TRACKS TO AVOID

If you really want to throw your handicapping dollars away, we have an excellent suggestion for you. Make sure you bet heavily during the first few days of an off-circuit meet and be prepared to leave with holes in your shoes. Consider, for example, winter tracks like Gulfstream, Tampa Bay and Fairgrounds, spring meetings at tracks like Keeneland and summer meetings at any track that attracts shippers from all over the country (e.g., Finger Lakes) and many have these horses have not had a race in several months. Another good way to throw away money is to bet at tracks like Colonial Downs where virtually every race is on the grass and many are filled with horses trying the sod for the first time. Another category would be tracks that recently converted from dirt to polytrack or the start of a polytrack meet with most of the horses coming to the track have little or no synthetic racing surface experience.

At the winter tracks many horses have been rested during the fall and have not had a race in several months, let alone a race over this track. It's a crap shoot when you try and determine if a given horse is in shape to run today or will need a few races to return to prior form. Past performances for these animals are worthless until you can tell if the horse is ready to run and the best time to know that answer is after the race is over.

As an example of what we mean, consider the 10 race card at Tampa Bay Downs on January 4, 2008. Only 4 horses had 2 races over the track and about half were running over it for the first time. Also, about half the entrants had not raced anywhere in many weeks. In the 2 turf races scheduled that day, only 4 horses showed a race over Tampa's turf course. This created a highly unpredictable betting scenario, particularly for exotic bets. The second place horse in the 2nd race went off at 19/1, the place horse in the 4th was 22/1, the place horse in the 5th was 12/1, 66/1 in the 8th, 28/1 in the 9th and 38/1 in the 10th.

In order to survive in this game, handicappers must strive to reduce the number of variables they have to consider to the least amount possible. While these winter tracks are certainly wonderful facilities to attend or even to watch they can be deadly early in the season to even the best horse players. In these days of multiple track simulcasting there is no need to waste your money on these unknown horses - you can always find a track (e.g., Maryland, Philadelphia Park, Aqueduct, etc.) where the weather might not be warm and sunny but the horse racing is considerably more predictable because the horses have been running over these surfaces and against each other for a long time.

Can you still bet these tracks? Of course you can but give the horses some time to get a few races under their collective belts before committing any serious money betting on them. If you still feel compelled to bet at these tracks early in the year, pay much more attention to the horses that have a race over the track and don't over-emphasize past performances earned at other tracks, particularly when the animal has not raced in awhile. Also, pay attention to trainers that do well with horses off layoffs. Every one of the long odds horses shown above either had a race over the track or the trainers had an outstanding layoff record. In the 8th race, for example, the winner's trainer showed a 23% win rate for his laid off horses and the 2nd place horse won over this track last out. Even though the place horse was rising in class from a lowly $5,000 claimer to a lofty $25,000, he was able to get 2nd place money and the exacta paid a whopping $261.20. The old saying caveat emptor does indeed apply to horse racing!

Good luck!

WHAT IS A FALSE FAVORITE?

In horse racing a "false favorite" is a horse that is the mutual betting favorite but it has one or more flaws in its record that makes it very vulnerable to a poor finish. Handicappers that can spot and bet against false favorites are often rewarded by getting significant overlaid prices on the horses that have been overlooked by the public.

A classic example of a false favorite appeared in the 8th race at Philadelphia Park on March 11th of this year. The race was at 6 furlongs for 3 year olds in an open claimer for 25,000. The favorite in that race was a horse called "Truly Pro" who went off at 8/5 odds, up slightly from 6/5 just before post-time . The running line of his last start showed a wire-to-wire win by 2 3/4 lengths. He set sizzling fractions of 21 2/5, 44 flat and 57 4/5 while gaining the easy win.

What was wrong with this horse? To begin with, he had been laid off for nearly 2 months following the win. He showed 4 workouts in the interim but his last work was 9 days prior to today. One could easily accept that he may still be sharp if that were the only problem but there were several others. This lightly raced 3 year old had just 2 starts and both at 5 1/2 furlongs. Although stretching out to 6 furlongs did not seem to be a big deal for a young colt we also noted that he lost 1 1/4 lengths of his lead in the stretch of his last race and blew a 2 1/2 length lead in the stretch in his previous outing while finishing 3rd. The next fact we noted was that he won on a muddy track and his previous race was also on an off track. The track today was fast. The biggest pock mark on this horse's record, however, was that he won a Pennsylvania state bred maiden claimer with a tag of $25,000. His move today into an open claimer at the same price level was a huge move up in class. Using the Class Chart from our publication "Practical Handicapping II", the actual class increase was a whopping 48%! Our statistical studies have clearly demonstrated that a move upward of more than 10% in class, using our Class Chart, is almost impossible to overcome for any horse unless they showed success at this level in the past, which was definitely not the case here.

After applying our handicapping figures to the entire field, in accordance with the "Practical Handicapping II" method, we completely eliminated this horse as a contender. We structured our exacta bets using the 4 horses we considered to be the true contenders in this race.

As expected, our false favorite broke smartly and went for the lead. He never attained it although he was briefly in second place before beginning to fade on the turn. He continued to fade into oblivion and finished well out of the money. Our number 4 contender narrowly edged out our top choice who, at 2/1 odds. was really the legitimate favorite in this race. However, since our No. 4 horse went off at 15/1 odds the combination returned a juicy exacta of $140.20!

To summarize, false favorite status applies when a horse has more than one knock against it but if there is a serious class issue that is by far the most important factor. Long layoffs, for example, can be forgiven if the horse ran well against equal or better competition in the past and comes from a well trained barn. We also give a horse the benefit of the doubt when it shows distance and/or surface changes (other than moves between grass and dirt) by assuming that most trainers know what they are doing. Major class moves are, however, extremely troubling. Fortunately, the rating methods we have developed in "Practical Handicapping II" will take care of these situations by downgrading the horse to secondary contender status or, as in the above example, non-contender status. This book is obtainable through Sterling Publications at a spring reduced price of $19.95 and can be obtained at P.O. Box 1292, Hampton, VA 23661.

INFORMATION OVERLOAD

Present day past performance racing publications such as the Daily Racing Form, Bris, TRN and others provide handicappers with huge amounts of information that were not available in the "old days" when the only 2 available past performance publishers were the Daily Racing Form and the Morning Telegraph. There were no speed or pace figures, speed or class ratings, Tomlinson Ratings or even fractional times in these early publications. If a handicapper wanted to use speed ratings he had to create them himself, a laborious and time consuming task. Class analysis was difficult because the class figure shown in the publication did not contain all of the limiting conditions of the race (e.g., an open claimer and one for non-winners of 2 lifetime were both listed the same way) and there were no purse size data shown for the more expensive races. Only those who kept large files of results charts had access to this information. And, of course, there were no home computers to allow punters to use today's sophisticated handicapping software (e.g., AllWays, MultiCaps and others) , video replays or data files that can now be easily accessed.

The question still remains, however, does more information lead to better handicapping? Thirty years ago the average favorite won about 1/3 of all races on just about any race track. Today that statistic still holds true - the favorite wins about 1 out of every 3 races. Despite all of this improved data and computer generated selections, there has been no measurable improvement in the handicapping ability of the general public. Even the very best handicappers still have trouble exceeding the 33% win rate of the masses and the few who exceed this level usually are spot players who only bet specific types of races rather than playing the whole card from a given track. These specialists can use simulcasting to ferret out those narrowly defined races and the new technology and improved data has helped many of them to improve their win rates. The typical weekend race goer has neither the time nor the resources to search the national slate of races for "perfect" races to handicap - they still limit play to the race card for the track they are visiting or possibly a couple of tracks if they are at a simulcast parlor. It is easy for the casual horseplayer to be overwhelmed by all of this new data if he tries to incorporate too much of it into his doping out the races and can also be frustrated in trying to determine the importance of these new data elements. This is even more complex when one realizes that data measuring the same thing can lead to widely different results. It is impossible, for example, to compare Beyer speed figures with Equibase figures. A horse may have a higher Beyer than the Equibase rating in one race and a lower Beyer compared to Equibase in the next race. These inconsistencies can confuse just about anyone trying to pick a winner.

The solution to all of this is to remember the simple acronym KISS - Keep It Simple, Stupid. Find a fixed but limited number of factors that can be found in every past performance publication that can be readily compared to each other no matter which set of PP's you use. For example, a jockey's winning percentage will be the same no matter what the publication. Speed figures are most useful when compared to the speed PAR (when available) for today's race. It is more important to note that a horse ran 5 points better than par in his last race than what the actual numerical rating was in that race. Also, don't go too deeply into the past performance history of a horse. The last race run is by far the most important one in the PP's and if the horse ran poorly in it without a very strong excuse he will probably run poorly again today. Use trial and error or study some old PP's to determine what factors you will limit yourself to use and then use them - religiously, every time you handicap a race. Over time you will be able to develop your own winning percentage and may need to adjust or change some of the factors but eventually, if you stick with it, you can develop a satisfactory method that may not make you a millionaire but will give you a legitimate chance to have a winning day and, occasionally, a big winning day. Don't allow yourself to be buried under the information overload - too much information can be just as bad as not having enough to make a sensible bet.

Good luck!

SPEED FIGURES - WHERE IS THE STANDARD?

The Daily Racing Form gives its readers a Beyer Speed Figure for every race. Other racing form publishers (e.g., brisnet, equibase, tsnhorse, etc.) also provide speed figures in their past performances. Your local race track program may also give you a speed figure. And, of course, we have Time Form figures for some foreign tracks. The problem with all of these numbers is that they are all based on different, proprietary formulas and they cannot be used interchangeably. For example, you can't use a Beyer figure to compare a horse's speed against a bris figure. Class pars, if available, are geared to whatever speed figure is being used which means, for example, that Beyer Class Pars are tied to Beyer Speed figures.

Our research has shown that brisnet speed figures and resulting speed-class pars are about 10-15 points, on average, higher than Beyer figures and pars. However, this range can vary considerably from rating to rating. Sometimes the bris figures are actually lower than Beyer's. Time Form figures are about 10-15 points higher than an equivilent Beyer and, at best, can only give the handicapper a rough idea of what Beyer that horse is capable of. As of this writing, Time Form figures are only available to Daily Racing Form readers and the other services provide no speed figures at all for foreign imports. This inconsistency between these different numbers can lead to problems when handicapping the horses. To minimize these effects, a horseplayer could create his own speed figures using final times with adjustments for trailing lengths. This is a laborious process that also involves calculating track varients adding many hours to the handicapping process. This is impractical for most handicappers but there are ways to survive without doing this:

1. Always use the figures available from the publication you are using for today's races. Do not try and "adjust" figures to another publication's figures (e.g., do not try and "convert" Beyers into bris figures or vice versa);

2. Use standard class pars (such as those available from us in our publications) regardless of whose speed figures you are using. For example, a bris speed-class par for a given race on today's card might be 85 but our speed-class par might be 72. Since all of our speed-class pars are mathematically linked to each other, you should rate today's race at 72 and all other races in the PP's should be rated off these speed-class pars which, in effect, provides the CLASS rating of the horse;

3. You can then use the bris SPEED figure to compare the horse's speed ability against others in the race because, again, you are using a universal standard that allows an accurate comparison of SPEED between individual races and the other horses in this race.

If you handicap using this approach you will still be able to evaluate the relative ability of each entrant against each other and at this racing level. In our example above, if the bris speed rating for horse A in one of his races was an 82, we would consider him to be at 10 points higher than our CLASS par of 72. When all horses on today's card are evaluated this way, the relative differences between them will be the same even though the numerical differences (using other speed figures) would be different but the value of the numerical differences are really irrelevant.

Finally, we would like to implore all of the publishers of racing information to develop and use one standard for giving race goers speed and class figures, no matter what that standard may turn out to be. If that were to happen, every handicapper would have the same information no matter what program or form they were using. We would also implore the Daily Racing Form to provide its users with pace figures, something that was promised a long time ago but has never occurred. In the meantime

Good Luck!

HORSE RACE HANDICAPPING: RACES WITH MULTIPLE CONTENDERS

Many races, especially small field races, have one or two serious contenders and perhaps another horse or two that could complete the exacta or trifecta. By serious we mean horses that are likely to go off at 3/1 or less. However, there are some races where the contention is very close and there may be several entrants that have a longshot at the win as well as a definite threat in the exotics. The first consideration is how to determine if a race is one of these contentious races and, when so identified, how to profitably bet the race.

Most good handicappers make an odds line based upon whatever handicapping factors they use to dope out the race. I strongly recommend that, if you are not doing this now, you should. Don't rely on the morning line since that is based on someone else's judgment and not your own. Also, the morning line odds total up to 120-125% and not 100% which is the standard for a true betting line. The line you make, if you are reasonably good at it, will easily uncover the contentious race. Just doing a line will make you a better handicapper. In my line, I consider any horse with odds below 8/1 to be a potential factor in the exotics. If I have a race where my lowest odds horse is 2/1 or higher and there are several others below 8/1, it is a contentious race.

Contentious races offer excellent opportunities to cash in on some very lucrative exacta and trifecta payouts. For example, let us suppose your line shows a horse at 5/2, a second horse at 7/2 and three others at odds from 4/1 to 7/1. I do not bet trifectas but I would handle my exacta wager by keying my top two horses over the three (i.e., my number 1 horse over number 2 and the other 3 horses and my number 2 horse over number one and the other 3. Using $2 exactas the total wager is $16. I only make this wager if my number 1 horse and number 2 horse over the other 3 horses will pay an exacta of at least $30. My 1-2 horse box is acceptible at any price since these are the two most likely to make the exacta and the public confusion should generate a decent price that will likely be a significant overlay. This way if I hit the exacta I should obtain a better than 50% profit on the race. If one or more of my possible "extended" bets would pay less than $30, I eliminate it. I can then lower my $30 standard on the remaining bets as long as my better than 50% profit margin is preserved. When the 4th or 5th contender runs second (and they should not win very often if your line was good) the exacta payoffs can be substantial.

The ideal contentious race for me is two solid contenders plus no more than 2 others. I can then key my top THREE horses with each other and over my 4th choice. The bet is $18 but the 3 horse contender box greatly increases your chance of winning this exacta. My key bets over the 4th choice must still pay no less than $30.

One final note. In the unlikely event you have a race with more than 5 possible contenders it is far more prudent to pass the race than to try and force a bet out of it. There are too many contenders and you can rest assured that if you eliminate one or more of them to keep your bet size reasonable that eliminated horse will get a piece of the exacta and ruin your day.

Good luck!

HORSE RACE HANDICAPPING: MYSTERY HORSES

Every once in a while you will find a horse entered in a given race that is making a huge dropdown in class. Most of these horses show a big gap in time since their last race so a handicapper can logically assume that it suffered an injury and the owner is trying to get rid of damaged goods. But what if there is no big gap? I call these horses "Mystery Horses" since their entry in today's race doesn't seem to make any sense.

Consider the horse "Houston's Prayer" who was entered in a lowly $4,000 claiming race at Philadelphia Park on July 22 of this year. This horse's last race was only 35 days before today and he showed a workout just 7 days ago. His last start was a second by a nose loss as the favorite at Belmont Park in a $16,000 claimer. Two races back he was claimed for $35,000 at Aqueduct. During the spring he was running in claimers of $50,000 or more and even ran 5th in a $70,000 handicap at the Meadowlands. He has career earnings of more than a quarter of a million dollars. What the heck is he doing in a $4,000 claimer at a much cheaper track? More importantly, how do you handicap this race with him in it?

One would think that this horse would destroy this field even if he ran on three legs. Do you bet him? It would certainly be attemped suicide to ignore him. So, what should an astute handicapper do in this situation? The only answer is to PASS the race. A tip-off that there is something very wrong about this horse being in this race is during the pre-race betting his odds were holding between 3/1 and 2/1. If he were at all healthy his odds should have been 3/5 or less. This factor indicated that this horse's connections were not betting the animal. He has to have some serious problems but are they enough to cause him to lose against the cheapest stock on the grounds?

The answer to the mystery is WE WILL NEVER KNOW. The horse was scratched at the gate on the order of the track veternarian. If we had bet this horse there was not enough time to make new bets before the race started. As it turned out, two big longshots hit the board for a big exacta. Avoiding this race was by far the best decision. Given the huge drop in class for this horse he should have been checked out by the vet before he left the barn and not ruin the race for bettors by scratching him at the gate.

The above is an extreme example of a Mystery Horse but they crop up with relative frequency. These horses create an element of uncertainty that one really cannot handicap and the race becomes a guessing game. When faced with a horse like this, the best thing to do is to simply pass the race. There will be many more races to bet on that will not incorporate Mystery Horses. Avoid them like the plague.

Good luck!

HORSE RACE HANDICAPPING: THE JOCKEY FACTOR

In our last blog we discussed the importance of the quality of a horse's trainer as a major factor when handicapping a race. Today, we will take a look at the jockey factor. It would seem to be obvious that the best jockeys at any given track get to ride the better horses at that track. It would also seem obvious that poorer jockeys rarely have the chance to ride the better horses due to their inferior riding ability. The trick is to determine the characteristics that identify these two jockey catagories.

Our research based on non-maiden races has determined that a jockey that can win 15% or more of his starts (with 50 or more starts) has a significant edge over jockeys who do not do as well. This edge is even more pronounced if the jockey has ridden the horse in the past and especially so if he shows a prior win on this horse. About 80% of the jockey colony at the average track cannot meet this 15% standard. Since they are the majority of the riders they still win about 25% of the races. However, in terms of Impact Values, this is equates to an IV of 0.35 which is a significant negative. If one of these riders shows a past effort on this horse (winning or losing), the IV improves a little to 0.45. This is still a very low IV and would hardly instill confidence in an astute handicapper. These negative IV's include all riders with winning percentages below 15%. Horses ridden by Jockeys with win percentages below 10% are extremely poor betting propositions and are most likely in the race for excercise.

Approximately 49% of the races are won by the elite group. Even if a 15% jock has never ridden on this horse before, he still has a strongly positive IV of 2.45. If he has won on this horse in the past, the IV shoots up to an amazing 3.15. Of course, there are many races, especially the highest quality races, where there is more than one 15% rider. Non-elite jocks are at a severe disadvantage when competing against several elite jockeys in the same race. When there is more than one of these top riders, other handicapping factors need to be applied to sort out the better bets among them but you should severly discount the chances of horses ridden by inferior jockeys.

In quality races (top allowances, handicaps and stakes) all trainers want the best to be atop their best. They might allow an average jockey to ride their cheaper horses but not when they are going for the big bucks. There is very little tolerance for jockey error in a big race. Many trainers have difficulty getting elite jockeys on their mounts because these top riders have prior committments to other trainers. Quality trainers have a small group of quality jockeys that they routinely use in these big races. There is tremendous competition among jockey agents to gain the attention and favor from these trainers for the jocks they represent.

At any race level, a horse that is trained by a trainer who wins 15% or more of the time that is also being ridden by a 15% or better jockey, especially one that has previously won on this horse, is a powerful combination that should never be ignored or overlooked by a handicapper. If you find just one such horse in a race you have an excellent spot play, especially if the odds are favorable.

This research and our trainer research shows the importance of paying attention to these factors in order to improve the handicapping bottom line. Therefore, do not be overly swayed by a horse's apparently decent recent past races if it comes from both a poor barn and is ridden today by a poor jockey. Routinely betting such horses is an almost sure way for you to wind up with holes in your shoes.

Good luck!