that through the preps. But people make excuses and continue to bet over bet horses. When WOW draws the one hole, he gets the trip and the jump..... Pimlico ain’t Churchill. The rail is golden.
I suppose Game Winner may show up for the Belmont. Depending on who else does, he’s no cinch. But by the power of observation, you can sit back and watch him be over bet. And read the million reasons why on the internet. But there’s only really one....... Bob Baffert.

I don't know what the trainers did during Trackus Intereuptus at Santa Anita but I had to believe some of the horses lost training time. When a horse is running a mile and a quarter for the first time, he better be in top shape. I was very wary of any horse coming in from CA.

[bobphilo]

Originally Posted by clicknow

Game Winner had terrible figs for the Derby in that respect. He should have only raced in the Belmont. Ditto, Country House, and CoH. When the only "preps" you get for races 10F and over are one race at 1-1/8 and the rest much shorter than that, (spend your entire 2 year old and most of your 3 year old career running at the wrong distances) it's hardly the correct "trajectory" to excel at 1-1/2 miles. It's almost a joke, really.

Game Winner had excellent figures for the Derby and, counting his extreme ground loss, ran the best race in the Derby earning the race's top T-Graph figure. He also finished strong. I hope he goes in the Belmont as he seems like the kind of horse who can handle that distance too. Hopefully, he'll get a better trip and Belmont is more forgiving to wide trips with it's gradual sweeping turns than Churchill with it's sharp turns.

[classhandicapper]

If you looked at all of Baffert's young horses over the years, you'll find many that kept developing for quite awhile and some that jumped way up as soon as he spotted them aggressively. Whether that is great training, the quality of horses he gets, or both, it's something you have to deal with. A horse trained by Baffert is more likely to continue improving or jump up than the average horse trained by the average trainer.

That's what bettors are building into the price. They are building in all the times they tried to beat him because they thought his horse was 2nd or 3rd best and it jumped up past the other horses and won anyway.

So the trick (or dilemma) is figuring out when you are dealing with a horse that's taking extra money that's probably appropriate and when you are dealing with a horse that isn't that good, is not getting much better, and is being overbet because Baffert is the trainer. That's harder than it looks until after it beats you or disappoints as the favorite.

[bpiets]

Originally Posted by burnsy

Just start by saying the guy is a great trainer. Probably the best in this generation or period of time. But there are thousands of horses bred every year and everyone is trying to get the best horses. The point is statistically the chances of getting the fastest horse in consecutive years is pretty slim.

The bias this Triple Crown season was remarkable. His 3 horses showed promise but they were not winning. Yet, they took all the hype and burned a lot of money. Improbable is something I can’t understand. This is a horse that constantly burns energy before the race and is not bred to afford that going two turns. But it’s Bob Baffert so they love him. Even after he says the horse is “one of the good ones”, which in his terms is not biggest boost of confidence.

Reading what people say on the internet is a good way to feel out the bias. I’m not talking about track bias. I’m talking about people’s fandom and vibe. Betting is not just a bunch of figs and numbers . You do have to be good at math but it helps to know what people think too. And when they keep making a horse favorite and he isn’t performing like one....... that’s a bias.
Right now, his 3 big horses are not on top of this class. They showed signs of that through the preps. But people make excuses and continue to bet over bet horses. When WOW draws the one hole, he gets the trip and the jump..... Pimlico ain’t Churchill. The rail is golden.
I suppose Game Winner may show up for the Belmont. Depending on who else does, he’s no cinch. But by the power of observation, you can sit back and watch him be over bet. And read the million reasons why on the internet. But there’s only really one....... Bob Baffert.

My question is , what might the R O I on betting all the horses he trains ,year by year ,if one were to place an $2.00 w / pl / show on a monthly and yearly basis...( I do think ,if one were to consider just doing the above on any graded races his horses enter over the course of the year, one would be in for a surprise at the r o I ....) ....but a better r o I would be had if one considers betting on the Owners of the horses he trains ie: as some owners have a horse or two which win and some other owners have a few but also win and are worth betting for a positive r o I ...

[bpiets]

But for the owners of the top bread winners, all trainers come out on top, but not the betor / gambler, because the odds for the public ,on these really top conditioned graded horses, just do not pay off on a yearly basis ...

[bpiets]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

If you looked at all of Baffert's young horses over the years, you'll find many that kept developing for quite awhile and some that jumped way up as soon as he spotted them aggressively. Whether that is great training, the quality of horses he gets, or both, it's something you have to deal with. A horse trained by Baffert is more likely to continue improving or jump up than the average horse trained by the average trainer.

That's what bettors are building into the price. They are building in all the times they tried to beat him because they thought his horse was 2nd or 3rd best and it jumped up past the other horses and won anyway.

So the trick (or dilemma) is figuring out when you are dealing with a horse that's taking extra money that's probably appropriate and when you are dealing with a horse that isn't that good, is not getting much better, and is being overbet because Baffert is the trainer. That's harder than it looks until after it beats you or disappoints as the favorite.

Yup....he is noted for letting his two year olds to develop as long as possible as horses are still growing physicaly and thier bones and other structure break down much to soon when raced or pushed in training or races as two year olds...one need only check out an interesting write up written by Kathleen Parker at The American-Canadian Horsewarrior Forum....under opinion ...