Maiden workout information from Delmar

[Bill Lyster]

I got interested in the workout designations that appear on the Entries page of RDSS and also shown in the workout tab..

I summarized all of the maiden races, separating races that were won by first time starters (FTS), races that were won by horses with at least a race, but which had FTS in them (the FTS did not win in these races) and then all the maiden races that did not have FTS in the field.

Here are the results:
There were 34 FTS winners in the races I looked at. I think I missed the PPs for 7.23 so there might be a race or two left out of this summary.

The column headings are pretty self explanatory. The field col = the number of runners, FTS = # of FTS in the race; the yellow column (%FT) is the percentage of the field represented by FTS; PL=profit line from twinspires; Odds are final odds, then the morning line odds and rank; WR and Wkout info and rank and then any workout abbreviation shown (more on that later)

There were 93 maiden races with FTS and FTS won 34 of them, but FTS only won when running 5.0/5.5/6.0/6.5 on the dirt and 8.0 on the turf.
2YO MCl - 2YO MSW - 3YO MCl - 3YO MSW
5.0 - 2/7 1/3 1/2 0/1 0/1
5.5 - 18/33 6/14 10/12 1/5 1/2
6.0 - 8/23 1/4 5/8 1/6 1/5
6.5 - 2/4 0/0 1/3 0/0 1/4
7.0 - 0/3 0/0 0/0 0/3 0/0
8.0 - 0/2 0/0 0/2 0/0 0/0
5.0T – 0/1 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/1
8.0T – 4/15 0/0 4/8 0/0 0/7
8.5T – 0/2 0/0 0/0 0/0 0/2

In my opiinion based on this data, the two best workout designations for maidens are any form of SRW (short recent work)and any form of GW (gate workout). there were six winning FTS with SRW works, only one paid less than 3:1. A total of 49 horses in all races won by a FTS also had SRW works. If you combine SRW with HWL and SWG workouts there were only 32 such horses and the same six won (18.9%)

12 of the FTS horses won with GW workouts. But look at the races that had FTS horses that did not win. None of the winning horses in those 60 races had a GW workout.

34 races won by FTS
41488


60 races with FTS that did not win
41489

41490


30 maiden races with no FTS. Look at how many won that were top 3 morning line.
41491

Good luck,

[Bill Lyster]

Maybe its the time of year, but the DMR info shows that most often 2YO FTS winners are run in 5.5 furlong races, some at six and very few beyond that distance. This year no dirt route FTS winners. However there were 4 FTS winners in one mile turf races. The pattern of FTS winners at 5.5 and 6 F continued at Los Alamitos as well.

I mentioned the GW (gate work) in the last post. Of the 34 fTS winners, 13 had a GW work out; of the 60 other races that included FTS that did not win, there were NO GW works for the winners; and in the 30 maiden races that had no FTS there were 2 winners with GW works. This should emphasize the importance of GW works when considering a FTS.

One other workout designation that should be noted is the "SCW" or Special Condition Workout. This workout designation only applies to horses that have raced since it compares workouts before and after the last race and whether they are improving or not. So you will find no FTS with an "SCW" workout.

In general horses with "SCW" workouts usually go off at lower odds. You can see this in the bottom two panels of the results posted by reviewing the final odds of the winners. In the 60 races that had FTS horses that did not win, there were 24 races where no horse had a "SCW" workout, so that leaves 36 races and in those races there were 51 horses with SCW works. For some reason when a race has multiple SCW horses, at least in this sample, no of those horses won the race. There were 4 races with three or more horses with SCW and none won (total 13 SCW's). So in 36-4=32 races with 1 or 2 horses with SCW ratings 9 horses won - 28%.

In the 30 races with no FTS, 43 horses had SCW works, but they occurred in only 23 races. In five races multiple SCW horses were entered (16 SRW's) and in one race did one of the multiple SCW horses win. In the end there were 18 races with one or two SCW horses. An SCW horse won 8/18 of these races or 44%. If you are playing horizontal bets this info might help.

[Mitch44]

Not nice work Bill but great work. Record keeping does reveal many things.
Mitch44

[Bill Lyster]

Here is a FTS at a mile on turf. Look at the workout info, the +GW work is pretty meaningful for FTS. This one paid 9.10/1. Since DMR there have been no FTS in SoCal that won beyond 6.5 furlongs, except at a mile on turf.

41492

[gandalf380]

I have a question about this. I notice you don't pay attention to trainers. wouldm't certain trainers have certain pet ways to prepare winning FTS?

[Bill Lyster]

Yes, Charlie it might. I looked up the SRW/Hwl/SWG winners and found that Peter Miller did it 4times and Bob Hess twice. All others were one timers. If you want I can send you the spreadsheet and u cud fill it in or may be ask. Bill V I think be may have recorded that info for dmr

[Mitch44]

The trainer is a corollary factor especially with FTS. Knowing their workout pattern can pay big dividends and enhance profits. Some are notorious for fast works while many fly under the radar with slow works that get big payoffs. Additionally their trainer stats with young horses, todays conditions i.e. routes vs sprints or turf etc. can help solve the puzzle. Always remember to assess the odds to the risk, or payoff vs the risk . Again Bill a terrific job.
Mitch44

[Bill V.]

Hi Charlie Bill and Mitch

First I want to thank Bill L for his work,

I have every race from DMR summer meet recorded.

In all races these trainers won with a GW notation

41504

[Bill V.]

These trainers won with the SCW1 or better notation

41505
41507
41506

[Mitch44]

WOW!!!! Ah ,record keeping. The ESP is also interesting as I see lots of S types & P. So much for the early argument and justification for the match up is well rewarded here. One would just assume Cailf. & early speed all the time. Bill was this the visual ESP or % Med.? Many nugget's and great examples of record keeping to mine nugget's that escapes the average player.
Odds by ESP may be interesting as the "Doc" always said that sustained horses pay better prices.

Mitch44

[Bill V.]

Odds by ESP may be interesting as the "Doc" always said that sustained horses pay better prices.

Mitch44

Thank you Mitch, You made me smile, thinking about the many conversations
Doc and I had about just that , odds and esp.

Mitch, the notations you see are about 90% "out of the box" RDSS2.1 ESP notations
I did not change the notations too often , Unless there was a wild notation
based on my visual assessments I left it as RDSS marked it .

[gandalf380]

odd observation--have no idea what it means. when his FTS wins with GW, Baffert uses many different jockeys. When he wins FTS with SCW1or better, he uses mostly Bejarano.

[Mitch44]

Bill V. : I use the older version of RDSS which has both the visual ESP and the % Med. It looks like you may be testing and using the yet to be released version. Which particular version did you record? Visual or % Med?

Myself I'm partial to % Med as I believe it to be more consistent and accurate.The visual can have some flaws such as all S types in a race, well some one has to lead but it does not mean it distributing its energy early etc.
Mitch44

[Mitch44]

grandalf380:

Jocks are tough to analyze and trainers working with these guys everyday get to know a riders capabilities and limitations better than the public. Additionally some of their traits and weaknesses that aren't public records they are aware of.. I.e. some are exceptional breaking from the gate while others are just average, very important in short races and young horses, some excel with fillies, some with older horses etc. Some of this stuff just isn't published and requires your own research but a really good trainer like Baffert are aware of each jock's traits. Those that are using drugs, hungover etc. The move could be to get a better price and recoup some of the outlay of $ to get the horse there and also some owners insist on choosing the jock. In most cases if the jock is capable you have to trust the trainer to make the correct choice.

Finally in many races it makes absolutely no difference as its all about the horse. At top tracks and class races (Graded & BC) every jock in the race is exceptional. My self I give no weight or consideration to jock's, trainers have a greater influence on the horse but they can only extract what the horse has and is capable of. Some place tremendous weight on jockeys, hey their entitled to their opinion and others their money.
Mitch44

[Bill V.]

Hi Mitch

The ESP notations are on your RDSS
Here is horse 4. RDSS has marked it a P3,
so that is what I am recording,

41508

[Mitch44]

Thanks Bill V., I believe that's the visual. On the velocity- POH and BL/ BL screens I have both.
Mitch 44

[Bill V.]

Hi Bill L.

Peter Miller scored another nice winner on monday with this FTS $11.80

at 5.5 but the pattern fits !GW

41512

[Bill Lyster]

Also the combination pattern of SRW/HWL1/SWG which was the one he won 4 FTS races with at DMR. Usually this pattern pays better, but a win is a win.

[Tim Y]

Many baby work information never sees the light of day and occur at training centers.

A work, in the quiet isolation of the AM, is certainly not close to the cacophony and chaos that occurs both behind and IN the gate on race day. No pace pressure either.

[Ted Craven]

Many baby work information never sees the light of day and occur at training centers.

A work, in the quiet isolation of the AM, is certainly not close to the cacophony and chaos that occurs both behind and IN the gate on race day. No pace pressure either.

Re the FTS workout info and patterns that DO see the light of day - do you advise not bothering to model them to see if actionable decisions at prices come to light?

Ted

[Tim Y]

Re the FTS workout info and patterns that DO see the light of day - do you advise not bothering to model them to see if actionable decisions at prices come to light?



No, but incomplete data can be just as "off the mark" as no data, that's all. Drawing conclusions from UNEVEN data is flawed in many ways.

My point is that UNLESS YOU SEE A WORKOUT, you know very little of what went on during that move, Not enough, in the long run, to continually draw consistent conclusions. Did the work take place on a mile track or a smaller training track (training facilities in the nearby area and unreported)? With the advent of hydrotherapy, many "ouchy" horses are bypassing works for swimming and that is never reported. Slow moves, for exercise, are not reported either and are listed as having "fallen off the tab," by the clockers. They worked and yet it goes unreported. If fitness, or race ready status is being predicted by data that is that variable, how can it be that reliable?

Did they work alone? in company?, before or after the break when the track was re-worked?, were they medicated with therapeutic, though banned race day medications like broncholdilators?, what was their rider's weight?, where on the track did the horse work? (what lane, as often they start a work in one lane and finish in another), what tack was used (many a time harsh run out bits, used in the AM,but banned in the races, are used for training purposes only).

Young horses often work in company to teach them the lessons of running INTO dirt in their face, new equipment, and/or running inside work mates..and the majority of those works tend to be slower. Does one draw a conclusion that a slower work was less important a work without knowing WHY?

QUESTIONS QUESTIONS QUESTIONS making this information source without a consistent sample space. Only when data is draw from the same initial conditions can the results be evaluated consistently. Sample error remains one of the largest errors in statistical analysis.

When we use the OBJECTIVE data of pace of a race then compare the entrants, it is there without subjectivity. Not so workout information.

[Bill V.]

Also the combination pattern of SRW/HWL1/SWG which was the one he won 4 FTS races with at DMR. Usually this pattern pays better, but a win is a win.


Hi Bill L

So far at Santa Anita the SRW/HWL1/SWG pattern has only 3 winners in all races

It did much better at Del Mar
Here are the winners from the past DMR meet, which had the
SRW/HWL1/SWG pattern, I have highlighted the winning price
Col I - Lots of nice prices ,
Bill V.


41513

[Bill Lyster]

yeah, for some strange reason the cited workout combo paid really well at DMR when the horse was not a top 5 ML choice. For sure there were a couple of low-medium prices but the average was over 7/1 if memory serves me correctly.

[Mitch44]

I always thought racing was a stochastic event. In fact there are always many unknown that a player must deal with I.e. can this horse stretch out, is this router fast enough to cut back in distance and win, can this trainer have a horse ready after a layoff etc.

Fact of the matter is that through patterns of trainers or angles such as workouts we can mine nuggets that others miss. The more knowledgeable we are the greater the edge overs less astute players. Really many ways to skin a cat and they all won't reward the miner however record keeping and investigation does pay $$$$$.

Fact of the matter is ; if you want to know about the unknown than investigate the unknown. If new to RDSS maintain records of your results to expose a weakness weather its contenders, pace lines ,factors or a poor betting plan.

Again great example Bill V. and Bill Lyster on your workout study, I'm sure you'll garner some gems from it. Looking for a corollary such as trainer to the workout is a big step. Workouts also remain an area where the public remains unsophisticated today.Good luck.
Mitch44

[Bill V.]

I'm with you 100% Mitch

Class and trainers ,,

In the words of Bill Parcels great NFL HOF coach
"You are what your record says you are"

The top owners hand their horses to the top trainers
These top trainers have patterns, and with record keeping, plus
their expert skills, they place these horses in the best races to fit their abilities.

In race 7 on Monday P. Miller had his FTS ready with an excellent workout
pattern, He is a top trainer with FTS's

In Race 7 , These were the other entrants trainers. Their records
for DMR summer 2016 and SA 9/30-10/10 . In Maiden Special Weight races only

Trainers- Tracks # of winners #of FTS winners = MSW races
6, Peter Miller DMR 3 winners 2 FTS - SA 1 winner FTS
3, Jerry Hollendorfer DMR 2 winners both MSs 63 statebred only - SA 2 winners 1 FTS
4, John W. Sadler DMR 2 winners SA 1 winner
2, George Papaprodromou DMR 1 winner - SA no winners
9, Bob Baffert DMR 8 winners 5 FTS's - SA 1 winner FTS
1, Charles S. Treece DMR 0 winners - SA no winners
5, Scott Hansen DMR 1 winner - SA no winners
7, Michael Pender DMR 0 winners - SA no winners
8, Richard Baltas DMR 2 winners 2 FTS - SA no winners
10, Mike Puype DMR 1 winner -SA 1 winner

FTS winning trainers
Miller P 4 winners
Hollendorfer J. 1 winner
Sadler J. None
Paparodromou G. None
Baffert B. 9 winners
Treece C. None
Hanson S. None
Pender M. None
Baltas R. 2 winners
Puype M. none

[Mitch44]

Bill:

You failed to mention that nugget paid $11.80 and was a nice key to an Ex, DD & P-3. BTW you get to keep the $$$$

When you find an edge like this it'll pay as long as the guy is around. Now you won't win every one but the ROI will be nice. Accessing the other trainers within the race made this one even more of a standout.
Mitch44

[Bill Lyster]

I hid the rows of data to show the summary info. The 1st 34 races were won by FTS; the next 60 races had FTS entered, but none of them won; the last 30 races were maiden races without FTS.

FTS maidens with the SRW/HWL/SWG workout pattern won 7 races at average odds of over 15/1 (surprisingly 3 of the 7 were top five ML). There were 32 horses that had this combined workout pattern, so the win rate was 18.8% (right col labeled TED1)

Notice how winning FTS dominate the SW, GW, HWL, SAR and SWG workout categories relative to the other two types of races. See that well meant FTS have a Gate Work (GW) 38.2% of the time whereas winners of races that included losing FTS had none and 'experienced' maidens rarely had a gate work after their first or subsequent races.

The column labeled ML is for morning line odds; #R is ML rank. Winning FTS were in the top 5 ML 25 out of 34 times; in races with FTS that DID NOT WIN, the winning maiden was top 5 ML 57/60 races! In maiden races without FTS, the winner was top 5 ML 25/30 times.

Disclaimer: this is DMR this last summer. Your track might have different percentages or even some added workout designations that are profitable. Go find them and report back, PLEASE.

[Mitch44]

Bill Lister:
While we have already discussed GW and some other things, two things jump out at me with this data and that is FPD and the 5F distance.

Most players fail to realize the amount of preparation to even get a horse to a race let alone to win it, regardless of the type of race. As much as two months even if just starting, of course if steadily racing that time is shorter. But very long layoffs and FTS this becomes a key corollary. The FPD definitely indicates readiness.
The 5F distance is a key because young horses tend to be as fast as older horses but do not have their stamina. Or in other words they show this by poor 3rd FR's. This is easily visible on big race days when top 2 yr olds run on the same days as older horses and even on Breed. Cup days. So they already show classical speed but lack the stamina of older horses. Their stamina grows as their 3 yr, old takes off particularity later in the year such as this time of the year for 3 yr olds. So what all this tells us is that very good and smart trainers debut their FTS at 5 F which helps insure a win verses longer distances. Using this as a corollary and sticking to races shorter than 6 F increases the chances of success.

The more corollaries the better the horse and bet and the lower odds you can accept. Compared to others and the fewer the corollaries the greater odds you should demand because the risk is greater. Note: see Bill V. nice $11.80 horse. Without all this information I demand 9-1 on any FTS, lower my bet and try to take advantage of a LS with a small DD or Ex bet. Getting over $200 for these bets is nice.

Nice work Bill L.

Mitch44

[Bill Lyster]

Mitch: Just for clarification purposes the 5f and 6f in the table of my previous post refers to workouts at those distances. Your point about running FTS horses shorter distances is born out by the stats below. Note how most of the 2 YO FTS won at either 5 or 5.5 furlongs, with a few at 6 furlongs. I posted this in an early post near the start of the thread, but it might not have been clear because sometimes this site does not accept formatting from copied and pasted media. (and it did not accept it this time earlier.)

Anyway, for example, FTS won 18/33 races at 5.5 furlongs, where two YO won these races greater than 50% of the time (6/14 + 10/12=16/26 races).

For clarity purposes I have stated the race length and the total number of FTS wins (5 furlongs 2 out of 7, in this case both 2 YO) the wins are separated by 2YO mdn claimers, 2YO MSW; 3yo mdn clmers; 3yo MSW


2YO MCl - 2YO MSW - 3YO MCl - 3YO MSW
5.0 - 2/7 1/3 1/2 0/1 0/1
5.5 - 18/33 6/14 10/12 1/5 1/2
6.0 - 8/23 1/4 5/8 1/6 1/5
6.5 - 2/4 0/0 1/3 0/0 1/4

[Mitch44]

The distance factor is something from my experiences with these type races. It also applies to 3 yr. olds early in the year(Jan. thu. July).

Hell of a drop off after 5.5 F even through they are all facing the same conditions. It takes exceptional trainers to win at longer distances, even more so at routes. But they do exist and it pays to know a trainers capabilities and limitations.

I use BRIS PP's in conjunction with RDSS PP's as I can determine more from them with trainer data being just one item. Best of luck. Luck equals preparation meeting destiny.

Mitch44

[Mitch44]

The difference's between Del Mar and SA could be from different trainers hence different patterns. Also looking at the 3 yr. best times table Del Mar is slower that SA therefore a horse at Del Mar will get more conditioning from a slower track than a faster track. Smart trainers will adjust to differences in track so not to leave its race in workouts vs. the afternoon and to get the same conditioning for their horses. I.e. if you run a horse on a slower track in the same time as a faster track. And the opposite if going from SA to Del Mar. Another way to compensate for this is by shorting the distance of the workout or lengthening it to adjust.

What all this means is each track has its differences and probably requires a separate study. And even then you may only fine a few really reliable trainers and their moves or patterns. But they are creatures of habit and follow what has been successful for them in the past. Once a trainer has 2 wins I'd be looking for him as he already has begun to out perform his peers.

A technique that you guys (Bill V. & Bill Lister )can employ is to collect data from different tracks and then share it with each other. I.e. share the workload or collaborate with each other. Many logical benefits here, cuts the work load in half, finds twice as many patters and trainers with exceptional moves etc. Just coordinate prior so both of you are on the same sheet of music as to what your actually going to collect. Good luck.
Mitch44

[Tim Y]

Any trainer who works horses by a pattern, and not to the needs and intellect (if you will) of the individual horse, is a poor trainer indeed.

If you have ever gone backside and observed the training board in their office, the astute trainer has a specific outline prepared for the particular needs of the INDIVIDUAL horse, not some theoretical pattern. I have observed some that are all about slow stamina works and not a single speed move other than a qualifying work.

The way the lessons go forward have no specified pattern, but reflect what the individual animal needs to work on.

Imagine a football coach trying to implement the same preparation on each member of his team. Some need agility work, others strength training yet others need blocking and tackling work......Horses are much the same: some need gate work, others need IN COMPANY work, others need to run straight, others learn to apportion speed and relax on the lead, getting used to equipment changes and how much they can or cannot alter the running. One lesson does NOT FIT ALL.

ANYONE training like a cookbook can expect poor results.

[Tim Y]

So much of the dogma of racing is based upon the LUDIC FALLACY, in other words the belief in some logical conclusion based upon partial or inexact data. Dogma just fills in, or simply disregards, the many facts that are unknown or simply not included in the creation of a logical conclusion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludic_fallacy

What is the Ludic Fallacy?

The ludic fallacy is the misuse of games to model real life situations. It is associated with use of overly simple statistics and the mistaken belief that technology can predict the future.

from http://simplicable.com/new/ludic-fallacy

[Bill V.]

Hi Mitch

Del Mar did seem to have faster workouts than Santa Anita is currently showing

Here is an example

First DEL MAR 2016 Maiden winners (trainers col K highlighted )
These winners ran a 92 or higher work out speed rating,( Col 0)
and also had a 5 or 6 furlong work within 9 days of the winning race

41550

Here is the same thing but from the current SA meeting

Notice the speed ratings are so much higher at Del Mar , thn at SA (Col, P)

41551

[Mitch44]

Bill V.:
On average Del Mar was faster however SA lowest are still 93 or better which 92 and above seem to be a breaking point. For column F, I see a lot of X's which I assume is the distance of the workout and if so their shorter.

Del Mar & Sar. are know for 2 yr. racing and their maturity fits that time of the year. The type of racing (age) and distances vary by tracks which is why some of this is track specific.

Trainers become creatures of habit and what they found that works for them. Smart trainers will and do adjust to a horses needs but their numbers are small to the other side of the spectrum. Baffert is an example as he works all his horses fast. They either handle it or break down. He ruins many horses that can't handle it and this been written about before. We tend to only hear about the ones that make and thrive on it to become champions. Trainers rush horses to make the triple crown while others have the best interest of the horse as the priority.

In racing there are arguments for and against everything and literally thousands of angles and trainers and all this presents variables. Variables does not mean one can't find consistent patterns and take advantage of that knowledge which escapes most of the public.

Mitch44

[Tim Y]

I come in early some days and have breakfast at the employee cafeteria.

I go up to the 6th floor and work out the races of interest for the day and usually run into the clockers who are in the stewards office and/or the placing judges room.

I have never seen any more than three of them there at a time,... now it is later into the second session so there may have been more earlier.

On any given day during the season, some 150-200 animals are out on the main track. They come over from the barns, talk with the horse identifier at the gap (he radios over the information to the clockers) and tell him the horse's name along with how far they are going to work. Also, since there are no logical ID's on the animals (like in Hong Kong where EACH worker is assigned a saddle cloth number so as to NEVER mix them up). Most, but not all, have some sort of stable ID (usually by a colored blanket specific to the trainer).

Now this is NOT including all the animals OUT on the course just making standard two mile gallops. At any one time (unless they are working in company) only one horse goes through their work. WITH all the horses out there, with the feeble way of identification on their backs, MANY times the time and the animal get mixed up.

I sat several mornings with the clocker at Hastings (much fewer horses out there at any one time) and he had 6 stop watches that he lined up on his desk corresponding to the POSITION each animal that was in a work were positioned out on the course. A few times, one that worked BEHIND another passed the first worker in line and he moved that stopwatch to that relative new position. He assured me that MOST of the horses working get accurate recordings, but with so many out there some are missed or incorrectly reported.

He also reported that many two year olds that had not started often were listed under the dam's name until the paperwork got to the racing secretary. This was usually early in the season.

Can you imagine how they keep track of some many animals without numbers?

[Bill V.]

1n the 2016 Fall SA meet ( as of 10/16/16 ) there have been 20 MSW races, At Del Mal, for the 2016 Summer meet
there were at total of 66 MSW races.
What I have shown are the winners of those MSW races that ran a 92 or higher workout speed rating.
These horses also had a 5 of 6 furlong workout within 9 days of the winning race

Those x's you see indicate which horses did not have the qualifying 5 or 6 furlong within 9 days, Those
horses with "x" had either shorter works of sometimes no workouts at all,
(that we know about)

From the RDSS files , Workout Documentation by Ted Cravin

I have highlighted the 5 and 6 furlong notations.

41560

[Mitch44]

I remember back when the Doc defended the beaten lengths of horses that were made by various chart makers, really critical to a pace handicapper, to which he said as long as their consistent in their methods.

I find the same thing with the timing of work outs and races themselves. Yes there are faulty timing of races also. As long as it's consistent and we're all on a even playing field, what difference does it make? Otherwise why play the game if you feel it can't be beaten? Hell quit now! We all have the same chance to both lose and profit from incorrect data etc.

Bill V. :
Your right about the 92 as it jumped out at me. Rather then a specific number, furlong worked or GW what data collectors should be looking for is something that will include the most of the sample. A parameter rather then a specific number. The 92 fits this perfectly. What makes yours and Bill Lister study so good is the finding of several different corollaries which strengthens the overall spot play of this. Most would reply on only one piece of date such as a trainer stat that this guy does 12 % with FTS. Its the combining of several different corollaries (synergism) that makes it powerful and giving you an edge over the public.

A 12% trainer with FTS becomes meaningless if the trainer is a poor turf or route trainer and that todays conditions. That 12% has to be put in context much as you did Bill with that $11.80 horse which was competing against trainers with very poor FTS records, except one.
Best of luck,

Mitch44