Obsession with Recency

[Mark]

In 1993, a 7 year old gelding named CARDMANIA won the Breeder's Cup Sprint.
In Southern California they have a rule that if the horse has not had a race in 60 days they have to have a published workout. Cardmania didn't workout, but they forced his trainer Derek Meredith to work the horse out. I think he went 4f in about 54 seconds. Then he won the Breeder's Cup Sprint and the million dollar purse.
In the Racing Form there was an interview with Meredith questioning him why his training routine was so unconventional. He said that the horse was such a strong galloper that he got himself fit.
That changed my perspective on recency and conditioning completely. On the one hand you have guys like Bob Baffert and D.Wayne Lucas, both former Quarterhorse trainers that work there horses very hard and fast, Then you have Cardmania.
Classic conditioning says it takes 90 days from the farm to the first race. That is a horse that has had no conditioning such as a two year old or a horse that has been off 200 days or more. It also takes about 30 days to "let a horse down" coming from the track.
In many cases, particularly at the minor league tracks, horses will work the initial conditioning at the farm. This involves galloping a horse to harden the bone in the horse's front legs. Then you begin the breezes, usually 3f to 4f and then 5f. Each step of increase will follow a work that is equivalent to a 24 second furlong. A normal progression is something like, 36, 48 and 1:00. What you don't know is what the weight of the exercise rider. He could be 120 lbs or 160 lbs. This is all stamina work. I like to see them go back to 3f or 4f after the last 5f work and work on speed. When you see that you know the trainer has taken his time and is serious about the animal. When you see an older horse that starts right off with 4f drills, you know he has had a lot of work at the farm.
Some trainers run their horses back into shape, in other words, after the initial galloping they start right in with races. Generally, you can expect major improvement after 3 races and those initial races can be horrible. The one thing I have found that helps somewhat is that the horse will run to the POR after falling to the rear out of the gate. Not alot of lengths gained or lost. Of course, you are not going to do this with quality horse flesh but their goal is to darken the form so badly that when the horse is right, he cashes a big ticket.
By its nature Gambling is risky, there is no way around that. To prescribe conservative rules concerning recency and form insures losses given the high rates of takeout. If you just study the pps of horses that win at a price, you will find their defects that drive the public away and you will also understand the reasons for betting them.

[Tim Y]

PUBLISHED workouts (the kind that we read in the tab at the DRF) have NOTHING to do with works BEFORE the clockers are out, OR, on private training facilities.

Qualifying works (done to assure the wagering public that the horse is sound) are one time efforts and most run to just barely qualify for why do they need to go any faster?

Works as a whole are given FAR TOO MUCH importance when you review the training methods of ALL the other venues around the world. In Europe take out "sets" (often up to a 1/3 of the barn at a time) and the entire groups runs over long gallops to build stamina. This FOLLY of seeing some development in a horse via works is just what people READ INTO a situation and do not represent reality. Unless YOU RE THERE how do you know what went on?

The first 4 seasons at Woodbine I worked with a long time exercise rider, who, in later years, was a clocker. To encapsulate what he learned and related to me: "UNLESS you SEE a workout, you have NO idea what happened in that workout."

Exercise riders can weigh easily upwards of 160 pounds, often work in the 3 path off the rail, can or cannot work in company often teaching another horse how to react to dirt in its face, being down inside another speed horse, or teaching it to pass a horse in front of it, etc... Depending upon the time in the two work periods each morning is close to the beginning of a session or not dictates the state of the surface. If you work late, it is all torn up.

Many times tack, NOT ALLOWED TO BE USED IN THE AFTERNOON, is used to aid in the training session (some very nasty sliding bits that give the rider an enormous lever arm in straightening the animal that bears out or in for example).

There is NO REQUIREMENT for the worker to go the same velocity throughout the work, NOR is the worker required to stay in the same lane. My co-worker friend said that this was the most often used technique to "hide" a faster work into a slower one: start off slow and wide, then finish up fast and down by the rail.

Finally, there are NO DRUG tests after workouts. Many therapeutic medications i.e. bronchodilators, muscle relaxants etc., that are used to make the horse more comfortable, but are NOT allowed post race, are readily used in the AM if necessary.

SO a work should just be considered regular exercise of a learning session and unless you SEE it, you have no idea what went on just by final time.

[Tim Y]

In Quirin's book, he found that STATISTICALLY, now with year round racing, the probability of a probable overworked horse's winning is not that much better than a fresh layoff.

Each horse has to be viewed as an individual situation. If the layoff suggested real injury (long time off, big class drop, few works on the path to a return) of course make exception by assigning the horse about a 30% higher odds threshold to overcome that.

Higher class horses, particularly turfers, can usually pick it up where they left off...however I see those that just cannot let the BIG ones go, even after repeated experiences tell you that the animal has soured to racing. They should get TWO excuses, NO MORE.

[Mark]

I specifically was commenting on the handicapper's primary reliance on recency as a major handicapping consideration but the subject of workouts is a consideration.
1. I would say activity, the horse actually visiting the track is better than non-activity, except in those areas of the country that have so many off track facilities to prep horses.
2. Patterns of workouts, their spacing and distance progression can be helpful in seeing the amount of work the individual horse is getting.
3. Clockers especially back in the day were known not to report information accurately, in fact some were known to sell information on rapidly working horses to select customers. However, the information was always much more reliable at the Major Tracks.
4 There have always been workout services available to the public. One at Del Mar, Bob Baedekker was always good for a juicy 2 year old winner or more on a day.
5. Racing was much more regional in days gone by. I followed the Southern California circuit for 30 years and you could profile trainers. Some worked fast, others slow. There were patterns bringing a horse to the races so divergences from this patterns were noticeable. When Jerry Hollendorfer started out in Northern California, he rode Russell Baze almost exclusively. And his pattern of 4f works every week were legendary. His horses were never beaten for lack of conditioning. Now of course, he races trains much better stock and races all over the country.
It is true that more happens behind the scenes than in front of the camera but we have what we have. I have been at this game for over 50 years so I rely on my own experience. My suggestion is that those interested do a little work and research the subjects yourself.
I don't know that European training systems really apply much here in this country or anywhere that they run primarily on dirt. Those horses tend to gallop about 80% of the race and then sprint the remainder. That just doesn't cut it here where speed is at a premium.
Minor league racing is completely different. Few of the small barns have the horses to work in tandem if they work their horses at all. You have to pay an exercise rider to work your horses. Here a fast work is an exception like a misprint and one should take notice. If you had with that horse in the race Richie P posted and did a little more work you would have had a hell of a day.
I have read all of Quinn's books to a point. He had some good stuff about young allowance horses years ago but candidly, when I would see him at Santa Anita he was always giving out selections and they didn't win. There's an old saying, "Those that can do, those that can't teach and write books"!

[Mitch44]

All the variables of workouts are part of the form puzzle that a handicapper has to try to figure out to be successful. Like a FTS true form always belongs to the connections, then again even they are trying to figure what makes a certain horse respond in a positive way. The best thing about workouts is that they are indicative of racing soundness, especially layoff horses.

Hell a great trainer(Kiaran Mc Laughlin) just figured out that his horse Frosted responds to a greater time between races which just resulted in two graded victories. Had he know that prior Frosted3 yr. old season and the triple Crown series may have ended different. Some trainers never figure this stuff out.

The "Doc's" guidelines for workouts are a long standing axiom know to old heads that will greatly assist in the success to determine racing soundness and the form puzzle,particularity layoff horses. Take the lesson and put it in your tool box because it'll enhance your overall results more than it'll hinder it. Nothing will ever catch up with form but we also don't have to take the worse of it.

Mitch44

[Tim Y]

quote: "I have read all of Quinn's books to a point. He had some good stuff about young allowance horses years ago but candidly, when I would see him at Santa Anita he was always giving out selections and they didn't win."

SO have I, and I agree that his stuff has not had the LONGEVITY that Dr. William Quirin had, has and WILL have down the line as his material was based upon thousands of race results, not conjecture.

As an aside, what is BRIS today was HIS idea (Dr. Quirin) and the owner of that firm outright stole the idea of a national racing database from him. Soured him to the game and he quite writing.

As nebulous as workout information is (Particularly OF UNRACED 2 y/o's) it should be considered on par with simple "jumping Jacks" not different than the regular workouts that any athlete does to maintain fitness. I worked the gate for several years and saw many a "publicized" monster just come apart in the cacophony and chaos of the gate when they had been clock busters in the cool, isolated QUIET of the morning on the track all by themselves. A race is not a workout and they are nowhere equivalent.

[Tim Y]

I will go one step further: WE tend to only CONSIDER horses in the RANK order the program gives them, RATHER than just accepting them as CONTENDERS and letting the ODDS BOARD separate them.

I have found the best prices in the 3rd, 4th and 5th contenders, or those that are ranked as having few challenges on the lead. Think of how many 9/5's you have to hit to make the equivalent money as a 9/2 or 5/1 gives you. STOP thinking in terms of handicapping and start thinking in terms of PAYOUT.

NEVER think of ANY race has having a SINGLE WINNER. Given the right circumstances, if you have capped the race anywhere close to reality, ANY ONE of your final contenders has a shot and it is up to YOU to decide that probability and then compare it to the probability that the market at the track is offering.

ONCE the handicapping is done, LEAVE IT BE and JUST zero in of the possibility of betting or passing the race right in front of you.

[Mark]

I will digress for a moment and tell a story...
My folks raised Thoroughbreds on a farm northeast of the Napa Valley. We have 4 broodmares and were market breeders. Annually, the goal was to get one or more of our yearlings accepted to the CTBA sale at Del Mar. Pedigree analysis and a physical inspection of the yearling were required for acceptance. The result was that I would go in my mid teens to Del Mar in September and muck stalls and do chores and in the afternoon in the company of my Grandmother we were off to the track. I hit my first daily double at 15, it paid $180 bucks. The second race was a maiden and I doped out the form and came up with a first time start that smoked them. I studied pedigree because we had a complete library of Stud Books and DRF Chart Books. But I also evaluated this horses workouts. This was 1965.
The next year a friend of my parents, Paul Meredith who was a trainer of long experience would give me a horse everyday. These were not his horses but horses he had seen worked at Del Mar, notoriously different from the two LA tracks. It could be fast as lightning if the tide was in or very slow. You needed a tide chart to figure it out I guess. For the 3 days leading up to the sale I was up about $40 on $2 win bets. Then I dumped it all on Jack Outlaw who made a terrific move around the far turn and flattened out to run 4th. Easy come, easy go. Several years later, Paul trained the best two year old filly to grace the Southern California circuit, Jan Jessie. He was my age or older when I got picks from him, but it seems like a lot of those old horsemen just got better with age and experience.
So my point is that everything is a crap shoot gambling on anything. However, you have to use what you have if you have hopes of turning it into a profitable avocation. My stance on workouts is this: A work or lack of a work is not viewed negatively, however good works are viewed positively. It is just one of the factors under consideration. Primarily, the horse has to be able to run to today's projected pace somewhere in his pps or no work makes any difference.

[Tim Y]

With the news studies in EPIGENETICS, classic breeding beliefs are in for a topsy turvy re-evaluation as even IF a gene is transferred to an offspring (and EVEN IF we knew what specific genes amounted for what in the baby, which we currently do not) we could not know if they were activated or not by the operator genes.

No activation, then NO specific protein is made from what that gene codes for.

http://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/epigenetics/

The American Racing Manual is littered wiht A+ breedings that sold for big bucks and did nothing and the blue collar ones sneak in all the time. 4 clones of Ribot and the 5 of Northern Dancer prove it is truly a crap shoot.

[Mitch44]

I agree with Mark, workouts and other angles should only apply to horses you make a contender. That was also Talbots theory long ago and throughout his lifetime. Workouts and angles take a back seat to main factors such as pace, class consistency etc. and always will.

Some pick contenders by the matchup others by pace etc. There are as many ways to pick contenders as beliefs in racing weather it's weight , jocks etc. We form our own belief system and players take the easy way almost always. Even when presented with a viable contender selection such as the "Doc's" in RDSS that has proven itself over many years there are those that refuse to adapt and change. That's alright through because their insanity is our meal ticket or reward.
Mitch44