Evaluating Big Winners

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by aaron

I had a very profitable player explain the bounce theory. If the horse is 6/5 he will bounce. If he is 10-1 he won't bounce. He simplified the process by just thinking in terms of value.He believed there is no reason to overthink the theory.

Good idea.

What if he's 7-2

[aaron]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Good idea.

What if he's 7-2

good point,if you perceive 7/2 as value in the race and you believe the horse can beat the field,then make the bet.The point with these type of horses is your going to be wrong a lot,but if you get what you feel is a price,and you have no other questions on the race you should win often enough to make a profit. If you are on the fence you can always pass.

[JohnGalt1]

The only time I use the term bounce is when a horse off a lay off runs a fast race within 1 length either in front or behind, than runs a much slower race and loses by many lengths is a bounce.

My reasoning is a horse off a lay off would be muscle sore after the strenuous race and so might run a clunker.

I think Ray Taulbot had an angle he called the BBB angle--back bounce back.

He would excuse the 2nd race after the lay off and use the the come back race pace line.

In this case the last line is NOT the most representative.

Because of changes in track and weather conditions, and class and distance moves most horses run differently from race to race, so when I see a horse that rand a fast race followed by a slow race without an excuse I won't consider it a bounce and will assume it may be going off form.

[classhandicapper]

Yesterday I was interested in Bridget Moloney as a horse that might be better than she looks on figures. She looked dreadfully slow in beating some really weak fields.

The play would have been a cold Gracer/Bridget Maoloney exacta if the price was right. In this case, BM's big win last out may have been aided by the off track. Quite a few horses won big that day. So that confused the issue further. She did not run particularly well.

[aaron]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

Yesterday I was interested in Bridget Moloney as a horse that might be better than she looks on figures. She looked dreadfully slow in beating some really weak fields.

The play would have been a cold Gracer/Bridget Maoloney exacta if the price was right. In this case, BM's big win last out may have been aided by the off track. Quite a few horses won big that day. So that confused the issue further. She did not run particularly well.

I very rarely bet horses back who won big on off tracks unless they have a figure on a fast track that is somewhat in line with their off track figure. In my opinion sometimes horses have big wins on off tracks,because they are the only horse who really liked the off track in that race.

[burnsy]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I thought a thread on this subject might be interesting (it is to me lol).

When a horse wins by a huge margin it's usually because of one of several things (or a combination of a few of them).

1. He was way better than that class of horse.

2. That particular field was very weak for the class.

3. He got a bias aided win or perfect trip relative to the other contenders.

4. He shook loose on a sloppy track he loved.

5. Combinations

What techniques do people use to try to determine what category of horse they are dealing with and where it fits against horses of a much higher class when they move up.

Number 4 does not even count..if its sloppy you have to take the win with a grain of salt. Its harder to gauge with cheaper horses, but with higher class, stakes horses its something you can make money off of. These horses will win big against horses they really outclass and people go crazy over them. Game On Dude is a perfect example of this, last year Verrazano was another in the 3 yo ranks. People get carried away by horses that find weaker fields. You can always spot horses like this, on the internet and in the horse "talk" world and if you really dissect the PP's. You can usually take the Beyer # and "chuck it" too (Dreaming of Julia). People go way overboard and the horse gets over bet every time it runs after that. These horses have a "ceiling" of the level they can reach but most people don't see it. They would rather be on the bandwagon than to use a watchful and critical eye........that's when you pounce and catch the BETTER HORSE at a BETTER PRICE. Its not as much of a gamble when the odds are WRONG. It works in other sports too. Some people never catch on either, they just love "big winners". The ease and distance of winning......means nothing...that does not prove "class"...the level of competition that you beat....is the only thing that matters. Beating your equal by a nose trumps beating schleps by 20.....any day of the week. I use this scenario to my advantage every time I find it. If you don't understand the "fundamentals" of "sports competition", you'll never get it. This applies to Boxing and Football too.

[BIG49010]

Originally Posted by Light

I guess you wouldn't like a horse called Moments Notiz. He beat only 3 others at Aqu on Dec 26.It wasn't even a "big win". But that led to a "big win" on Dec 31,followed by another win on Jan 19. It's not field size that matters,it's the horse.

Funny you mention this horse, he was offered for 30,000 after IND race, and Jacobson has placed him in good spots to make a nice profit. Not a horse you can really bet, unless you like short prices.

[auntjanet5]

I have always called a big win when a horse is in front by a neck or less at the stretch call and go on to win by a length and a half or more. They seem
to be the most reliable repeaters for me.

Nothing automatic but a good starting place.

[BlueShoe]

Runners coming off of swift easy wins, with competitive for today's field speed and pace figures, ala Ainslie's Big Win, coming back quickly and stepping up in class, have long been my pet plays. Often these types repeat while double or triple jumping up the class ladder. However, as others have commented, many cautions must be observed, most surely they cannot be all played blindly as a "system."

One situation that should be handled with caution is when an older inconsistent runner suddenly runs a figure much higher than it's recent outings. For example, a 6yo that is 2 for 30 lifetime that has been running Beyers in the low 70s wins easily with a fig of 85 is going to have me wondering where that effort came from, and would expect regression back to his other recent races. But this does not always happen, sometimes these types do come back and run another smasher, which is why it makes the game tough.

But lets say that 6yo that won inpressively with a fig of 85 is 9 for 30 lifetime, and four and five races back ran Beyers in the low 90s. If all other things fit, these types will send me to the windows for a serious wager. Consistent in form middle aged geldings in claiming races are great wagers, but unfortuneately, everyone seems to know it, and prices are short.

[Light]

Originally Posted by BlueShoe

Runners coming off of swift easy wins, with competitive for today's field speed and pace figures, ala Ainslie's Big Win, coming back quickly and stepping up in class, have long been my pet plays. Often these types repeat while double or triple jumping up the class ladder.

Everything you said in the above quote was verified yesterday at GP, 11th race. Lochte was coming off a "Big Win" (by 3+ lengths) for OC25K1x only 17 days ago. He stepped up to a G2, same surface, 1/16 longer in distance and won easily again paying $80.60.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Light

Everything you said in the above quote was verified yesterday at GP, 11th race. Lochte was coming off a "Big Win" (by 3+ lengths) for OC25K1x only 17 days ago. He stepped up to a G2, same surface, 1/16 longer in distance and won easily again paying $80.60.

"After the fact" I also considered that horse to be better than he looked on paper. I wouldn't have been aggressive enough to make a win play on him, but he might have been the kind of horse I would have used in a multi-race play or other exotic.

[Light]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

"After the fact"

Absolutely. I only saw his form today while reviewing some races from yesterday.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Light

Everything you said in the above quote was verified yesterday at GP, 11th race. Lochte was coming off a "Big Win" (by 3+ lengths) for OC25K1x only 17 days ago. He stepped up to a G2, same surface, 1/16 longer in distance and won easily again paying $80.60.

Lochte's big win (not yesterday, the previous win) was "despite" his trip last time, so his big win was more impressive than say a horse who got the lead on a sloppy gold rail and went all the way in the 1 path while kicking mud on her rivals.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Light

Everything you said in the above quote was verified yesterday at GP, 11th race. Lochte was coming off a "Big Win" (by 3+ lengths) for OC25K1x only 17 days ago. He stepped up to a G2, same surface, 1/16 longer in distance and won easily again paying $80.60.

It was a G1 on Sunday, not a G2.

[BlueShoe]

Originally Posted by Light

Everything you said in the above quote was verified yesterday at GP, 11th race. Lochte was coming off a "Big Win" (by 3+ lengths) for OC25K1x only 17 days ago. He stepped up to a G2, same surface, 1/16 longer in distance and won easily again paying $80.60.

From a first level allowance to a Grade 1 is a huge jump in class, five or six levels, and like just about every one else, dismissed him as being outclassed. This race was actually a weak G!, in name only, with a field of mostly G2 And G3 runners as far as recent success was concerned. Even so, that was still a much, much tougher field, so hats off to Lochte.

The next race, the Donn, also had a couple of Big Win entrants that had sharp scores over the Gulfstream strip, River Seven and Lea. This player went with River Seven, who could not be found at the end, while Lea wins at 5-1.