Claiming Horses - Trainers - Pace and Cap

DaveEdwards · 01-21-2013, 12:21 PM

I've been snowed in this last couple of days (probably nothing like Ted has to face in Canada I know!). I've had the opportunity to spend some time listening to the Brohamer Lecture Tapes.

Key points being the importance of keeping a track profile and the negative class dropper as ways of identifying horses that wouldn't be contenders.

I thought it might be useful to collate the data on what amount horses were actually being claimed for in a simple spreadsheet to help me get an idea about how negative a drop actually was. As I was starting to think about this it then occurred to me that I'd be in a position to then identify the relative strengths & weaknesses of trainers as they operated with claimers. Tom has made reference to knowing who the good and bad trainers are on your circuit. I know you can see what a horse has raced at previously in RDSS, but I thought it may give me a greater understanding of this area to do a little more digging.

My rationale here isn't really to go down the trainer angle route. It really is just to help identify non-contenders. Clearly some trainers are going to be much better at preparing the "non contender" than others so-to-speak.

Before I start this process my initial ideas were looking at:

Who is good at claiming horses, measured by how well they run next time out.
Who is bad at claiming horses, measured as above.
Who is good at offloading horses what are going bad and how much do they reduce a horse's value by in order to tempt a buyer? Measured by how badly the claimed horses run in future, lay-off time and the size of the claiming level drop.
Who thinks they can claim an injured/cheap horse and turn it around?
Who just claims cheap horses and has no idea?

The tracks I'm going to concentrate on are Parx and Penn. Further to this I'm downloading the pdfs from FL for last year too.

My question to the forum is basically, am I on the right lines here or have I missed anything out? Any ideas on this gratefully received. To be honest, I have no preconceptions about the trainer claiming issue. I've never read anything on this area and am aiming to keep my analysis as much within the Methodology as possible. Also, is this a worthwhile study or do you think it might be a waste of time in terms if effort v. potential reward?

Thank you for reading! Hope the new year is treating everyone well.

Bill Lyster · 01-21-2013, 12:41 PM

Dave:
Before you take on this burden it might be good to check into available info for the circuits you are thinking of cataloging. Depending on the circuit there might already be much of the info you are looking for. I know when I did the same kind of study back in the 80's for the SF Bay area tracks found that there was trainer info already available that duplicated my own work.

You might also check the various past performance info available because some of them have such statistics just below the PP info, things like first after layoffs of varying durations, first on turf, surface switches, etc. Its been awhile since I looked at this data. Perhaps someone who uses the print edition of DRF can add more info here.

Best of luck,

Report back,

Bill

DaveEdwards · 01-22-2013, 02:27 AM

Hi Bill,

Thank you for the steer on this. I was hoping that this wouldn't prove to be too cumbersome a task to get involved with. I'll check out to see what data is already available.

Maybe perhaps going back to do some research isn't the way to go with this if I do end up doing it myself and just start from now and build up my data incrementally. One of the things that I was hoping to get by collating the info myself was a feel of what was significant and what was not. May I ask how useful you found carrying out your research please?

Thanks.

alydar_ David · 01-22-2013, 10:50 AM

You might find this interesting, Dave.

http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthr...8335#post88335

trotman · 01-22-2013, 09:54 PM

Dave my two cents worth is if in the 10-12 PP lines what a claiming trainer may or may not do means diddly IMO this is one stat that will cost you money in the long run. The PP's will give you recentcy, class, and fitness, remember it is all about the horse. I will never understand the need to make this game more complex than it already is by what I consider non factors.

DaveEdwards · 01-25-2013, 05:16 PM

Trotman, I do agree with you on the horse running the race wholeheartedly. I'm just really trying to explore the issue of ironing out non-contenders, starting with the negative class drop where the trainer is (hopefully) indicating that the horse is not worth what it once was for whatever reason.
Similarly, to this end I've also studied some of Joe Takach's work. It was recommended by Howard in one of the Follow Ups. It's definitely possible to eliminate non-contenders during the parade & warm up. Not saying I'm an expert by any means, but it can be very illuminating to see a horse that clearly won't be running very hard today.

01-21-2013, 12:21 PM	#1
DaveEdwards Grade 1 Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: England Posts: 489	Claiming Horses - Trainers I've been snowed in this last couple of days (probably nothing like Ted has to face in Canada I know!). I've had the opportunity to spend some time listening to the Brohamer Lecture Tapes. Key points being the importance of keeping a track profile and the negative class dropper as ways of identifying horses that wouldn't be contenders. I thought it might be useful to collate the data on what amount horses were actually being claimed for in a simple spreadsheet to help me get an idea about how negative a drop actually was. As I was starting to think about this it then occurred to me that I'd be in a position to then identify the relative strengths & weaknesses of trainers as they operated with claimers. Tom has made reference to knowing who the good and bad trainers are on your circuit. I know you can see what a horse has raced at previously in RDSS, but I thought it may give me a greater understanding of this area to do a little more digging. My rationale here isn't really to go down the trainer angle route. It really is just to help identify non-contenders. Clearly some trainers are going to be much better at preparing the "non contender" than others so-to-speak. Before I start this process my initial ideas were looking at: Who is good at claiming horses, measured by how well they run next time out. Who is bad at claiming horses, measured as above. Who is good at offloading horses what are going bad and how much do they reduce a horse's value by in order to tempt a buyer? Measured by how badly the claimed horses run in future, lay-off time and the size of the claiming level drop. Who thinks they can claim an injured/cheap horse and turn it around? Who just claims cheap horses and has no idea? The tracks I'm going to concentrate on are Parx and Penn. Further to this I'm downloading the pdfs from FL for last year too. My question to the forum is basically, am I on the right lines here or have I missed anything out? Any ideas on this gratefully received. To be honest, I have no preconceptions about the trainer claiming issue. I've never read anything on this area and am aiming to keep my analysis as much within the Methodology as possible. Also, is this a worthwhile study or do you think it might be a waste of time in terms if effort v. potential reward? Thank you for reading! Hope the new year is treating everyone well.

01-22-2013, 09:54 PM	#5
trotman Grade 1 Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 259	Dave my two cents worth is if in the 10-12 PP lines what a claiming trainer may or may not do means diddly IMO this is one stat that will cost you money in the long run. The PP's will give you recentcy, class, and fitness, remember it is all about the horse. I will never understand the need to make this game more complex than it already is by what I consider non factors. __________________ "Success consists of simply getting back up one more time than you fall"

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
How does the #1 horse qualify to race in this field?	Bill Lyster	Sartin Methodology Handicapping 101 (102 ...)	13	01-20-2013 12:31 AM
Sunday 10/2 at Parx - TM104 Race Class	RichieP	Matchup Discussion	14	10-04-2011 02:07 PM
Saratoga 7th	pktruckdriver	Selections	10	08-17-2011 06:29 AM
Horses run trainers don't	Tim Y	General Discussion	5	07-22-2009 03:32 PM
Jim Bradshaw's 5 Step Approach to learning the Matchup	RichieP	Hat Check - How Can We Help You?	1	05-25-2009 09:52 AM

01-21-2013, 12:41 PM	#2
Bill Lyster Grade 1 Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Escondido CA just 25 minutes from where the turf meets the surf - "...at Del Mar" Posts: 2,418	Dave: Before you take on this burden it might be good to check into available info for the circuits you are thinking of cataloging. Depending on the circuit there might already be much of the info you are looking for. I know when I did the same kind of study back in the 80's for the SF Bay area tracks found that there was trainer info already available that duplicated my own work. You might also check the various past performance info available because some of them have such statistics just below the PP info, things like first after layoffs of varying durations, first on turf, surface switches, etc. Its been awhile since I looked at this data. Perhaps someone who uses the print edition of DRF can add more info here. Best of luck, Report back, Bill

01-22-2013, 02:27 AM	#3
DaveEdwards Grade 1 Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: England Posts: 489	Hi Bill, Thank you for the steer on this. I was hoping that this wouldn't prove to be too cumbersome a task to get involved with. I'll check out to see what data is already available. Maybe perhaps going back to do some research isn't the way to go with this if I do end up doing it myself and just start from now and build up my data incrementally. One of the things that I was hoping to get by collating the info myself was a feel of what was significant and what was not. May I ask how useful you found carrying out your research please? Thanks.

01-22-2013, 10:50 AM	#4
alydar_ David Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,654	You might find this interesting, Dave. http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthr...8335#post88335

01-25-2013, 05:16 PM	#6
DaveEdwards Grade 1 Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: England Posts: 489	Trotman, I do agree with you on the horse running the race wholeheartedly. I'm just really trying to explore the issue of ironing out non-contenders, starting with the negative class drop where the trainer is (hopefully) indicating that the horse is not worth what it once was for whatever reason. Similarly, to this end I've also studied some of Joe Takach's work. It was recommended by Howard in one of the Follow Ups. It's definitely possible to eliminate non-contenders during the parade & warm up. Not saying I'm an expert by any means, but it can be very illuminating to see a horse that clearly won't be running very hard today.