Why NOT Maidens?

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Segwin

Couldn't this be accomplished in works too (unless it's better to keep the horse in the "action")?

I really don't want to get into a discussion about workouts, so I'll just say this. I have been at this game for 46+ years. I download from Trackmaster every day, albeit a different file than the one downloaded for RDSS. I get the last 12 workouts (I think) for each horse, if they have that many. Both in my experience before I started my own database and after I started my own database, I have never found anything that is consistently good about workouts. Workouts ARE NOT races. Races provide "live" competition, workouts do not, even when two horses work "in company".

Having said all that, I know someone will point to some Grade I horse that got ready for a big race on workouts alone. That's the reason they are Grade I horses.

I deal with low level races that are the bulk of the racing we are all confronted with day after day. In a lot of these cases the horses are lucky to make it to the starting gate. They race themselves into shape. Races are their workouts.

For those who do not agree with my assessment of workouts and their value, I wish you the best of luck.

[Segwin]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

I'm not sure what rules you are reffering to and why those rules would lead to the #5 horse, nevertheless, let me move on.

In your database post you stated:

About 52% of maiden races were won by the horse that was running 1st or 2nd at the first call.
About 63% of maiden races were won by the horse that was running 1st or 2nd at the second call.

In your example the 4 horse was 1st at the first call but the 5 & 2 were tied at the 2nd call. Also the 5 was favored in the bl/bl.

Had I been hc this race I would have chosen 5 (and wrongly so). Just trying to understand what steered your decisions.

I'm truly not trying to be a PITA but trying to better my game. If I can't see it in my mind I'll keep going down the wrong road.

On a side note I had the most horrendous day at PRX. Hoo-fah.

[Segwin]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

I deal with low level races that are the bulk of the racing we are all confronted with day after day. In a lot of these cases the horses are lucky to make it to the starting gate. They race themselves into shape. Races are their workouts.

Fair enough - that's why I ask questions.

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Segwin

In your database post you stated:

About 52% of maiden races were won by the horse that was running 1st or 2nd at the first call.
About 63% of maiden races were won by the horse that was running 1st or 2nd at the second call.

In your example the 4 horse was 1st at the first call but the 5 & 2 were tied at the 2nd call. Also the 5 was favored in the bl/bl.

Had I been hc this race I would have chosen 5 (and wrongly so). Just trying to understand what steered your decisions.

I'm truly not trying to be a PITA but trying to better my game. If I can't see it in my mind I'll keep going down the wrong road.

On a side note I had the most horrendous day at PRX. Hoo-fah.

The percentages you quoted are not "rules", they are "stats". When I post stats from my database I generally use 2 years worth of data. What I have found is, if I take any 2 years worth of stats, any other 2 years will be almost identical. Over 16 years, that's a lot of data.

Keep in mind, a large portion of that 63% at the second call are made up of the 52% from the first call.

The hardest thing to do in handicapping is understand early horses. Sure, when you see one that went wire to wire its' no problem, but when they fade down the stretch it becomes a MAJOR ISSUE. People see these horses as fading each and every time they run. Nothing could be further from reality.

Closers are easy to see. They start off somewhere behind the leaders and make up ground throughout the race coming ever closer to the finish line and a win or close 2nd. It's a very good "visual". You can "picture" (that's a key word) the horse coming from off the pace, running down the early leaders and winning the race. Easy, right?

But early horses that fade down the stretch, ahh, that is a different story. Nobody can "picture" (remember that key word?) that early horse getting the lead and drawing away down the stretch. It's just too much for them to "visualize" even though it happens many times a day at tracks all over the country.

So how can you tell which early horse can win and which one can't? Well, your readouts are a good place to start, but your readouts are only as good as your contender selection and line selection. Consider this. You have a race that is filled with "other than early" horses. In fact, none of them have ever been near the lead in a race. So you go about picking lines and etc. When you look at your readouts, one of those horses is going to show as the best F1 horse. Does that mean that horse is an early horse? NO.

Most people look at a race and if they see more than one horse that has ever been on or near the lead, even if it was only one time, they visualize a "speed duel". Is that correct? NO.

Then there are the races that have an abundance of early type horses. Does this guarantee a "speed duel". NO.
In many of these types of races there will be a dominant early horse that will come out and establish a clear lead, relagating the other early types to "chasers" that ultimately will not challange for the win.

Although I do not use them, the Quirin "speed points" in RDSS give you some insight. When entered in the same race, an E8 is certainly an early horse, where a P4 is not.

I can't emphasize enough the importantance of line selection if you want good readouts that actually tell you something.
With early horses, it doesn't matter how the horse finished down the stretch. It just doesn't. The important thing for early horses is the first fraction, just like it is the third fraction for closers.

[Segwin]

Many thanks for taking the time (effort and typing) to detail this. I just left another post about horses fading but you have answered it here.

[polambi]

FTL, good teaching. Every time I find two early horses in a race, I bet them both to win...especially if none of them is the favorite. So far, it's been working great for me. I guess people always anticipate a pace duel, like you said, but one of them usually came up as the dominant, and wins the race. Early horses are my favorites

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by polambi

FTL, good teaching. Every time I find two early horses in a race, I bet them both to win...especially if none of them is the favorite. So far, it's been working great for me. I guess people always anticipate a pace duel, like you said, but one of them usually came up as the dominant, and wins the race. Early horses are my favorites

Thank you.

And good job by you!!

[Bill V.]

Here is a great example

I did not bet this race as I avoid maiden races with 2 first time starters.
The distance was also 7 furlongs and I avoid this distance at Parx about 90 % of the time, because of the mix of distances horses enter this distance from.

Anyway race 6 is a great example of how following this thread you could get this winner.
The winner is a E7 Although its 0-11 it has always run plus or Plus within a zero races

Here is the winner, If you follow the guidelines of this thread you will get this horse and only 1 other horse so that makes a 2 horse win bet easy

The winner paid $68.00




The result chart

[polambi]

Bill...that horse would have been in my pocket if you had sent me the alert before the race
From your result screen, I can see that this time the rider managed to rate the horse by going slower at the beginning. It worked for him.

[Appy]

The thing about that 2 horse is a lot of people would have dismissed him from consideration as a contender based on the high odds. I've seen that advised in threads on this site.

I've arrived at a resolution never to dismiss a horse solely for high odds, but I will pass betting a horse that has odds too low.

Another good thread.