workouts

[Capper Al]

Who needs them? That's were I'm at in my rewrite. I wish the racing industry would regulate and standardize them. The Japanese racing commission does an excellent job here. Every horse is followed by a digital chip extended on the saddle.

I met a capper once that handicapped all featured stakes like the Derby and the Breeders' Cup by workouts and clockers notes alone. I wouldn't go anywhere near that, but I do look at workouts.

[Lemon Drop Husker]

Not sure how you can handicap without, at the very least, recognizing works.

There are patterns that evolve. Especially for a number of top end horses in how they may or will perform.

Like any a number of handicapping factors they can't be ignored, or simply tossed aside.

[Dave Schwartz]

LOL - And there you have what makes this game great: "Who needs them?" vs. "Not sure how you can handicap without"


Is this a great game or what?

to both of you guys!

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

LOL - And there you have what makes this game great: "Who needs them?" vs. "Not sure how you can handicap without"


Is this a great game or what?

to both of you guys!

I do use them. I'm rethinking how.

[chadk66]

I wouldn't put much faith in workouts unless they were identified prior to workout via tatoo and a electronic timing mechanism was used that was highly accurate.

[horses4courses]

They are definitely a handicapping tool.
However, reading them out of the racing form can be deceptive.
Getting excited about very fast works, or downgrading slow ones,
is something I wouldn't recommend.

Frequency and a regular pattern are a plus for a horse.
A gap in workout pattern, or a lack of works, is often a minus.

I subscribe to a clocker service, and occasionally to a second one.
I would have a hard time going near maiden races,
or judging layoff horses, without them.

[Dave Schwartz]

I do use them. I'm rethinking how.

Al,

You have my parallel workout chart, right?

You have my instructions for when to use it, right?

Try that way.


Dave

[green80]

go out to the track some morning and watch how horses are identified and how workouts are timed. You won't put much faith in workouts after that. The only value they are is to show that the horse worked, maybe.

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

Al,

You have my parallel workout chart, right?

You have my instructions for when to use it, right?

Try that way.


Dave

I use parallel workout charts, but I'm always interested in what the racing authority has to say.

[JohnGalt1]

While some work out data is misleading, I do not bet horses who have no published workouts after a layoff.

If a horse has the best class/speed after a layoff with only one 3f work out, or none, I probably won't bet against him, unless there is a horse close in ability, but will probably pass the race, not knowing if it has worked out and is in condition. But I DON'T KNOW if it has hidden, off track or missed workouts, and he's really in condition. And I don't like not knowing.

I watch many track handicappers pick odds on favorites off lay offs with few or no work outs of lay off horses who finish up the track. I don't think they use workouts or they ASSUME that all horses are in condition to win.

I assume nothing, except that this is a challenging game.

[Ruffian1]

It is nice to see a pattern and several posts in here elude to that. I agree. But as far as times, I would give them very little attention. This is because it is all about HOW and when they did what they did.

Cases in point:

Horse A works a 1/2 in 48 flat at 6:10AM on a perfectly harrowed track that was very fast from the morning dew.
Splits are 11/22/34.4/48 flat. This horse went the last 1/8th in 13.6 and the last 1/4 in 26. The horse was breezing and asked . That is not very impressive at all.

Horse B works a 1/2 in 48.2 at 9:30 AM , an hour after the last harrowing on a chopped up track that is drying out, cuppy and loose.
Splits are 13/2, 26, 37.2 , 48.2. This horse went the last 1/8th in 11 flat. The last 1/4 in 22.2, galloping out strongly and was also breezing but it was clear the horse had plenty left having run every 1/8th faster than the last.

Horse B has the better workout by a large margin, yet the workout might be considered not as good because of the slower time.

Because of all these factors, seeing the horse has worked is a nice tool but leaning on the times is very flawed.

I hope this helps.

[ReplayRandall]

It PAYS to have a great clocker you can trust=$$$

[GaryG]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

It PAYS to have a great clocker you can trust=$$$

I used to deal with a guy called Clocker Bob at Santa Anita. I forget his real name. This guy was aces, but I think he got into some trouble and was banned from the track and I lost track of him. Not sure about this, does anybody know?

[chadk66]

Originally Posted by green80

go out to the track some morning and watch how horses are identified and how workouts are timed. You won't put much faith in workouts after that. The only value they are is to show that the horse worked, maybe.

this

[Capper Al]

Originally Posted by Dave Schwartz

Al,

You have my parallel workout chart, right?

You have my instructions for when to use it, right?

Try that way.


Dave

I watch your workout video. I use your 22 days for sprints and your 27 for route rule. I'm interested in your parellel charts to match up with mine.