In Your Opinion, What Age...

[Stevecsd2]

I find that 6 & 7 years old do quite well in route races (7F & longer.)

[MJC922]

I don't have much of an opinion on this, I think the question you're asking is really more along the lines of at what point is the body of work sufficient from a handicapper's perspective and includes enough data points to draw reliable conclusions from it.

In that case I think you really need X number of races in the record rather than focusing on age, a five year old with three lifetime starts probably doesn't tell you much in the way of preferences yet.

The other way to look at the question is when does the horse generally reach let's say a career top and possibly even at what age is the average horse maybe most consistent in its level of effort from race to race.

I could research it with the class ratings but I would probably be looking to only include the subset of horses with very long careers. In such a study then I would have no use for any horse that retired at 3 or 4 for example because including those horses wouldn't tell me anything at all about the optimum age for a racehorse to compete at its best.

In any case I'm not sure a study like that would tell me much, if (pick a number here) age 7 is 'best' but a horse has many nagging injuries then 7 could be best for the mind but not this particular horse's body. It's too much of an individual thing IMO, but apparently Benter cared about age in his model so maybe you're on to something. Good luck.

[AutumnLotus]

Originally Posted by rastajenk

Are we talking about the age of peak performance, or the age range of form maintenance and consistency over some period of time? I think the original question was aimed at the latter, but I could be wrong.

I am referring to what prime age a thoroughbred to be considered to have reached a point in their age/experience that handicappers can reliably/assume, as much as one can anyway, the horse has 'developed'/matured/been trained into its most predictive form.

RASTAJENK - Which, as you put it, "CONSISTENCY".

Example: we know that 2 yr olds can be very unpredictable, making maiden races the more difficult to handicap, in my opinion anyway. And I'm not only referring to the fact that there is a lack of history to handicap from, I'm referring more to the fact that a horse at that age has not yet found/revealed its capabilities, nor has the trainer yet tested/exposed the horses strengths or weaknesses well enough to confidently know in what track circumstances/environment the horse is most fitted to.

The core of my posted question ultimately has to do with us as handicappers, trying to determine at which age of the horse allows us to do our methods of handicapping with the horse PP's knowing that the horses PPs are consistent and as reliable as they come!

[AutumnLotus]

Originally Posted by MJC922

The other way to look at the question is when does the horse generally reach let's say a career top and possibly even at what age is the average horse maybe most consistent in its level of effort from race to race.

Thank you, that is what I was mainly inquiring about.

For an example, let's take boxing or mixed martial arts. There's an obvious, yet, not necessarily link to the age of a fighter/horsebut rather level of experience which comes from the number of fights/races one had and or have under their belt until they have developed/grown into/it has been revealed by the trainer/or until their own fighting/run style has become prominent enough as to be consistent and identifiable.

[MJC922]

Originally Posted by AutumnLotus

Thank you, that is what I was mainly inquiring about.

For an example, let's take boxing or mixed martial arts. There's an obvious, yet, not necessarily link to the age of a fighter/horsebut rather level of experience which comes from the number of fights/races one had and or have under their belt until they have developed/grown into/it has been revealed by the trainer/or until their own fighting/run style has become prominent enough as to be consistent and identifiable.

There's surely a generic answer that we could hang on this for an age number and it may well have already been noted in this thread. On the other hand my thought is the true answer which might have potential to bring value to a model would be a lot more nuanced than just standalone age. There are things like age/sex/seasonal where if you break it down there is likely variation in consistency with females vs males and then maybe geldings are more consistent than any others combined etc. Just guessing based upon basic knowledge that's what you might see from a study of it. In summary I think that while you can come up with an answer (age number) it might still be missing the forest for the trees unless you really break it down by age/sex/seasonal. It's a nuanced game. Like I said in another thread we love it for its complexity. That's where the value comes from because you will have people who will stop at age by itself and go no further. With that being said maybe age alone is enough to bring value to the process, who am I to say.