Restriction Glossary

[guckers]

Originally Posted by RonTiller

Ron Tiller
HDW

Thanks for the thorough write-up. It's pretty humbling however.

Perhaps in the cases of complex/compound restrictions, it would be beneficial to see if there is a lowest common denominator. For instance, in your example,

Originally Posted by RonTiller

"NW3$X / NW4 / NW1 STK 9M" and Equibase has "C"

Maybe all entrants fit the NW4 condition and the race could be sort of re-classified as NW4. Not that the secretaries are going to do this, but maybe it could happen in a separate system or data source? It could make defining these conditions a lot simplier. What prevents a track a from having 5 compound conditions when all the entrants fit one or two of them.

Anyways... thanks for your write-up, I found it valuable and it was a fun read, but it leaves me with more questions.

[RonTiller]

Maybe all entrants fit the NW4 condition and the race could be sort of re-classified as NW4. Not that the secretaries are going to do this, but maybe it could happen in a separate system or data source? It could make defining these conditions a lot simplier. What prevents a track a from having 5 compound conditions when all the entrants fit one or two of them.

Well, conditions are conditions. They don't change because nobody entered a horse that was eligible under option 3 of a multi-condition race. To collapse multi-condition races based on the eligibility of horses entered would be prohibitively labor intensive. I have a program that parses the text of the race conditions and generates matching codes in over 99% of them, so that part is not labor intensive at all (although writing the program was!). What you suggest would be - plus they would be inaccurate, even if easier to read.

As for having 5 conditions, tracks can do as they please. Racing secretaries are trying to fill races - compound conditions make more horses eligible to enter, which makes filling races easier, which makes staying open more likely. mountainman could probably answer this better, as he works in the racing secretary's office at Mountaineer.

Ron Tiller
HDW

[sjk]

When there are multiple conditions they are generally selected so as to attract a similar class of horse.

If your reason for wanting to know the condition is to make a par for the race any one of them should get you close.

[Tom]

Great reply, Ron.

[guckers]

Originally Posted by sjk

When there are multiple conditions they are generally selected so as to attract a similar class of horse.

If your reason for wanting to know the condition is to make a par for the race any one of them should get you close.

That is my train of thought. I performed restrictions analysis by track, and for example, with AQU, 11% of races have a compound/complex restriction and 21% have X restriction types. Another standout for AQU is that 31% of the races have a state-bred type restriction. The highest NW# race type is the NW2 L.

As a new handicapper, restriction analysis may be the first thing I do, to assist in my decision in which track to cap.

[Show Me the Wire]

"c" means conditions and "nc" means no conditions. Usually used in Allowance races. The "c" is allowance horses that meet the eligibility conditions and the "nc" is an allowance race without conditions, i.e. open to all

[mountainman]

Originally Posted by RonTiller

As for having 5 conditions, tracks can do as they please. Racing secretaries are trying to fill races - compound conditions make more horses eligible to enter, which makes filling races easier, which makes staying open more likely. mountainman could probably answer this better, as he works in the racing secretary's office at Mountaineer.

Ron Tiller
HDW

Sorry for not noticing this post earlier, Ron. Yes, in addition to doing the show, I'm a veteran official who serves as Mnr's ast racing sec. As to conditions, from the racing sec's side of the fence there's a balance to strike. Sometimes tighter restrictions attract horses that would otherwise not be entered, while in other cases they simply make a category too narrow to fill from. Thus as a general rule, we might loosen or compound the conditions on a race we've been unable to "make," but wouldn't tinker with something that works.

The general policy and specific appeal (to horsemen) of a racing program is also a consideration. Being known as the Baskin Robbins of bottom conditions, we would lose our allure to horsemen if we started to mix or discontinue "flavors"-however expedient it seemed at the time.

By the way, dude, your initial post on conditions ROCKED.