Same Trip Different Impact

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Another thing. My experience tells me that the hot pace usually doesn't translate to much of an advantage for a closer in a dirt SPRINT. In a sprint, the unusually-hot pace usually leaves the closer much further behind in the early going than he would prefer to be...and the race distance prevents the horse from putting his late charge to effective use. Plus...some closers will just pack it in, in this type of scenario.

That's an issue. Put's pressure on both the horse and the jockey to handle it.

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I saw it...but I remain unconvinced. For as long as the game has been around...the closer has been giving the false impression that he had more energy in the tank which went unused in the race. And the horseplayers have been left salivating for "next time"...when the closer's jockey "makes an earlier move"...or when the trainer "gives the horse a little more distance". But it never seems to work out as planned. IMO...the closer's menacing late move is largely an illusion...and any optimistic future outlook that comes from it is bound to disappoint.

Agreed. Any time you start 'extrapolating', you better be getting juicy odds...

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I saw it...but I remain unconvinced. For as long as the game has been around...the closer has been giving the false impression that he had more energy in the tank which went unused in the race. And the horseplayers have been left salivating for "next time"...when the closer's jockey "makes an earlier move"...or when the trainer "gives the horse a little more distance". But it never seems to work out as planned. IMO...the closer's menacing late move is largely an illusion...and any optimistic future outlook that comes from it is bound to disappoint.

I have never done a detailed analysis of fast paces and the final time figures for the deep closers.

What I can tell you is that over decades of observing stakes caliber horses, I've seen a LOT of significant career speed figure tops run by deep closers on days when the pace was especially fast. I can't recall a single one that paired that top next out or even soon after unless it was an improving 3yo that did it later in his career.

At the same time, I have also seen many races where the pace was very fast and the deep closers ran their typical figure (and as you said possibly won but without running any faster).

That is consistent with the premise of my thread.

The reality is that not all horses have the same balance of speed and stamina even when they are similar in overall ability. So they don't all seem to benefit or get hurt by the same amount even when they get identical trips.

The way I handle those fast pace lifetime tops by deep closers is to toss the race. I know they are less likely to duplicate those figures than the typical horse even if I can't explain the dynamics exactly.

Sometimes it's enough to say, "This horse usually runs around a 105. He ran a 115 last time closing off a hot pace, but I'm going to view him as a 105 horse".

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I have never done a detailed analysis of fast paces and the final time figures for the deep closers.

What I can tell you is that over decades of observing stakes caliber horses, I've seen a LOT of significant career speed figure tops run by deep closers on days when the pace was especially fast. I can't recall a single one that paired that top next out or even soon after unless it was an improving 3yo that did it later in his career.

At the same time, I have also seen many races where the pace was very fast and the deep closers ran their typical figure (and as you said possibly won but without running any faster).

That is consistent with the premise of my thread.

The reality is that not all horses have the same balance of speed and stamina even when they are similar in overall ability. So they don't all seem to benefit or get hurt by the same amount even when they get identical trips.

The way I handle those fast pace lifetime tops by deep closers is to toss the race. I know they are less likely to duplicate those figures than the typical horse even if I can't explain the dynamics exactly.

Sometimes it's enough to say, "This horse usually runs around a 105. He ran a 115 last time closing off a hot pace, but I'm going to view him as a 105 horse".

I don't throw these aberrant races out...I take note of them. It means something to me to know that a horse is capable of running a very fast race under ideal, for it, conditions. After all...ALL horses encounter an "ideal" set of conditions from time to time...and it helps to know how high a horse can reach at such a time. Just because a race may not be readily repeatable doesn't mean that it should be treated as if it didn't occur at all. It's just another fact that I like to keep in mind as I weigh all the different handicapping factors, in association with the offered odds.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I don't throw these aberrant races out...I take note of them. It means something to me to know that a horse is capable of running a very fast race under ideal, for it, conditions. After all...ALL horses encounter an "ideal" set of conditions from time to time...and it helps to know how high a horse can reach at such a time. Just because a race may not be readily repeatable doesn't mean that it should be treated as if it didn't occur at all. It's just another fact that I like to keep in mind as I weigh all the different handicapping factors, in association with the offered odds.

By "toss it" I meant not indicative of what the horse is capable of under normal conditions. I also don't consider it totally irrelevant if the horse might get another hot pace. But even then there's something unique about those fast pace tops that make them less likely to be duplicated. If a race just has a fast pace, it doesn't automatically lead to faster times for the closers. That's why I am saying it's some unique combination of horse, fractions, and possibly drafting that probably allows it to happen.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

One of the things I noticed long ago is that when speed horses get loose or catch a speed bias, they don't all benefit equally. Some horses will move up a LOT and others hardly at all. I always considered that a function of how much natural speed the horse has, how easily it relaxes on its own, and how much stamina it has. The greater the natural speed and the less the stamina/relaxation the horse has, the greater the potential impact of a favorable trip on the horse's speed figure and performance and vice versa.

I think to a large extend that's also true of pace.

How often do we see 3 or 4 horses go for the lead, the cheaper losers of the chase often back up very badly relative to their typical figures, but the fastest highest quality horse goes on to win or at least run a figure similar to his norm. Only when it gets very extreme do they all collapse.

These kind of distinctions are why I sub-classify "need lead" types as either "swift," or "strong." You have given two excellent examples-ESPECIALLY the one pertaining to track bias-of exploitable differences between types of frontrunners.

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

I don't throw these aberrant races out...I take note of them. It means something to me to know that a horse is capable of running a very fast race under ideal, for it, conditions. After all...ALL horses encounter an "ideal" set of conditions from time to time...and it helps to know how high a horse can reach at such a time. Just because a race may not be readily repeatable doesn't mean that it should be treated as if it didn't occur at all. It's just another fact that I like to keep in mind as I weigh all the different handicapping factors, in association with the offered odds.

Quite agree. And your premise, to me, has an intriguing corollary that I often state on the air: Horses show their limitations when they win.

Hope all is well, Gus. Stay safe.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by mountainman

These kind of distinctions are why I sub-classify "need lead" types as either "swift," or "strong." You have given two excellent examples-ESPECIALLY the one pertaining to track bias-of exploitable differences between types of frontrunners.

Thanks

Assuming all horses are the same is a mistake I made for years.

Years ago I would deduct "x" points any time a horse got loose.

Then I'd watch that horse beat me next out running the same exact figure sitting just off the pace.

Sometimes I'd use one after deducting "x" points and watch him finish up the track when challenged even a little.

Eventually I figured out that "x' doesn't work for every horse. Some relax well ether way, some get helped a little, some move up a lot, and some need to be loose (or a bias) or they fall apart. The trick is knowing what you are dealing with before the race, which is not as easy.