PDA

View Full Version : CT test


Bill V.
07-07-2017, 09:38 PM
Just trying something here

not expecting much

race 6 CT

43627

Bill V.
07-07-2017, 09:51 PM
I took a shot with the 5 !

Just missed in a photo at 7/1 darn

43628

43629

Mitch44
07-08-2017, 07:48 AM
A very low price for a horse that has to step up 12 lengths and at the same time stretch out to 6,5 F. That line indicates he can stretch out another furlong but still I wouldn't put him in the hunt. Either a bad line or the horse improved tremendously from something, I.e. a trainer change or equ. change, Rather an odd circumstance without a reason. If none than just not a gettable race. To have to prove all that at those odds would be a toss for me. Keep doing what your doing Bill.
Mitch44

Bill V.
07-08-2017, 08:55 AM
Right on Mitch

I took line 1 But really I had no interest in horse 3

43630

shoeless
07-08-2017, 09:24 AM
Bill,

Nice call on the 5 hope you had some place money on it

Just out of curiosity how would the 3 look if you took that 2nd race back


Jeff

Mitch44
07-08-2017, 11:16 AM
After seeing his chart I would have used line # 3. That difference between line 2 & L 3 at 6F is very deceptive because of the beaten lengths. With L 3 being a full second faster at 6F its equals to about 6 lg. so its a much better line. Plus its total energy is better for L3. Additionally L1 was muddy so I wouldn't have used it.

A lesson I gave Jeebs was if your going to extract a line from a longer distance always choose the one with the fastest internal fractions. Burn that one into your brain housing group. Of course why worry about all that and just use the computer by running both lines and see which comes out better, we are allowed to cheat. So do it. Without doing it I'm sure L 3 would be best.

Would L 3 would make him a contender ? I don't know as I didn't download the race. I did check Bris PP & found he was dropping in class however his trainer was only 3% with layoff horses and that was 3% of 38 horses, definitely not good. His APV here is very good. If he did come up with L 3 at his odds he's a risky bet with the layoff & trainer stats and a toss. I believe Bill made the correct bet.
Mitch44

Lt1
07-08-2017, 12:20 PM
Bills' point about no races or workouts is well taken. I keep records on this type of negative flaw and can tell you these types don't win very often and are usually a toss unless all the contenders have serious defects. Also its' form before the layoff was poor and as Mitch points out a poor trainer record with laid off horses adds up to 3 strikes. Toss.
Tim

shoeless
07-08-2017, 01:09 PM
Just to clarify I am not saying Bill picked the wrong line on the 3

He did a great job of getting the 5

Bill V.
07-09-2017, 07:53 PM
Bill,

Nice call on the 5 hope you had some place money on it

Just out of curiosity how would the 3 look if you took that 2nd race back


Jeff

Hi Jeff

Sorry for the delay. Once again I played the good soldier. Because of the
4th of July being on a Tuesday, Most of the other drivers wanted to take
an extra long weekend last Sat-Sun -Mon- Tuesday
So that meant lots of freight got backed up and they needed extra drivers for yesterday. I was already at Del Mar waiting for race 1 when they called.
Can you PLEASE run up to Sacramento -NOW!

So I said okay, I got extra pay plus the regular load fee so It all works out
Maybe next weekend I will have off,

Now to the race, I figure it really did not matter, which line I used. All horse 3's LPR"s are too weak. Horses when in form run pretty consistent TPR numbers.
For horse 3 to compete ( normally) in this match up. I figured it had to improve back almost 20 points on TPR, Where is is going to get that energy?
It only has a slight advantage on EPR but its way deficient in LPR. If it saves
EPR, will it pick up 10- 15 points of LPR? I did not see this happening.
Because of the 55 day layoff with no works, I just figured to look elsewhere.
The 5 just missed, One more step/jump past the wire and the 5 passes the slowing 3
and I win :\

Good Job by the way on race 4 from Parx !!

Bill

43645

Mitch44
07-10-2017, 08:21 AM
I agree Bill with you in that where does he pick up 10 t0 12 lengths with L 1 or L3. This horse could possible be a 5th contender on class but would end up a toss. There is no way off the layoff and class this horse could be in form, obviously the trainer was working him away from the public and even at that his record is atrocious.

You would have to go back to L 6 to make this horse a contender and you would be violating the Doc's rules for picking pace lines. Those rules were designed to put the percentages on your side. Lesson here is stick to the percentages and keep them on your side. Good analysis Bill. All races are just not get-able.
Mitch44

shoeless
07-10-2017, 07:57 PM
Thanks Bill and no need to be sorry about the delay, glad you were
able to pick up some extra cash.

For The Lead
07-25-2017, 05:30 AM
I just thought I would offer an alternate look at the winner.

Before you begin to handicap any race, and therefore any horse, the first thing you must do is read the conditions of the race. It’s not me saying that, “DOC” said it. That’s right, it’s in the manual. I was doing that 20 years before I read that in his manual, but that doesn’t really matter, I was just glad to see “Doc” giving important and accurate information even though he didn’t go into any great detail on the subject. In this race those conditions are “$5,000 claiming for non winners of two races in six months”.

Ok, moving along, let’s take a closer look at today’s track. Today’s race is at CT (Charles Town) a “bull ring”. Why is it called a bull ring? Because the track has a 6 furlong circumference as compared to most tracks that are 1 mile in circumference. Let’s take “Lrl” for an example, a seven furlong race there is around one turn, while a 7 furlong race at “CT” is around 2 turns. This makes trying to compare times ridiculous. There is no comparison. At “Lrl” the horses run almost ½ mile before encountering a turn. At “CT”, however, the horses encounter a turn before running ¼ of a mile. At “CT” the turns are tighter and the straightaways are shorter. These differences have an influence on not just times, but how the horse(s) actually run their race. Getting position going into a sharp turn can be crucial because the shorter straightaway doesn’t give as much time for overcoming a mistake.
Also, CT is one of the cheapest thoroughbred tracks in the country. Horses don’t start their careers there, but many of them end it there. Not sure about that? How many MSW (maiden special weight) races for two year olds do you see there? For that matter, how many of those type races do you see there for 3 year olds? Now, see how many races there have horses than are 6,7,8 and older. Why am I mentioning all this?
The eventual winner shows 10 races, 4 of those races are at tracks of better quality and larger circumference, “Lrl”and “PIM”. I would eliminate all 4 of those races. That leaves 6 races, all at CT. It is interesting to note that the eventual winner won 3 of those 6 races. That’s 50%. Not bad!

And now the hard part.
It was asked in this thread where would the eventual winner get the necessary LPR and/or TPR in order to make it a contender? Let me offer an explanation.
“DOC” said, and it is in the manual, that a horse that just ran on the lead or fought for the lead in the first two fractions of its’ last race, regardless of distance, is sitting on a “big effort” regardless of how it finishes. Well, that assumes the horse is placed in a race where it can deliver that “big effort”. Obviously a $5,000 claimer that just ran on the lead the first two fractions of its’ last race and then runs in a GRADE I race is not going to deliver that “big effort”. But how about its’ next race if it returns to the $5,000 claiming level? It makes sense that it is still sitting on that potential “big effort”. But how do you quantify that potential “big effort”? Numerically, you don’t!
With computer programs being what they are today, the majority of people are handicapping “by the numbers”. Here’s the problem. Horses are not machines. They don’t have settings where you can just dial up a number you want them to run. Here’s the good news though. Horses can and will deliver the numbers you are looking for based on their competition. Let’s take a look at the eventual winner’s last couple of races AND today’s race.
In the race 2 back the horse had the lead for the first two calls. (REMEMBER WHAT “DOC” SAID!) In the last race the horse ran at PIM, that’s a step or two above the level of horse running at CT, not to mention a complete change in track configuration. I’m not surprised, based on the horse’s past performances, that it did not run well. Now let’s look at today’s race.
For today’s race we are back to CT, a plus for the horse. Today’s race is at the lowest class level it has run at in months, another plus for the horse. And now one of the biggest pluses. For the first time, the horse is in a race with a condition. (REMEMBER, “DOC” SAID YOU SHOULD ALWAYS READ THE CONDITIONS OF THE RACE BEFORE YOU DO ANYTHING!) Today, the horse is running against “non winners of two races in the last 6 months”, a big drop from “open” (no condition) company, not to mention the drop in class level that comes with it. When you take all this into consideration you can expect this horse to run that “big effort” “DOC” talked about, just one race later.
For me, personally, line 2 is the line. I think it was already pointed out that using that line shows the horse to be a couple of points higher on EPR than any other horse. (for me personally, I would have an “FFR” (first fraction rating)) Anyway, if line 2 shows this horse to be a couple of points higher on EPR than any other horse, then how much better will it be today with all the various factors mentioned in its’ favor? Sorry. There is no formula for developing a number. The handicapper has to decide this for themselves. The better handicappers will “get it”. The other ones won’t.
Recall that Jim Bradshaw talked about “VOODOO”. Has anybody figured that one out yet? I didn’t think so. But many people still adhere to it. Funny. Perhaps “voodoo” isn’t some mysterious, black magic “BS”, but rather, an understanding of horse racing.

Here is the horse with the races at “Lrl” and “PIM” lined out, leaving only relevant races at “CT” remaining.
Then see the review of each race after the horse's PP's.

43762

Let's look at the winner line by line starting from the bottom.

line 10 - a win vs. NW2L for $5,000
line 9 - a win vs. NW3L for $5,000 (winning these two conditions back to back is uncommon)
line 8 - a more or less even race vs. "OPEN" company for $6,250
line 7 - a race at "Lrl" that should be ignored
line 6 - a win while moving right back to the same condition and claiming level as line 8
line 5 - a race at "Lrl" for $7,500 vs. "OPEN" company that should be ignored
line 4 - a race at "Lrl" for $7,500 vs. "OPEN" company that should be ignored
line 3 - a race vs. "OPEN" company for $10,000 (way over its' head)
line 2 - a race vs. "OPEN" company for $6,250 (it leads at the first two calls)
line 1 - a race at "PIM" vs. "OPEN" company for $7,500 that should be ignored
TODAY'S RACE - NW26M (non winners of 2 races in the last 6 months) vs. $5,000

Best of luck to everyone.

Bill V.
07-25-2017, 11:55 AM
Hi FTL

Thanks for the workup of the winner

I have a couple of questions for you.

1. You show line by line the 3 horses class history
but did you also do that for the other 7 horses in the race?
Perhaps the 1 5 7 and 6 also had class advantages from their lines.

Next question

Here are horse three's LPR's from all it CT races

LPR from races at CT
Line 10 82.5
Line 9 81.5
Line 8 77.2
Line 6 82.0
Line 3 74.4
Line 2 64.7



It is my opinion based on our work over the years you are heavily biased against the Sartin programs because you feel the 3rd fractions are overly weighted.

However, with Phase 1 the LPR is a point system based on the horse's velocity with beaten lengths and track to track and daily varient adjustments, It truly is a good measure of
the horse's velocity ability, Basic Match Up principles says, The more energy a horse uses in the EPR the less it will have in the LPR

Looking at these numbers What LPR do you project the 3 running
today?

In 6 races its best ever LPR was only 82.5
In My, Mitch Shoeless and Tims conversations, the question is where is the 3 going to improve?

I do not see it and I bet against the 3

43763

shoeless
07-25-2017, 05:30 PM
FTL

Nice job explaining things, I always enjoy your posts and wish you
would do so more often.

Jeff

For The Lead
07-26-2017, 01:54 AM
A further discussion.

Hi FTL

Thanks for the workup of the winner

I have a couple of questions for you.

1. You show line by line the 3 horses class history
but did you also do that for the other 7 horses in the race?
Perhaps the 1 5 7 and 6 also had class advantages from their lines.

I think you have it all wrong. I was not attempting to handicap the race. I stopped by P&C and browsed though the recent posts. I found a couple that I thought were worthwhile commenting on. This was one of them. The only horse shown was the winner #3, so that is what I commented on. It is all together possible that other horses in this race had redeeming features, but they were not shown. I was handicapping “a horse” not “a race”.
The line by line on the #3 horse was not an exercise in showing class history, but rather an illustration of how to evaluate every horse in the race.
First, always start with the bottom race and read up to today’s race.
Second, you are not just reading the class level of each race, but taking note of how the horse performed at that class level, distance, surface, etc.
There is much more to be garnered from an evaluation of each horse in this fashion, but the bottom line is, it’s called handicapping.

Next question

You said “next question”, but there was no question, just a list of LPR’s at CT.

Here are horse three's LPR's from all it CT races

LPR from races at CT
Line 10 82.5
Line 9 81.5
Line 8 77.2
Line 6 82.0
Line 3 74.4
Line 2 64.7



It is my opinion based on our work over the years you are heavily biased against the Sartin programs because you feel the 3rd fractions are overly weighted.

As far as any bias I may have is concerned, I would be biased against “ANY” software that leans heavily in one direction or another. “SARTIN” has nothing to do with it. And as far as “SARTIN” is concerned, I was always a fan of ENERGY and I don’t believe that was biased in any way.
For the sake of clarification, it is RDSS that is biased. It double weights 3rd fraction and that is what I am opposed to. This can be seen on the segments screen where the third segment is TS+F3 which is True Speed + 3rd fraction averaged. True speed being speed from start to finish already includes the 3rd fraction. This approach rewards horses with good 3rd fractions (OTE horses) and penalizes early horses that fade through the stretch in the line being used.
On the segments screen the first segment is “first fraction”.
On the segments screen the second segment is “2nd fraction”.
On the segments screen why isn’t the 3rd segment simply “3rd fraction” to keep in line with the first two segments?
So much for that issue.

However, with Phase 1 the LPR is a point system based on the horse's velocity with beaten lengths and track to track and daily varient adjustments, It truly is a good measure of
the horse's velocity ability, Basic Match Up principles says, The more energy a horse uses in the EPR the less it will have in the LPR

Looking at these numbers What LPR do you project the 3 running
today?

I don’t project any LPR number for the horse. As I said in my previous post, there is no conversion number. It is an understanding of how class determines outcome. This horse is set up for success not failure. An effort that could find the horse in the winners circle. I simply project a good effort for the horse based on handicapping. That makes this horse a contender. As I said in my previous post, my line for this horse would be line 2. As “DOC” said, a horse leading at the first two calls (REGARDLESS OF ITS’ FINSH) is a horse sitting on a big effort. Should that line show me the horse is better than the rest of the field on first fraction and/or EPR, I can only conclude it will improve on that effort today. Evidently “DOC” felt that way as well.
In any event, in order to evaluate the horse, line 1 is definitely not the line to use. It’s the wrong track, wrong surface and wrong class level and will never show the horse as a contender in any way.

In 6 races its best ever LPR was only 82.5
In My, Mitch Shoeless and Tims conversations, the question is where is the 3 going to improve?

I think my two posts illustrate where he horse is going to improve.

I do not see it and I bet against the 3

43763

Mitch44
07-26-2017, 07:03 AM
"On the segments screen why isn’t the 3rd segment simply “3rd fraction” to keep in line with the first two segments?
So much for that issue."

To answer that question: simply because its on the FPS screen if one cares to look, exactly the way you would like to see it..

"For the sake of clarification, it is RDSS that is biased." TS + 3rd Fr is there because it has proven to be an effective factor in routes and especially route grass races.

TPR and 3r FR of TPR has also proven to be a very effective factor for those that understand it. My analysis always start with TPR. However I also use several other factors from RDSS but not any one screen or all the factors within RDSS. If one wants to believe Fractals are important their free to use it, BTW personally I don't.

Bottom line is its up to the individual to determine what's important and to that situation. 3 rd FR is important and vital to success and one reason why its on several screens. I could make the same argument on EP or SC which on some read outs is also double weighted because it has proven to be effective.

Hindsight is always perfect. I admire Bill for putting up this example and is honesty. I could have been dishonest and said it was a play but I didn't because I wouldn't have had it. What really counts is when the shoe leather hits the road by putting up your picks before the race goes off rather than a contrarian opinion based only on Monday morning quarter backing. Ditto with trashing RDSS,"For the sake of clarification, it is RDSS that is biased." Your free to use Energy just remember its part of RDSS! Factors by Sartin and staff within RDSS have stood the test of time, some are better than others which is up to the user to determine.
MItch44

shoeless
07-26-2017, 06:14 PM
FTL

Thanks again for posting

Jeff

shoeless
07-26-2017, 07:39 PM
FTL

Why do you say when looking at PP'S start from bottom up?


Jeff

For The Lead
07-27-2017, 04:21 AM
FTL

Why do you say when looking at PP'S start from bottom up?


Jeff

That’s a good question, especially when asked of someone like me. Why? I am a strong advocate of picking lines from the top down. The exact opposite of my suggestion to read PP’s from the bottom up. So here is your answer.

If I wanted to know the life story of “Shoeless” I would probably go back to the day you were born. Who were your parents? How many brothers and sisters did you have? Where did you go to school? Were you a good student? Did you play sports? What sports were they? And so on and so on. The idea being to learn how “Shoeless” got to the point in life where he is today. I am sure that as your life unfolded we could see high points and low points. We could see where you made good decisions and bad decisions. We have all made them.

In horse racing we only get to go back 10 races, but in most cases that is enough. By starting from the bottom and reading up we get to learn a lot about the horse, as it happened, but at all times we must read the conditions of today’s race first. That way we know where the horse is headed (today’s race), so in the back of our mind we are comparing each of its’ efforts to where it is going today. We try to determine if today’s race will be better or worse for the horse. What we are doing is reading each line paying attention to not just the claiming price, but to the condition of the race. We pay attention to the track the horse ran at and does that have any bearing on the horses performance? We look at the type of track (dirt, poly, turf). How did the horse react to each type of track it ran on and did it run good or bad on “off” tracks. If the horse had a bad performance was it because of the type of track or perhaps the horse was place at a class level where it could not compete. When you come across a race where the horse won or ran very well, was there anything in its’ races just before it that indicated a coming good race? Look at the time between races. Does that information tell us anything? A very lengthy layoff could indicate the possibility of an injury. At all times we are paying attention to “how” the horse ran in each of its’ races. Was it early, presser or sustained? Did the distance of the race have a bearing on how the horse ran? As an example, I have seen many horses that run early at 6 furlongs, but consistently run as a presser at 5.5 furlongs. Take note of claims. Horses don’t always take to new surroundings and regiments. They may need a race with a new trainer before reverting back to form. Owners/trainers claim horses because they think they can improve the horse. That doesn’t always pan out. Many times they end up with buyers remorse. Just be aware of it. In short, you have to be aware of every piece of information you can see. It all matters, good or bad. In some cases, but not all cases, following the horses life (so to speak) leads us to the conclusion that the horse is a legitimate contender in today’s race. Other times our journey shows us the horse is not prepared to compete today. It is not easy and is not something you learn overnight, but you have to start sometime if you are interested in improving your handicapping skills.

I take a lot of heat for analyzing a horse after it won or a race after it is over. Most recently, that was the case with the horse that won the CT race. It was the only horse shown so I looked it and offered and alternate look at it to allow people to see the horse in a different light. (my alternate look was based on what I just laid our for you) When I think about it, I can’t recall any teaching race in any follow up that was shown before that race was run. Funny how that works. When trying to teach you use examples. Examples naturally come from past experience. I can’t think of any author who writes a book illustrating how to lose races. I doubt that that would be a very big seller. Authors always show old races, races that are long since over, as examples of how to get a winner. I wonder if they get heat too? Nahhh. They just get money from the sale of their book that “red boards” on every other page! But, hey, who cares? People hand over their money and are happy to so if it means learning how to pick more winners. As far as they are concerned..."red boarding" be damned. Just show us how to get more winners!
You have been around here a long time. I think you understand that my interest has always been in trying to help people to get more winners. And what the hell, it doesn't even cost anything!

shoeless
07-27-2017, 07:52 AM
FTL

I know that you post here to help people out and I appreciate it and
thanks for the insight about reading PP'S bottom up

I used to look at race conditions all the time but in recent years have
gotten away from it, the first person to really write about it was Steve
Davidowitz in Betting Thoroughbreds had a great chapter devoted to it.


Jeff

Bill V.
07-27-2017, 08:18 AM
Hi Jeff

You and FTL and Pino all woke me up to READ THE CONDITIONS
You know how much I admire you and your ability

Hope you are doing well as usual with ENERGY

Good Skill
Bill

lostandwon
07-27-2017, 08:31 AM
FTL

Nice job explaining things, I always enjoy your posts and wish you
would do so more often.

Jeff

Just want to echo the sentiments above

lone speed
07-27-2017, 10:24 AM
I take a lot of heat for analyzing a horse after it won or a race after it is over. Most recently, that was the case with the horse that won the CT race. It was the only horse shown so I looked it and offered and alternate look at it to allow people to see the horse in a different light. (my alternate look was based on what I just laid our for you) When I think about it, I can’t recall any teaching race in any follow up that was shown before that race was run. Funny how that works. When trying to teach you use examples. Examples naturally come from past experience. I can’t think of any author who writes a book illustrating how to lose races. I doubt that that would be a very big seller. Authors always show old races, races that are long since over, as examples of how to get a winner. I wonder if they get heat too? Nahhh. They just get money from the sale of their book that “red boards” on every other page! But, hey, who cares? People hand over their money and are happy to so if it means learning how to pick more winners. As far as they are concerned..."red boarding" be damned. Just show us how to get more winners!
You have been around here a long time. I think you understand that my interest has always been in trying to help people to get more winners. And what the hell, it doesn't even cost anything!

Intrinsic value:
The intrinsic value does not depend on what the world thinks. It is something of value to us regardless of what others think and what it costs us to live those beliefs.

FTL..

I for one have always looked forward to your contributions of your well thought out and well written detailed posts. it takes effort, energy and time to write out our inner thoughts on the point of discussions.

I would rather read your contributions a thousand times over some spewed out post of someone's picks before the race or a "Red Boarder" who posted his supposedly winning picks after a race is over.

I have said it many times over that I would rather "learn to fish to live" versus "being given a fish to eat".

FTL, many thanks for your invaluable insights and contributions over the years. They provided many impetus to think outside the proverbial box and to approach the game from the gained experiences and wisdom from someone who has selfishly shared their knowledge freely in a public settings without writing a book.

Sincerely

Lone Speed

shoeless
07-27-2017, 08:22 PM
Hey Bill

I think you have surpassed me in understanding conditions

Energy is a good program I am probably not using it correctly
but trying


Jeff

shoeless
07-27-2017, 08:28 PM
FTL,

I have been playing the horses for 50 years, sure I have had big
winning days but never been a consistent winner. People probably
think I am crazy still trying to beat game at 66 but I don't bet over
what I cant afford to.

There are plenty of people here who have benefitted from your advice
so I wouldn't let those few who don't bother you.

I know it's on here somewhere but if you have time could you go over
optional claiming races.That is one condition I have trouble with of what
horses fit

Jeff

Bill V.
07-28-2017, 11:38 AM
Hi Jeff

Our long friendship has shown me, We have a common bond,
We have had to endure a hard road, I know you have the skill
I feel for you. You have dreams. I see in you a desire to never give up.
I won't give up thinking it will all come together for you. My hope that soon your love of racing will reward you.


Dad and I were chatting the other day and he asked how you are doing.
I told him you are doing well, he admires you so much, You made a lasting impression on us both.

FTL knows so much,
Here is what I have learned from him.
The Optional Claiming condition,
Actually I posted a race yesterday from Del Mar It was an Allowance Optional Claimer

The winner of the race. Horse # 7 was the only horse eligible to be claimed.
They raised the horse in class after so much success at Golden Gate
None of the other horses in the race were up for sale. In the race, every other horse had recent wins at the CL40000 level. Today's race was for $62500
Not many older horses are going to be claimed for $62500. If they carded a race for 62500 the field would never fill. If a horse is worth 62500 and is offered for sale It will be claimed and the connections would lose probably one of the best horses in their barn. This field looked like a group of established claimers, Only horse 3 and the favorite horse 5 had any stakes races shown.
They have to add conditions to high level claiming races, There just are not that many places for them to compete in straight allowance Nonwinners X3
and they might be unable to win stakes races.

43780

43781

For The Lead
07-28-2017, 04:21 PM
Bill has it.

Look, read the basic type of race. I'm not going to list all of them, but here are a few standard types:

Graded
Stakes
Allowance
Claiming
Maiden Special weight
Maiden Claiming

Maiden Special Weight and Maiden Claiming don't have conditions, they have restrictions, such as restricted to "STATE BREDS".

When you get to claiming races you start finding a bunch of different conditions. Some are standard, like NW2L, NW3L, NW4L, NW16M, NW26M, NW1Y, NW2Y and so on. Others are actually "made up". An example would be "for horses that have not been in the money at the current meet". Some don't even apply to the horses, like "for trainers that have not won a race at the current meet". You'll find these types of conditions at tracks like Turf Paradise , Finger Lakes and other very low level tracks.

When you get to Allowance races you can find a NW2L condition. Mostly at cheaper tracks. Once you get away from those low level tracks the most common condition for horses entering the Allowance ranks is "non-winners of a race other than maiden, claiming, or state bred". Another entry level condition is "non winners of $ (a stated amount of money) one time other than maiden, claiming or state bred. These conditions escalate from non winners of "a" race to non winners of "2" races and so on. A successful horse will eventually run out of conditions, at which point they enter the "Stakes and Graded" class levels.

Ok, so now to answer your specific question. Start by reading the race type. "Allowance Optional Claiming". That in itself tells you something about the condition of the race. What it means is, the race will be run under allowance conditions, such as the ones I mentioned above. Once you reach the end of the allowance condition of the race your will see "OR" which means there is another "option" to be eligible to enter the race. That "option" is that you may enter you horse as long as it is eligible to be claimed for whatever the specific claiming price is. The race is basically an allowance race, but in hopes of "filling" the race so it will go, the option to be claimed is added. This is similar to a claiming race with a NW26M condition that also allows NW3L to enter so the race will fill.

Hope this helps.

shoeless
07-28-2017, 04:55 PM
FTL and Bill thanks you cleared that up

Now you made me think of another race that gives me trouble

Allowance ranks is "non-winners of a race other than maiden, claiming, or state bred" also non winners of 2 other than

What type of horses should I be looking at that would fit at this level


Jeff

shoeless
07-28-2017, 04:58 PM
Bill

Thanks I feel the same way about you and your Dad.

Like I have said before I really admire the way that you stick
to one way of doing things and are successful at it also the way
your able to win with all of the programs


Jeff

dlivery
07-28-2017, 05:51 PM
I have no success over the years just reading
But seeing the results has made me a believer in reading the conditions up to the word OR

Nice to keep this topic alive :1:

For The Lead
07-29-2017, 04:50 AM
FTL and Bill thanks you cleared that up

Now you made me think of another race that gives me trouble

Allowance ranks is "non-winners of a race other than maiden, claiming, or state bred" also non winners of 2 other than

What type of horses should I be looking at that would fit at this level


Jeff

NON WINNERS OF A RACE OTHER THAN MAIDEN, CLAIMING, STARTER OR STATE BRED


Ok, so what is the logical interpretation of this condition?
Let’s look at what qualifies for the first part of the condition, “non winners of a race other than maiden”. What horses would be eligible? Obviously, only horses that have only beat maidens.
Since this is an allowance where horses are not eligible to be claimed, it stands to reason that it was intended for horses that broke their maiden versus maiden special weights. Again, a race where the horse cannot be claimed. In reality, many of these horses run and run and run, but never get the job done. However, they do turn in good efforts running 2nd and/or 3rd . For that reason, many times these horses are the favorite or made low odds because of those performances in their next race. At some point in time, after many failures, the owners of such horses finally reach the conclusion that their horse is not as good as they hoped and move the horse down to the claiming ranks. Since the horse has not established any real value by beating anything other than maidens, the trick is where to place them in the claiming ranks. The worse thing for the horse is to be placed in high value claimers where it will probably continue to fail. Horses like these learn to do one thing...LOSE!


Now let’s look at the “other than...claiming, starter or state bred” part because they are the horses that are eligible to run even though they have won more than 1 race. For everyone reading this I will challenge you to decide the following for yourself. What is better, a horse that is 1 for 20 that has never beat anything except maidens or a horse that is 10 for 28 and has demonstrated it is capable of beating fields of horses even those those horses were claiming, starter or state bred horses?
I prefer horses that have demonstrated they can win races. Even though these horses have only beat claimers etc., they have established they have value. Moreover, they have learned to WIN!

Having said all that, it doesn’t mean you run right out and bet only the claimers in these races. If you find a horse that broke its’ maiden at first asking or shortly thereafter and is now coming into this race, and especially if the horse is being bet down, that may be a horse to give serious consideration to. What you are looking for is the 1 for 15 or 1 for 20 horse that is being bet down because it has run 2nd and/or 3rd in “allowance” races and the other horses are “claimers”, which most people feel are inferior.


NON WINNERS OF TWO RACES OTHER THAN MAIDEN, CLAIMING, STARTER OR STATE BRED

Take everything I just said above and throw it out. That kind of thinking will not serve you well once you hit this condition. It may seem like a small thing, after all it’s 1 race or 2 races, how much difference can there be? My advice is, try it at your own peril. Claimers will not do as well at this condition.

At all times you have to evaluate the horses you have in front of you. It is also best to have an understanding of how racing works.

shoeless
07-29-2017, 11:31 AM
FTL

Thanks very much for the explanation and you have proved the
point that you can teach a old dog new tricks.

I would mainly use conditions when they are used in the cheaper claiming races such as the 3 horse going from open company to a condition race.

I see you had mentioned the Energy program is there anything you
can remember that would be helpful in using it.


Jeff

shoeless
07-29-2017, 04:37 PM
FTL and Bill

I just want to thank you both, reminds me of the old VDC Messenger
days.


Jeff

Bill V.
07-29-2017, 05:04 PM
Thank you, Jeff

For The Lead
07-29-2017, 05:52 PM
FTL

Thanks very much for the explanation and you have proved the
point that you can teach a old dog new tricks.

I would mainly use conditions when they are used in the cheaper claiming races such as the 3 horse going from open company to a condition race.

I see you had mentioned the Energy program is there anything you
can remember that would be helpful in using it.


Jeff

Just the usual.

Use good contenders and good pacelines.

And remember the old computer saying. GARBAGE IN....GARBAGE OUT!

shoeless
07-30-2017, 08:54 AM
Thanks

oswaldrha
08-24-2017, 11:09 PM
One of the horses listed in the Del Mar Result Chart that Bill V. posted had post time odds of 0.00?

gandalf380
08-25-2017, 06:44 AM
That horse was declared a nonstarter as he was held at the start

oswaldrha
08-25-2017, 10:12 PM
That horse was declared a nonstarter as he was held at the start
My thanks for the clarification. If I might prevail upon you with a few follow-up questions?
1. Who exactly declares the horse a nonstarter? Is it the jockey, stewards, other?
2. If you have a straight wager on a horse that's declared a nonstarter, can you get your money back? Or do you just kiss your cabbage goodbye?
3. If you have a horse singled in a multi-race exotic and its declared a nonstarter, do you get your money back? Or does the track replace it with another horse (betting favorite)? Or do you suck it up and tear up the tickets?

DontSayDont
08-26-2017, 08:07 AM
My thanks for the clarification. If I might prevail upon you with a few follow-up questions?
1. Who exactly declares the horse a nonstarter? Is it the jockey, stewards, other? Stewards
2. If you have a straight wager on a horse that's declared a nonstarter, can you get your money back? Yes, you'll be refunded your bet.Or do you just kiss your cabbage goodbye?
3. If you have a horse singled in a multi-race exotic and its declared a nonstarter, do you get your money back? Or does the track replace it with another horse (betting favorite)? Or do you suck it up and tear up the tickets? Your need to know how your track works on this one.
If it is a non-starter in the first race of a multi-race bet, you'll most likely get your money refunded. If it is in a leg of the multi-race bet, then some times they make a consolation payoff or put you on the favorite for that race.
When in doubt, take your ticket to a teller and they can tell you how that situation is covered.

Ray

oswaldrha
08-28-2017, 09:32 PM
Ray
Many thanks for the reply.