what if one could figure comparable workout times?

[Capper Al]

I know that there are several methods for evaluating workout speeds. I know of three methods myself. The question here is assuming one could compare them successfully? What would they mean? Never knowing the barns intentions nullifies their value doesn't it?

[cj]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

I know that there are several methods for evaluating workout speeds. I know of three methods myself. The question here is assuming one could compare them successfully? What would they mean? Never knowing the barns intentions nullifies their value doesn't it?

Unless you could watch them, I don't see any real value.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

I know that there are several methods for evaluating workout speeds. I know of three methods myself. The question here is assuming one could compare them successfully? What would they mean? Never knowing the barns intentions nullifies their value doesn't it?

In my opinion, workout timings are next to meaningless.. What counts more, is the regularity of the workout tab and the existence (or not) of gaps in them..

[PhantomOnTour]

What if they included splits and gallop out times?

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by cj

Unless you could watch them, I don't see any real value.

Good point!

Now why don't the track(s) show a live feed and maybe indicate who is working out?

If it's too expensive then just show the workouts, we can figure it out.

[horses4courses]

Originally Posted by cj

Unless you could watch them, I don't see any real value.

Absolutely right.

A horse can have a workout on the same track, same day, as another
horse where he can run slower and actually be more impressive.
Some horses are ridden much harder, others restrained in order to run easy.
The times do not tell the entire story.

[Augenj]

Originally Posted by Capper Al

I know that there are several methods for evaluating workout speeds. I know of three methods myself. The question here is assuming one could compare them successfully? What would they mean? Never knowing the barns intentions nullifies their value doesn't it?

This doesn't sound like what you're looking for but it might trigger some thought.

You can use average workout rankings back any number of workouts to get a "rating" for each horse. Let's say you want to use the last 3 workouts for your calculations. Sum up the last 3 rankings for the horse (X). Then sum up the last 3 total ranked horses (Y). Divide X by Y and subtract the result from 1.0 to get the best on top.

The win per cent over hundreds of races is low but the ROI is pretty decent. It all depends on the track and type of race - maidens, non-maidens. I use an enhanced version of this as one of 10 factors to calculate a horse's overall rating.

[Tom]

The workout rating in HTR is one of the most powerful ones they have.
Not as a stand alone, but when combined with other factors. It is in several of my most productive spot plays.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Tom

The workout rating in HTR is one of the most powerful ones they have.
Not as a stand alone, but when combined with other factors. It is in several of my most productive spot plays.

Tom, are you a "Razor" devotee?......Powerful angle.

[Fingal]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

In my opinion, workout timings are next to meaningless.. What counts more, is the regularity of the workout tab and the existence (or not) of gaps in them..

Times can be very misleading. Take for example Get Happy Mister who won the San Simeon Hcp. at Santa Anita this year. Not only is he a Colorado bred, but his last work before the race while being on the turf was 6f in 1:19. Now that has to be awful close to the threshold for having a timed work. Horse paid 27 bucks.

I used to feel gaps in works was important, especially when it came to no work since raced but when I read one interview with Doug O'Neill it changed my mind. As he put it why work a horse just to work them ? Good work, good race, they'll keep their form with a strong gallop.

There's a few trainers out in S Cal that follow that line of thinking, I'm sure on other circuits there are some trainers that think the same. And for lesser circuits some barns may not have the type of horses that can stand up to works between races.

Or those gaps on any circuit may be because the clockers missed a work.
It happens.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

Tom, are you a "Razor" devotee?......Powerful angle.

Razor Rulz!

[pandy]

Has anyone ever done any record keeping or testing off workouts? For instance, do horses with a recent work in last 7 days win more often than horses that don't have a recent workout? Do horses that have a recent bullet workout win more often?

Although it's true that if you don't see the work, you don't know if it was good or not, it still gives you an idea of what the trainer is trying to do in terms of conditioning.

Also with older horses, if the horse is working regularly it's a good sign, the horse is sound.

I have had several big scores because of workouts. You have to use common sense. As an example, some years ago Ron McAnally had a first time starter, I can't remember her name right now, but she was working fast. But his stats on firsters was something like 0 for 68. However, the works were unusually fast for a horse from his barn, a sign that the horse was indeed fast, since he doesn't work his maidens fast. I had bet the horse and gave it out and then luckily they interviewed him on TVG and Ron said that although he never wins with firsters, "I can tell you that this one can run." I doubled my bet and she won easily at $46.

[eqitec]

I am currently doing a study of the 2013-2014 Saratoga meetings. Out of 525 races in the study thus far, 10.3% of winners had a 4F breeze on dirt 6 days before their wins.

[Dave Schwartz]

Has anyone ever done any record keeping or testing off workouts? For instance, do horses with a recent work in last 7 days win more often than horses that don't have a recent workout? Do horses that have a recent bullet workout win more often?

Pandy,

I have. There is validity to recent workouts. Percentages & Probabilities, page 89.

However, the difference in IVs is pretty slight. High point is 5-7 days, and tops at only 1.11, with the bottom being no work in 30 days at 0.82. Seems like not being worth the effort.

Because some tracks demand a workout for a horse returning from layoff and others do not, the statistics are skewed unless they are track-specific.


However...

When one uses a universal parallel time chart and looks at "Best Workout in 45 Days," one finds that horses ranked 1st perform well enough to actually be profitable at high odds.


However #2...

In my handicapping experience, even that factor is "correlational rather than causational," and, in practice, consistently points one to the wrong horses.


However #3...

The exception comes in young horses, races with FTS, and lightly-raced horses, where the 45-day best workout blossoms into a factor that can actually be used to handicap.

In fact, FTS that rank #1 for BW45 and go off at (I believe it is) 12/1 or higher have shown to be flat bet profitable.

[pandy]

Thanks Dave. That makes sense.