Home of the Arlington Million
POLYTRACK AND TRAINERS FOR COURSES
In response to my last blog a good question was raised and a good suggestion was offered.
TGH4559 asked how to handicap horses who have no previous Polytrack experience – should we use trainer data?
John Drake agreed with using trainer data, but also suggested to consider the horse’s record.
John makes a good point. Many horses are herd animals and are content to run with the herd, meaning the field. On any given day just look at the lifetime records of the horses entered and, with the older horses that have been racing for a while, you will see a number of them with more seconds and thirds than wins, illustrated with a record such as 18: 1-4-5. This is especially common in the claiming, non-winners of two (or three) races lifetime, type of races.
Such horses, as John points out, are herd animals no matter the surface. My advice: If you think they may be fast enough to take a part of the race, you may wish to include such horses as under horses (under your projected winner) in vertical exotic wagers such as exactas, trifectas, supers, and the new high-5.
TGH4459 is also correct in suspecting that trainer records can be helpful. The past performances carry each horse’s trainer’s current record at the meet. The lower the trainer’s win per cent at the meet, the lower the risk of his horse winning.
This is also the second year for Polytrack at Arlington. I will use the trainer’s record for last summer in addition to his current meet-to-date record. I recommend that you, the reader, do the same. I look at his record on the main track or turf course, depending on the surface where today’s race will be run. I also consider whether the race is a sprint or a route, around one turn or two, for two-year-olds only or older, and the like, and use the appropriate trainer data. Remember, that data must also be meet-specific.
A cautionary note. We must use reason and allow for change. For example, for the Arlington, 2007, meet trainer Hector Magana compiled a record of 58: 12-14-10, or 21%W, 45%WP, and 62%ITM (WPS). For the current Arlington meet to date Magana is 80: 6-18-17, or 8%W, 30%WP, and 51%ITM. Has Magana suddenly become a less-accomplished trainer? More likely the preponderance of seconds and thirds, versus wins, indicates that Magana is running his horses too high. Once he drops his horses a level or two, with permission of his owners, no doubt, his win per cent will improve. Take a second look at his entrants and be prepared.
Remember to join us at my upcoming free handicapping seminar in the Starting Gate area at Arlington this coming Saturday, August 2, starting at 11:30 AM. Registration begins at 11:15. I will be handicapping the afternoon’s races, then I remain in the area all afternoon and will be happy to show you the trainer data I use and talk racing and handicapping with you. If you are not able to attend but would like to see a sample of the trainer data, email me at mcmannis@horseplayerdaily.com.
Scott- Our partnership has
Scott-
Our partnership has Cooler by the Lake running in the 12th tommorrow (Sat.) It's when we find out if he could be a decent grass horse or a low level claimer. What's interesting though is the favorite, Kriss Me Once, is 0 for 17-can you say "pack animal". My question is, about how many races do you allow a horse before deciding that he or she just doesn't want to win races?
Dear eaoa89: Normally I
Dear eaoa89:
Normally I begin questioning a horse's will to win at 10 tries. However, that is strictly an arbitrary number, and one must remain flexible. For example, let's say the trainer then gets more aggressive and drops the horse from maiden special into a maiden $25,000 race. If your figures show the horse to be fast enough to beat his new competition, allow him another chance.
Other changes should dictate giving the horse another chance. For example, he may wake up if tried on the grass. A blinkers change could make a difference. Even a barn change, from weak hands to strong hands, calls for another chance, even maybe two.
However, I don't like to see a trainer wait too long to make a change, especially a drop to easier competition. The more often a horse loses, the more likely he is to think that is what he is supposed to do: run around in the middle of the pack and don't pass those guys in front.
Funny you should ask about Saturday's 12th race. I struggled with that race when handicapping it, but as you will see in my graded handicap in Saturday's Chicago Sun-Times, I put Kriss Me Once on top. But with a lot of reservation because of your very point: he is 0-for-17 and time is running (has run?) out. My reasoning is: he only "failed" once at this level (M$25,000) on the turf that we can see, but he did finish second, that was a false-paced race, and he did close in approximately 24 seconds FQE. And, by my figures, he was seven lengths faster when he ran on the turf here last year (again, with reservations about reaching back that far, but it's been that long since he ran on the turf). But, if he runs that fast today, he may be running too fast to avoid winning.
But there are a lot of unknowns in the race. For example, your horse certainly looks to be a better horse than he was when he made his first and only grass try. It's fine to give him another chance. After all, he isn't winning at M$10,000 on the Poly. One last thing: your horse's best race came on the main dirt track after his only turf try - is your trainer using this race to leg him up for his race following this one?
Come to my seminar next Saturday (9/27) at Arlington Trackside where I will be hosting the first in a series of handicapping contests that will send eight fans like yourself to Las Vegas. Introduce yourself.
Scott
Hey Scott...the man who
Hey Scott...the man who developed the Tomlinson figures, Art Kaufman, died over the weekend...I heard on the radio that he named the figures after his boyhood friend Leon Tomlinson...with his death comes a renewed focus on these numbers that are printed in the racing form on the right hand side...perhaps you can comment on these figures for us? How are they developed? How do you use them? do you use them? Thanks!
Chris
Chris: You are on top of
Chris:
You are on top of things. Art did indeed pass over to that big racetrack in the sky.
Art used the pseudonym Lee Tomlinson for professional reasons. He was working in the financial world when he began developing then distributing his Tomlinson ratings and he thought it wouldn't look good to his colleagues and business associates to also have this interest in horseracing; same reasoning as used by William Scott (not his real name).
When he first began distributing his ratings, they came in a slim, back-pocket style booklet. He called me and asked me to experiment with them, and sent me his books. I used his ratings for an entire Arlington meet and found them too hit-or-miss to be helpful. Since then I don't use them.
I'm a big believer in trying a horse on different surfaces, at different distances, etc., and finding out exactly what you have, and being able to measure the demonstrated talent with a good speed figure based on performance, not relying on some rating based on potential.
I met Art when we were presenters at one of the national Handicapping Expos. He was a very nice person, and will be remembered that way.
For those of you who use his ratings, you will be happy to know that Art left detailed explanations of how he arrived at his ratings so his work could follow on.
Will I see you at my first OTB Tour handicapping seminar and handicapping contest at Arlington Trackside next Saturday, September 27?
Terry Gestes First
Terry Gestes First Starters
Has any one taken note of Terry Gestes success with First Starters this meet? According to my records he has 3 wins and 4 seconds out of 13 First Starters through August 14th.
Furthermore, with Chris Emigh riding, he has 3 wins and 2 seconds out of 7 starts.
Quite an improvement from previous years, eh?
Will the success continue today in the 6th?
hyercyzk: Good observation,
hyercyzk:
Good observation, and good stats.
Indeed, this is quite a turnaround for Terry Gestes. For the five years prior to this, Gestes sent out 11 first starters at Arlington and from those 11 he had NO wins and just one second! (Source: Chicago Trainer Patterns, Arlington Park Edition, 2003-2007.)
The leopard has changed his spots, and you are on the ball to be aware of that and profit from it.
Scott
Did anyone else out there
Did anyone else out there cash in on the $22.00 win price?
hyerczyk: Must have, or else
hyerczyk:
Must have, or else you would have taken down the entire win pool and the mutuel would have been much larger than $22.
Just teasing. Hopefully there are readers (lurkers?) out there who read your earlier post and profited from your information that you so generously shared.
Keep up the good work. Email me your next winner, OK?
Scott
Last saturday, august 16th
Last saturday, august 16th Block's horse looked like he would get into a speed duel with McMullen's horse yet it never developed - McMullen's horse went to the lead on soft fractions and Block's horse sat off him - after the race in the winner's circle tv interview with Jessica, Block mentioned that he had told McMullen to take the lead before the race was run and that his horse would just sit off him - I'm wondering if trainers often preset the race strategy with other trainers and could I possibly be privy to this information - it seems that the track wants me to bet my money but doesn't really care about any integrity in their product - why should I bother with this kind of product?
The point is that two
The point is that two trainers are competing against each other not working together to create a certain outcome of a race. I believe that is called collusion but as long as you cashed a ticket then nothing else matters!
I hope you're not right. I
I hope you're not right. I thought "collusion" only pertained to the last week of the Hawthorne meet.
I'd like to hear that answer
I'd like to hear that answer too. I think it didn't matter what he said to McMullen. McMullen had just won (stold) two wire to wire races with Zimmerman on board, there is no way he was going to change his strategy for this race. With Perez aboard and no wins on grass going wire to wire for General Charley, I had a gut feeling Block would lay him off the pace. I had a win bet on Yankee Injunuity with two exacta savers with General Charley and Demarcation. After the first two fractions I thought Zimmerman had done it again. NOT! Actually. there was another horse that had to check hard behind Yankee in the stretch that could have got close. Anyway, I don't pay much attention to what trainers say after a race.
JOHN DRAKE and skyhawk: I
JOHN DRAKE and skyhawk:
I agree with you, John, that it probably didn't matter what Block said to McMullen before the race. If anything, McMullen must have been encouraged to hear that Block wasn't going to send General Charley to go with Yankee Injunuity. McMullen had to think his chances were improved.
Let's assume Block said nothing to McMullen. Then, when the gates opened, Zimmerman would have known the Block/Perez strategy immediately because Perez would have taken General Charley back. Zim then would have done what any good jock would do, he would try to slow the pace and steal the race. That's exactly what happened, even with McMullen/Zimmerman knowing the Block/Perez strategy ahead of time. It just so happened that General Charley stayed close enough to the slow pace to outkick Yankee Injunuity down the lane.
If anything, the one who likely would have liked to know the Block strategy was Paul McGee, trainer of Demarcation. He could have then told his jock to beware, Yankee Injunity will be alone on the lead and a false pace could result, so stay close enough to catch him when the real racing begins, down the lane. But, wouldn't an experienced jockey know that once the gate opened?
How much trainer-to-trainer discussion goes on before a race? Not much. It's like a poker game where most of each player's cards are on the table in the form of past performances. Each trainer has a good idea of what the other's strategy will be, just by reading the PP's. But each trainer isn't likely to reveal more than what is already known and expected. For example, if there is no true early speed in the race, a trainer who thinks he can get the lead, and that his horse will run well on the lead, isn't going to announce that he is sending his horse - that would give away what he perceives to be his advantage.
JOHN DRAKE, the horse you referred to as having to check hard was Cape San Blas. Assuming you are watching for him to come back.
While you are waiting for that one, be aware that your favorite professional maiden, Ottos Lotto, is in on Wednesday (August 27) and can take a piece of the race - morning line is 15-1. See you in the winner's circle?
Scott
I see that Otto's Lotto ran
I see that Otto's Lotto ran fourth today. Has any horse this old or older ever won a maiden race? What will happen first: Otto's Lotto wins a race or the Cubs win the World Series?
Also I was at the track on Sunday and was quite amused when it was announced that Captain Wood was now a gelding. Should we expect a name change for this horse?
TGH4559
We may or may not listen to
We may or may not listen to what the trainer is saying. I think the stewards should be listening to those types of comments. I would like to think that the stewards are listening and working on keeping racing fair. If I was a steward I sure would like to question both trainers as to their intentions for their horses.
I would like to think any trainer is working hard to do the best he can for his owners.
If the national average ACT
If the national average ACT score has gone up nearly twenty percent in the last 30 years then what is all that money doing in the win pool Friday on Ottos Lotto, a 7 year old 46-0 maiden? Talk about herd animals.
Word on the street is that
Word on the street is that Steve Davidowitz is coming to AP on the 13th. Of all the so called experts that still particpate in those Handicapping Expos, Steve is about the only one worth listening to. He's always interesting and informative. Andy Beyer is interesting too, but everytime I see and strain to hear him talk, he sounds like he's been up all night with an unlimited supply of cheap Scotch. And James Quinn, it's almost 1am and I wish I had a tape of his to put me to sleep. Sounds like a college professor giving the same speech for 30 years, "that horse was the class of the field and paid a generous 6.80"
Should be an interesting day and I hope everyone on this board can make it. Also hope it's not too crowded.
John Drake: You are correct,
John Drake:
You are correct, again. Steve Davidowitz is coming at AP and I will be interviewing him, and we will do some handicapping of the afternoon's card. Steve will also be signing copies of his books.
All fans should plan on being there. More details to come.
Scott
PS: Did I see you in the winner's circle yesterday (Thursday, August 14)?
PS: Did I see you in the
PS: Did I see you in the winner's circle yesterday (Thursday, August 14)?
No
I am not saying Otto's Lotto
I am not saying Otto's Lotto was the best choice in the last race, but it was a very poor group of horses and her record made her a more likely choice.
She has always (in my opionion) been racing above her class. Who know but she might have found her win if the trainer took her to Fairmont or Beaulah.
Her owners were probably did not want to worry about her being claimed away if she would run in the class she probably belongs.
However I don't think many are interested in claiming a 7 year old maiden, so they should have little to worry about.
Chermo: You are correct that
Chermo:
You are correct that Otto's Lotto was actually a contender in that race, based on best figures. However, horses like "Otto" have learned that it is OK to just run around the track in the pack; that's why we call them herd animals.
I agree that "Otto" might win if shipped to a lesser track, especially on turf - Fairmount doesn't qualify. The horse may find himself running so fast (really, the others running so slow) that he couldn't avoid winning. I would like to see that.
Scott
the 6th today (labor day) at
the 6th today (labor day) at arlington is a perfect example of "pack animals". The 2nd, 3rd, and 4th horses (according to the ML) are a combined 0 for 28, while the three outside horses are a combined 0 for 8 (with only 3 turf starts). I'm using those 3, along with the favorite, and Rainbows Arch (0 for 3) in all 3 pick 6's they're involved in and hopefully your "pack animal" comments will make me some money!
eaoa89: How did you do?
eaoa89:
How did you do? Share your story with us.
Scott
Believe it or not, 2 of the
Believe it or not, 2 of the 3 horses were gate scratches (the 7 fell, and the 8 somehow was a gate scratch also-I heard the 7 had somehow kicked him when he fell) Barouqe was last BUT Holy Anthem, making only his second lifetime start, won the race and because of the scratches, I ended up hitting the Pick 3s ending with race 6 and 7 three times each. (paying $61 and $36.80, but because of the scratches, ended up with about $300 and a decent profit)
John: Very funny. I just
John:
Very funny. I just have to shake my head when I see things like that.
After the owner of the horse, some of that money must come from guys named Otto, or from friends and family of someone named Otto.
Of course, there is the "He's due" crowd. He's due, alright, due to avoid winning again, just as he's done so masterfully over his long career.
Do you remember the days, not so long ago, when any horse still a maiden after age four couldn't enter?
Scott
Thanks for the comments. I
Thanks for the comments. I always enjoy reading any tips that can help me with my handicapping.
Thanks for the tip on
Thanks for the tip on Magana, I always try to look for horses (and trainers) that seem to be improving. I also note that Asmussen seems to be warming up. It could be with CD closed he is sending his better horses here now.
What do we do when a new trainer starts racing at AP?
by the way, still cannot post on IE.
chermo: By your question, I
chermo:
By your question, I assume you mean a new trainer for whom we have no meet-specific, Arlington statistics. You can still make some less-precise judgments.
For example, does he have a low win percentage, overall? A trainer who is 3% for the year-to-date isn't likely to jump up and become a 20% trainer at Arlington, especially if he has been campaigning at a lesser circuit.
At what level was his horse last successful, meaning winning or finishing close up? Where is he placed today? If he's above that level, especially if that success was at a lesser track, I wouldn't consider him.
Is the horse a seconditis, or thirditis, horse? I wouldn't consider him in the win slot.
What is the horse's running style and how does that fit the likely running of the race? Is he an early speed type in against other early speed? He likely will seal his fate, negatively, early in the race. Is he a deep closer who needs a hot pace to wilt in front of him? Can he get there at today's distance?
Who has the trainer named to ride? If the jockey is struggling, it's another way to assess, and in this case downgrade, the horse's chances.
So you see, we can make some related assessments that help us to rank the horse's chances versus the chances of his competition in today's race.
Hope that helps.
Scott
PS: Just so you know, Arlington has scheduled me for another free workshop in the Starting Gate area on Saturday, August 16. Starting time is 11:30. Email me with any questions: mcmannis@horseplayerdaily.com.