Trip Handicapping

[Smarty Cide]

can someone explain trip handicapping? What is someone looking for in the PP's to trip handicap?

[horses4courses]

The trip handicapper's biggest friend.

Hours of close scrutiny in an attempt to uncover information not found in PPs.

[Smarty Cide]

what about pace handicapping? what are you looking for in the pp's then?

[PhantomOnTour]

Originally Posted by Smarty Cide

can someone explain trip handicapping? What is someone looking for in the PP's to trip handicap?

Basically, trip handicappers are looking for one of two things:
> horses with an easy trip they wish to bet against next time
> horses with a tough trip they wish to bet on next time

So what's an easy or a tough trip?

EASY: this can be a few things...
> alone on the lead thru soft fractions (the easiest trip of all)
> a perfect rail run from off the pace (a rare trip)
> a closer that sat behind a brutal 2 or 3 or 4 way pace war and simply waltzed by the tired runners

TOUGH: this can be many things because horses can find trouble anywhere
> left at the gate, lunged at start, etc... (terrible start-spotted the field many lengths)
> travelling wide (not always bad, but generally is)
> being checked or having progress halted
> dueling thru fast splits with 1,2 or more runners
...and on and on and on.

Easy trips are generally easy to recognize, but not always a tough trip (and certainly not by just looking at pp's).
The best trip handicappers aren't looking for the obvious bad trip (like being left at the gate or checking severely) because everyone has seen it. They focus on the subtle complications...stuff like a jockey not putting a willing runner in the right spot during a race, thereby stifling his move and causing defeat.
You can't find these subtle complications in the pp's - as the above poster said:
You have to watch replays (they are readily available on the net and are FREE).

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Smarty Cide

can someone explain trip handicapping? What is someone looking for in the PP's to trip handicap?

Trip handicapping is not about PPs, it is looking at video replays of the races to see if the horse had problems, if the horse was advantaged or disadvantage by the way the race was run, etc.

Start here.

[dnlgfnk]

After devoting 30-odd years of my handicapping life agreeing with all of the above, for the past few years I would now disagree for 2 reasons.

1) After seeing visible proof (in a printout published by, I think, Jeff P.) of the public's skill in selecting not only the highest pct. of winners race in-race out, but whose choices win in almost exact correspondence to their odds, down to the smallest increments (i.e., 8-5 =31.3%; 9-5 =28.8%; 2-1 = 25.8%; 9-2 =14.1%; 5-1 =12.3%, etc.).

2) They accomplish this using obvious data.

It is more the interpretation of the same data, whereby one can glean trip insights from published data. However, like any specialized approach, it must be undertaken within the boundaries of the game's percentages. That's the part I didn't get for a long time. If a 7-5 favorite is objectively going to lose 67% of time, I can confidently view his sexy speed figure(s) and finish as the product of an easy trip, while identifying what will potentially be more difficult for him today. Sometimes I can't make a case against him, based upon the competition, pace scenario, post position, etc. But often I can.

Yet, within the next group in the field consisting of, say, 3 horses whose collective percentages win the race over 50% of the time, I am less willing to downgrade their performances, while likely finding at least one of them I can also confidently downgrade, often the one with the better last race figure (the bigger the fig, the easier the trip, presumably--of course there must be reasonable explanatory factors).

Some of the obvious data that consistently represent what I used to see visually? Negatively, a succession of inside posts and trips with modestly better finishes or a narrow win(s), while drawing wide or widest today. Conversely, strong (or impossible) outside efforts while drawing the rail today. The worst last race speed figure among that 50%+ group (= objectively most difficult trip). Negatively, a better fig but greater lengths behind the winner (= "unearned", "outrun" fig. that was established by the leading horse at each call). Beaten lengths between two frontrunners who both weaken- the one may outfinish the other by more lengths than the winner vs. the runnerup--indicating "visually" subtle impressive speed otherwise disguised by his finish...and so on.

The possibilities are endless, but I would suggest to Smarty Cide that, even if he attempts this visually, the visual perceptions must be seen in the context of the game's percentages.

[LottaKash]

Originally Posted by Smarty Cide

can someone explain trip handicapping? What is someone looking for in the PP's to trip handicap?

Trip handicapping to me is watching the race as it is run, and then the replays again if possible, while trying to detect whether the horses that had the best chances to win to begin with, had a troubled or ez trip, being able to do, or not able to do, what it does best in order to win a race....

I have watched many newbies and inexperienced players, watch a troubled horse as if, if it didn't have that trouble, it would have or may have won that race, despite that his original ability to do so was against it from the beginning....

A troubled contender may be a very good playback in another race scenario, especially if well spotted, and offering good value too, in the next outing or so..But not necessarily a horse that was never well meant to begin with...

[Robert Goren]

Trip handicapping is very tricky and it has a very long learning curve. If a person spends a lot time checking out what really hurts a runner and the runner shows improvement next out. You need to keep very good records as to exactly what happened and how the horse ran next out. Quite often something looks bad but really did not hurt the runner that much. You need to figure those instances out. Trip handicapping requires the patience of Job to learn well. I gave up after 6 months. I figured during those 6 months I learned about 10% of what I need to know and about 1% of what I could learn. Good luck to anyone who attempts to master it. If you succeed, you are a better man than me.

[Leparoux]

It is ALL about race replays. Be leery of the "comments" at the far right of PPs. Those can be misleading or just flat out wrong when compared to video.

[thaskalos]

IMO...trip handicapping must be augmented by a thorough analysis of pace if it's to be effective.

There is a world of difference between a horse making a 5-wide move as the leaders are tiring from their prior efforts...and one that tries to make a 5-wide move into the hottest part of the pace.

[cj]

Most underrated part of trip handicapping, in my opinion, is the start. A lot horses lose races before going even 30 feet. It doesn't take much to get out of position and shuffled.

[Robert Fischer]

Trip Handicapping is about going to the source to look for attributes that are unaccounted for in the abstracted data.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by Robert Fischer

Trip Handicapping is about going to the source to look for attributes that are unaccounted for in the abstracted data.

Great description. The source is the actual, physical race, including appearance and behavior in the paddock, post parade, and warmup. Race replays are good supplements, but should not be considered a substitute for watching the entire race live.

I have never met, heard about, or read about any serious trip handicapper that limited his or her observations to race replays. Some might say the most profitable opportunities in trip handicapping derive from the events missed by the camera (and therefore unknown to the bettors who believe they are "trip handicapping" by watching videos).

[pondman]

After reviewing stewards minutes, I've come to the conclusion that many of these jockeys are really nasty and will do what it takes to shut another horse down. So if for example an inexperience rider is in the 1 hole, and M Pedroza is in the 2 hole, the horse won't run from the 1 hole. It will have a bad trip. At SA they get rough. You won't be able to see this in the PP. You have to watch the tapes. There are many things to watch, including whether a whip is thrown into the face of a horse in the stretch. I look for a horse that is moving without a noticeable signal. At the high end of racing the riders are able to do this-- make a horse run without a signal. They'll just take off. I also look for horses who are willing to run inside. They have a distinct advantage in large fields.

[traynor]

Originally Posted by pondman

After reviewing stewards minutes, I've come to the conclusion that many of these jockeys are really nasty and will do what it takes to shut another horse down. So if for example an inexperience rider is in the 1 hole, and M Pedroza is in the 2 hole, the horse won't run from the 1 hole. It will have a bad trip. At SA they get rough. You won't be able to see this in the PP. You have to watch the tapes. There are many things to watch, including whether a whip is thrown into the face of a horse in the stretch. I look for a horse that is moving without a noticeable signal. At the high end of racing the riders are able to do this-- make a horse run without a signal. They'll just take off. I also look for horses who are willing to run inside. They have a distinct advantage in large fields.

Sounds like a description of Vicky Aragon's ill-fated "season" in SoCal. I don't think anyone who witnessed it could ever look at jockeys the same way again.