EXCUSED BAD RACE

[iceknight]

Originally Posted by chadk66

I trained horses for a fair number of years.

do you know that for your horses. or for any mare/filly that you see in the paddock

[traynor]

Originally Posted by SPEEDHORSE

I would like to know from members on what you think are legitimate excuses for a horse's bad race which you can dismiss when analyzing it's past performances.

William Quirin says that a bad race before a layoff or the first race after layoff can be excused. Any other excuses that you can add?

It might be useful to look at the flip side of that coin. What criteria do you use to determine that a horse's (specific) race is indicative of it's potential?

Given that the notion that every horse performing to the best of its ability/potential in every race is absurd, how do you distinguish the "indicating serious attempt to win" from the "out for a workout" races?

[Overlay]

Originally Posted by DJofSD

What exactly do you mean by a bad race? Finishing position out of the money?

Quirin used the term "good race" to mean any race where the horse had finished third or better (regardless of race distance), or within two lengths of the winner in a sprint (less than one mile)(regardless of order-of-finish position), or within three lengths of the winner in a route (one mile or longer)(regardless of order-of-finish position). By those criteria, a "bad race" would be any race that did not qualify as a "good race".

[thaskalos]

Originally Posted by Overlay

Quirin used the term "good race" to mean any race where the horse had finished third or better (regardless of race distance), or within two lengths of the winner in a sprint (less than one mile)(regardless of order-of-finish position), or within three lengths of the winner in a route (one mile or longer)(regardless of order-of-finish position). By those criteria, a "bad race" would be any race that did not qualify as a "good race".

Bad criteria...IMO.

A horse who battles for the lead through grueling early fractions may well run a race which Quirin might label "bad"...but that would be a major mistake.

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by iceknight

do you know that for your horses. or for any mare/filly that you see in the paddock

it's a seasonal thing. usually over by July or so. From about Feb thru July they have their estrous cycle approx. every 28 days. A fair number don't run for crap if they're in heat. I've had a few that were bad enough we kept them on medication to prevent the heat cycles. didn't do it to all because it wasn't necessary for some. They usually ran poorly a day or two before you could actually tell they were in heat. The timing of the cycles changes as the season progresses so it's hard to pin point when it's going to happen. So it's nothing a handicapper can really use. But it can be the reason why some fillies or mares throw clunkers.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Overlay

Quirin used the term "good race" to mean any race where the horse had finished third or better (regardless of race distance), or within two lengths of the winner in a sprint (less than one mile)(regardless of order-of-finish position), or within three lengths of the winner in a route (one mile or longer)(regardless of order-of-finish position). By those criteria, a "bad race" would be any race that did not qualify as a "good race".

Using those (or similar) criteria, it is simple to code a function that extracts only the "good" races for comparison purposes, ignoring all the "bad" races. Adding a few other selection processes, it should be fairly simple to create a "how well this horse can run when it runs well" performance envelope for each entry, and then compare them.

That is essentially what pace handicappers and speed handicappers have been doing all along. Especially the Sartin pace handicappers "picking the proper pace lines." And--essentially--what most speed analysis and pace analysis software does "automatically."

That leaves unanswered the question of whether or not a specific entry will "run well" today.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Bad criteria...IMO.

A horse who battles for the lead through grueling early fractions may well run a race which Quirin might label "bad"...but that would be a major mistake.

I still use Quirin's idea about a failure instead of a bad race - a failure being not a good race it the race was either the same as the horse's last good race or today's race, ie, if the horse is entered in a $25K claimers at 6 furlongs today, a bad race at a mile is not a failure, and a bad race at $50K is not a bad failure.

[RaceBookJoe]

Originally Posted by Tom

I still use Quirin's idea about a failure instead of a bad race - a failure being not a good race it the race was either the same as the horse's last good race or today's race, ie, if the horse is entered in a $25K claimers at 6 furlongs today, a bad race at a mile is not a failure, and a bad race at $50K is not a bad failure.

Yeah, I consider a bad race where a horse fails in what I consider a logical spot. I always look to see if I can figure out why the last race was bad..or good, sometimes I can while others its a semi-educated guess.

[johnhannibalsmith]

A lot of possibilities here but one of my favorites:

Horse is making his second start around two turns.

Showed speed as a sprinter and then in his first start going long, because most trainers aren't that bright, it was decided that the jock needed to take a hold and "save something" since they were going farther.

Now the horse is trying to do two things for the first time, run two turns and run through a hammerlock after being let run while sprinting its entire career.

If he runs back two-turns, you just pray and hope that the trainer is smart enough to let the jock do the riding and the horse do the thinking and he'll get to actually use his natural sprint speed and run the way he knows to. I couldn't tell you what percentage that meet this criteria actually win, but I would speculate that quite a number are playable at a much bigger price than they probably should be.

[Maximillion]

Originally Posted by johnhannibalsmith

A lot of possibilities here but one of my favorites:

Horse is making his second start around two turns.

Showed speed as a sprinter and then in his first start going long, because most trainers aren't that bright, it was decided that the jock needed to take a hold and "save something" since they were going farther.

Now the horse is trying to do two things for the first time, run two turns and run through a hammerlock after being let run while sprinting its entire career.

If he runs back two-turns, you just pray and hope that the trainer is smart enough to let the jock do the riding and the horse do the thinking and he'll get to actually use his natural sprint speed and run the way he knows to. I couldn't tell you what percentage that meet this criteria actually win, but I would speculate that quite a number are playable at a much bigger price than they probably should be.

Agree totally.
If you have the pps from Penn there is a horse in the 5th that I think fits your description....the 6 Landry Jack.
Looking at her first route....the horse was taken off the leaders despite being somewhat tactical sprinting.I thought she ran ok considering the trip and what she was asked to do in that spot.

Ugly five horse field I know....but with what I guess you could call a "suspect" California invader,a twice beaten favorite and a 1 for 53 mare all likely to draw some support...she may still offer decent odds.Interesting to see if the jock lets her use some of her natural speed here.

[jahura2]

Poor race then a layoff is a good reason for an excuse most times.
Poor races on surfaces the horse hasn't raced on much, i.e. synthetic, sloppy, turf, yielding turf, These usually stand out.

[Maximillion]

Originally Posted by Maximillion

Agree totally.
If you have the pps from Penn there is a horse in the 5th that I think fits your description....the 6 Landry Jack.
Looking at her first route....the horse was taken off the leaders despite being somewhat tactical sprinting.I thought she ran ok considering the trip and what she was asked to do in that spot.

Ugly five horse field I know....but with what I guess you could call a "suspect" California invader,a twice beaten favorite and a 1 for 53 mare all likely to draw some support...she may still offer decent odds.Interesting to see if the jock lets her use some of her natural speed here.

Rare case (at least for me) of the odds drifting up late. paid 16.00

[SPEEDHORSE]

Many thanks to all who responded to my query. I will compile all your replies in a list, which will serve as reference when I'm analyzing past performances...GOD BLESS YOU ALL !!!