Sat 1 dollar tournament

[wiretowire68]

Sat playing a 1 dollar tournament on Horsetourneys and I have been really sucking awful as I have been in constant experiment mode with declining speed figures as well different types of class type angles using Bris figures as well as some interesting figures in terms of speed figures in sprints to pace figures in routes. Sat. I pick a modest 5 winners although a couple were the post time favorite.

It will not show on the picture I am going to post, but two of my alternative picks in terms of the possibility of being scratched before the race. In tournament play, all picks had to be in and of course it comes down to picking the winner to run 1st or 2nd. I could not make up mind between Wesley Ward horse Sahir in race # 6 Keeneland and of course I used the horse as my alternative and went with the # 5 horse Alicit Exception who ran again, a tight third off a third start off the layoff and a stretch out to 7 furlongs.

I also made a mistake in I believe it was the 7th or 8th race at Gulfstream where I decided to go with the # 3 horse with Joe Brave due to the speed figures and the Early horse. Of course he went to the lead and quit in the stretch to run dead last and my alternative horse was #1 Royal Dame who won the race, So if I just change my mind in one or both races I win 1st place.

I was just curious if anyone uses a Jockey/Trainer percentage with the post position win percentage. I have been experimenting with this in terms of negative figures in terms of beaten lengths in comparison to the cycles. Of course it does work better in terms of more experienced horses with starts under their belt as opposed 2 year olds or FTS or horses with relatively fewer starts. P.S. tough in tournaments when they use maiden races.


I totally agree with Michael Pizzola, maiden sp. wt. races are very, very, tricky and very difficult to software handicap these types of races without work out interpretation and connections.

[Bustin Stones]

I think it's more productive to couple jockey/trainer superiority with recent bullet workouts. YMMV.

[wiretowire68]

You know...in terms of the tracks and first time starters... certain trainers you know will have horses ready particularly two year olds or limited high md. sp. weights. Brad Cox, Baffert, Pletcher, Wesley Ward. How do you come up with a scoring model for workouts.?

[Dave S]

Originally Posted by wiretowire68

You know...in terms of the tracks and first time starters... certain trainers you know will have horses ready particularly two year olds or limited high md. sp. weights. Brad Cox, Baffert, Pletcher, Wesley Ward. How do you come up with a scoring model for workouts.?

Not a scoring model per se and certainly won't find with every starter but I like to note if the workout ranked in the top 10% of the works if the work was at four furlongs. Or if the work was five furlongs or longer if it ranked in the top 20% for those works. The minimum number of horses that worked for each specific distance must be eight. I particularly like the better five furlong works as these on occasion can came up with some pretty good longshots.

[wiretowire68]

The only two trainers to me that are the most consistent in FTS are usually Baffert or Cox and I guess you can throw Pletcher in at times. It is an interesting idea to use the percentage as score in terms of top percentile of the actual work itself. I have always been a huge believer in 5 Furlong works mixed with 4 Furlong works with either having a bullet or a 101. in change. I used to believe in gate works no matter the work but have slowly learned that sometimes gate works are because the FTS is having issues learning how to load or the trainer believes on "on the job training: and just letting him go.

I appreciate the feedback.. I have experimented in the strt to the 1st call in sprints. And 1st-Call to 2nd Call in routes when it comes to percentages because I generally will take jockey win % for the season with their percentage at either either at sprints and or routes dirt or turf. Generally, though in my constant analysis the ranking I end up with does not have a huge affect as it still ends up speed/class/pace.

[Dave S]

Originally Posted by wiretowire68

The only two trainers to me that are the most consistent in FTS are usually Baffert or Cox and I guess you can throw Pletcher in at times. It is an interesting idea to use the percentage as score in terms of top percentile of the actual work itself. I have always been a huge believer in 5 Furlong works mixed with 4 Furlong works with either having a bullet or a 101. in change. I used to believe in gate works no matter the work but have slowly learned that sometimes gate works are because the FTS is having issues learning how to load or the trainer believes on "on the job training: and just letting him go.

I appreciate the feedback.. I have experimented in the strt to the 1st call in sprints. And 1st-Call to 2nd Call in routes when it comes to percentages because I generally will take jockey win % for the season with their percentage at either either at sprints and or routes dirt or turf. Generally, though in my constant analysis the ranking I end up with does not have a huge affect as it still ends up speed/class/pace.

I cannot take credit for the workout method that I presented above. It came from a book by Barry Meadow from a few years ago called The Skeptical Handicapper. By the way, these workout standards apply not merely to first timers, but to any horse really. He also provided a recency stipulation as well, that being the workout in question must have taken place within the last 21 days. I also like a method first laid out by James Quinn concerning firsters. Namely that horse must have at least two of the following prerequisites to qualify for a wager: Firstly that the trainer have at least a 12% success rate with firsters. Secondly that the sire must have at least a 12% success rate with firsters. And thirdly that the horses works must be good. I forget his exact parameters for a good work but I have largely substituted the Meadow parameters described above. A horse qualifying on all three parameters obviously deserves strong consideration. Those qualifying on two of the three can be backed at 8:1 or higher. Only one qualifying paramater illicits a pass. Of course with the tote being what it is these days, having any sort of pre-race odds requirement is a very iffy proposition.