Evaluating Big Winners

[Light]

Originally Posted by BlueShoe

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.

Yeah but you broke one of your own rules that I quoted as far as when a horse comes back off a big win to repeat it. River seven was off 49 days from his "big win" while Lea was only off 29 days. I don't have any stats on days off since big wins but my guess is the trainer would want to return the horse to cash while the horse is still in "big win form" which means sooner than later.

[BlueShoe]

Originally Posted by Light

Yeah but you broke one of your own rules that I quoted as far as when a horse comes back off a big win to repeat it. River seven was off 49 days from his "big win" while Lea was only off 29 days. I don't have any stats on days off since big wins but my guess is the trainer would want to return the horse to cash while the horse is still in "big win form" which means sooner than later.

Quite so, Lea had the recency edge, but in stakes races a bit of leeway is okay. The assumption was that River Seven was out of conditions, there was no race for him in the condition book, and that he was being pointed toward the Donn all along. He had worked okay three times since his easy win, which came around two turns, whereas Lea had won a one turn mile race out of the chute with soft early fractions. Had the race been an ordinary claimer, the 49 days away runner would have been an immediate toss, in fact, even 29 days away would have raised the caution flag, although the three works since raced, a positive sign, likely would have pushed the go button. Was wrong in the Donn, who has not been many, many times in our sport? Next race.

[pondman]

A big horse is prepping for a big race and everyone in the barn knows they are going to put in a big effort. And nobody wants to waste their horse against it. Racing management needs to find someone to run against the big horse. So they get trainers of lower level horses that are willing to run for place and show money. The big horse dominates throughout.

And when the big horse shows up to the big race it gets clobbered. And when the lower level horses show up for the next, they are over bet, because they ran 2nd to the big horse, they also get clobbered.

Sometimes the horses that tries and steal it on the lead from a big horse, and hang on for 3/4s do okay next time out. Even if they fade badly, and the big horse wins by a big margin.

[classhandicapper]

Just wanted to give this thread a bounce because I saw a few examples of this over the weekend.

[cashmachine]

Originally Posted by Light

To me the "bounce factor" is the single biggest obstacle in horse racing handicapping to figure out. Do that and you can quit your day job.

How exactly do you define the "bounce factor"?

[Light]

Originally Posted by cashmachine

How exactly do you define the "bounce factor"?

My definition is horses who do not repeat their present form when there is absolutely no excuse for them not to do so.

[Some_One]

Originally Posted by Light

My definition is horses who do not repeat their present form when there is absolutely no excuse for them not to do so.

So who's a recent example?

[classhandicapper]

I thought Condo Commando and Competitive Edge were both examples of horses that might be a lot better than their figures. Both won and ran very impressively. Granted, both were favorites. But I could easily imagine people trying to beat both of them with more experienced horses that were also in those races when that may not have been such a great idea.

[Light]

Originally Posted by Some_One

So who's a recent example?

What's your point? I can find many on any given day.

[cj]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I thought Condo Commando and Competitive Edge were both examples of horses that might be a lot better than their figures. Both won and ran very impressively. Granted, both were favorites. But I could easily imagine people trying to beat both of them with more experienced horses that were also in those races when that may not have been such a great idea.

Young, lightly raced horses are always prime real estate for finding horses that are better than their figures, especially horses that win easily.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by cj

Young, lightly raced horses are always prime real estate for finding horses that are better than their figures, especially horses that win easily.

Yea, we used to discuss that on your old forum. They aren't always good value because they get bet, but at least you know not to bet against them so enthusiastically.

I'm still searching for some iron clad way to separate the ones that can run faster from the ones that benefited from a soft trip against much weaker, but it's tough. Some are easy. Others, not so much.

[BlueShoe]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I thought Condo Commando and Competitive Edge were both examples of horses that might be a lot better than their figures. Both won and ran very impressively. Granted, both were favorites.

Actually, CC was second choice at 3.35-1. Thought that, under the circumstances, her Spinaway race was extremely impressive. From winning a mdn clm 75k to a Grade I is a huge rise in class. Next, she was totally left at the break, and then rushed up to get the lead. Almost always when a speed horse does that they hit the wall around the 1/8th pole and back up badly. When she went went on to win so easily, visually it was impressive. Was it the slop, or is she really that good?

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by BlueShoe

Actually, CC was second choice at 3.35-1. Thought that, under the circumstances, her Spinaway race was extremely impressive. From winning a mdn clm 75k to a Grade I is a huge rise in class. Next, she was totally left at the break, and then rushed up to get the lead. Almost always when a speed horse does that they hit the wall around the 1/8th pole and back up badly. When she went went on to win so easily, visually it was impressive. Was it the slop, or is she really that good?

She was very impressive, but I think despite all the rain the track was probably still carrying speed well at that point. So maybe that offset the fact she was off a little bad and rushed up.

Competitive Edge chased a hot pace while 3 wide on a day when the rail was still golden and the track still speed favoring but possibly less so than over the weekend. They came home slow in that race because of the hot pace, but I thought he was extra impressive. That's a tough trip on an honest track, let alone on a golden rail. The question with him is can he be rated and stretch out.

[Tom]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper
I thought Condo Commando and Competitive Edge were both examples of horses that might be a lot better than their figures. Both won and ran very impressively. Granted, both were favorites. But I could easily imagine people trying to beat both of them with more experienced horses that were also in those races when that may not have been such a great idea.

Beyer improvements of 15-30 points over the past top is not uncommon.
The trick is predicting it. Coming right back at the new level is common as well.
The trick is knowing when the move will occur.

[classhandicapper]

Originally Posted by Tom

Beyer improvements of 15-30 points over the past top is not uncommon.
The trick is predicting it. Coming right back at the new level is common as well.
The trick is knowing when the move will occur.

Exactly. Here was one that went the other way.

At GP on 8/30 9th race there was a horse named Atreides facing a horse named Pontos.

Atreides looked like a top prospect and was likely to be the big favorite.

Pontos had more experience, didn't look like much overall, but had recently been claimed by a red hot trainer and won by 10 lengths drawing off against a weaker field.

1. I thought there was some chance the Beyer figure for Atreides's last race might be mildly inflated, though he debut was brilliant.

2. I thought Pontos was clearly a new horse for his new trainer and might be even better than that last race looked.

I considered playing Pontos in the race at 5-1. Lucky I didn't pull the trigger because of his overall record. Pontos showed some speed and tired badly. Part of it may have been the mile distance and being choked so hard on the lead. But he clearly didn't have even more in the tank.

If you looked at his one running line coming into the race in isolation, there was nothing different between it and dozens of horses that DO have more in the tank and go forward. It's like you are forced to use things like trainer, pedigree, owner etc... to find additional evidence there may be more in the tank.