Horse racing is one of the most difficult games on earth to figure out. Week after week you break down races and play the probability that certain elements of past form will translate into future success. Most of time you either win or are beaten by a horse that you could have made a case for.
Longshots have won the Derby before. There was Giacomo, Charismatic, Thunder Gulch, War Emblem and even Sea Hero. None of them were without weaknesses but upon reflection there were some positive points to pick out. Not every handicapper feels as if their mind was blown and their world was shaken because they can explain the performance somewhat retroactively.
I don't see any of this being true this year. Mine That Bird truly came out of nowhere and there were virtually no clues about this ability beforehand. He was not the longest shot on the board, Join In The Dance and Atomic Rain both started at longer odds and I could have rationalized a win by either of them but even looking back there is nothing about Mine That Bird to like.
The only positive angle that I came up with on this horse is the somewhat cheeky anti-Dosage angle. I've mentioned it several times in this space that I think Dosage is overrated and useless as a predictive factor. From 1996 to the present there has been just 27 horses that ran in the Derby than did not have a Dosage index of less than 4.00. So virtually 18 of the 20 starters each year can apparently win according to the Dosage theory. A blind cat could randomly toss two horses each year and still usually have the winner. The interesting thing about the anti Dosage angle is that it has actually been extremely profitable to play. 27 horses and 4 winners in the last 14 runnings including Mine That Bird, Giacomo, Charismatic and Real Quiet. That's the three longest priced winners of the last two decades! If you're going for a longshot make sure you check out the anti-dosage angle.
Realistically I don't think this breakout performance will ever by fully explained. We want to find complicated reasons why it may have happened but he simply ran faster than everyone else that day. The morning of the Derby, once I Want Revenge had scratched, I wrote a quick post about how I thought the complexion of the Derby had changed. My conclusion was that when you remove all the fast horses from a race it becomes a weak race and it opens up to everyone. I think that was more or less what happened. Quality Road, I Want Revenge, Win Willy and even horses like Old Fashioned and The Pamplemousse would have made this race faster. Slow horses win less often when in the presence of fast horses.
Aside from Mine That Bird being 6 lengths ahead of everyone else I thought the Derby was pretty formful. There was a tight three horse finish for second place between three contenders that made a lot of sense. Although Mine That Bird was the worst ranked winner on record according to the 20-20 system I don't think the year was a complete loss for the statistical profile. Mine That Bird was simply an anomaly and no statistical system would ever pick up a winner like that. However if you took him out of the equation the 20-20 system would have had the top four finishers among it's top six contenders. So although it was not a great year for stats and profiles I think there is still cause to be optimistic about the project as a whole.
No explanation will ever be fully sufficient in my mind other than recognizing that sometimes things just happen in racing and one horse is faster than all the others on that day. Thankfully we don't have to deal with out of the blue winners like this too often in our high profile races. I see a response from a lot of people that goes something like this "Speed figures are useless" "Experts know nothing" "Throw out the form and just pick who you like". I don't think any of those are intelligent responses. Picking winners is all about probability and even good handicappers are wrong 70% of the time. This race was one of those 7 out of 10. It's no reason for a change of approach, just a recognition of the oxymoron that anomalies are common in racing.
Showing posts with label Derby Statistics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Derby Statistics. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
CJ Derby Data Gap
The Courier Journal has not made their Derby Data Track available this year and I think a few fans out there miss the access to information that it provided. It was a great resource. One of the things I used it for in past years was the closing fractions. I eventually built my own calculator because I wanted more information than the database would provide. Since people won't get a good look at the closing fractions unless they use Formulator I decided to post the calculations I've made.
Just a warning to anyone who may use these as a guideline. These were calculated without the benefit of 1/100th second data. All the raw data was rounded to the nearest 1/5th as you see in the PP's. These figures also use only the horses last 9f race. So you'll notice that Friesan Fire and Square Eddie are not included and that Advice's fractions were based off his performance in the Sunland Derby.
Just a warning to anyone who may use these as a guideline. These were calculated without the benefit of 1/100th second data. All the raw data was rounded to the nearest 1/5th as you see in the PP's. These figures also use only the horses last 9f race. So you'll notice that Friesan Fire and Square Eddie are not included and that Advice's fractions were based off his performance in the Sunland Derby.
Monday, April 27, 2009
Off Topic
For those of you who haven't seen the Derby weather forecast the track very well may come up sloppy or at least less than fast. There is a good chance of rain on all the three days leading up to the Derby as well as the big day itself.
A lot of people hate off tracks. They don't bet them and they think it's a shame that a good race like this is ever run over off going. The theory that I hear most commonly is that it's impossible to tell which horses are going to like it or hate it and anyone could win. The races are supposedly less formful.
I was wondering about this over the weekend and decided to look at some of the numbers. I looked at the average odds of every Derby winner from 1950 to the present then separated those Derby's that were run on tracks rated anything less than fast. The results revealed the following.
Average odds of a Derby winner since 1950: 8.88/1
Average odds of a Derby winner on an off track since 1950: 6.66/1
Average odds of a Derby winner on a fast track since 1950: 9.21/1
Derby winners on off tracks were, on average, shorter prices than those on fast tracks. While favorites did win on fast tracks at a slightly higher percentage (29% compared to 25%) there were simply fewer longshots winning on off tracks. Only 2 of the 8 off track winners were more than 10/1.
I also looked at the odds of the top 3 finishers in each of the Derby's since 1950. The results were not all that different.
Average odds of a Derby ITM finisher since 1950: 11.40/1
Average odds of a Derby ITM finisher on an off track since 1950: 10.21/1
Average odds of a Derby ITM finisher on a fast track since 1950: 11.58/1
Once again the average odds of the "In the Money" finishers was lower on off tracks than on fast tracks. The favorite hit the frame in off track races at a slightly better percentage than they did in fast track races.
None of this means that the Derby this year will be dominated by the first three betting choices but I think if you were to draw any conclusion from these figures it would be this. Off tracks don't mix things up as badly as you may think. In fact it would seem that the public has a decent handle on how to bet off track Derby's. I would probably not let the weather affect my choices very much. Odds are, most of the good ones will still be good in the mud.
A lot of people hate off tracks. They don't bet them and they think it's a shame that a good race like this is ever run over off going. The theory that I hear most commonly is that it's impossible to tell which horses are going to like it or hate it and anyone could win. The races are supposedly less formful.
I was wondering about this over the weekend and decided to look at some of the numbers. I looked at the average odds of every Derby winner from 1950 to the present then separated those Derby's that were run on tracks rated anything less than fast. The results revealed the following.
Average odds of a Derby winner since 1950: 8.88/1
Average odds of a Derby winner on an off track since 1950: 6.66/1
Average odds of a Derby winner on a fast track since 1950: 9.21/1
Derby winners on off tracks were, on average, shorter prices than those on fast tracks. While favorites did win on fast tracks at a slightly higher percentage (29% compared to 25%) there were simply fewer longshots winning on off tracks. Only 2 of the 8 off track winners were more than 10/1.
I also looked at the odds of the top 3 finishers in each of the Derby's since 1950. The results were not all that different.
Average odds of a Derby ITM finisher since 1950: 11.40/1
Average odds of a Derby ITM finisher on an off track since 1950: 10.21/1
Average odds of a Derby ITM finisher on a fast track since 1950: 11.58/1
Once again the average odds of the "In the Money" finishers was lower on off tracks than on fast tracks. The favorite hit the frame in off track races at a slightly better percentage than they did in fast track races.
None of this means that the Derby this year will be dominated by the first three betting choices but I think if you were to draw any conclusion from these figures it would be this. Off tracks don't mix things up as badly as you may think. In fact it would seem that the public has a decent handle on how to bet off track Derby's. I would probably not let the weather affect my choices very much. Odds are, most of the good ones will still be good in the mud.
Friday, April 24, 2009
Trading Places
Pretty much the only thing going on other than workouts and speculating over the fitness of Quality Road is ironing out all the riding assignments.
Garret Gomez and agent Ron Anderson made the biggest call of the spring when they chose Pioneerof the Nile over Dunkirk. I thought I'd take a look at the records of horses with new Derby jockey's as well as look at some of the past calls riders have made.
Horses that had a jockey who was riding them for the first time in the Derby went 66-2-2-1. Most of them failed badly because most of them were the no-hopers that none of the big names wanted to ride. The two exceptions were War Emblem who got the jockey change thanks to the sale and new stable and Charismatic.
It has commonly been held as a bad sign when the jockey that rode the horse in the last prep chooses not to ride that horse again in the Derby. That's probably fair but a study of the decisions jockey's have made from 96' to the present reveals that not all them make the right calls.
I looked at every case where a rider was on a different horse than he rode in the final prep or if he was on several in their final preps. I'm assuming that in all cases the riders them selves made the decision to get off a certain horse. I realize that sometimes it's the trainers decision but it's hard to gather that data. Riders made the right choices in 23 of the 40 cases. Meaning the horse they chose finished ahead of the horse or horses they did not choose.
Hardly any of these calls involved eventual race winners. In fact just three did. Kent D decided to stay on Big Brown instead of Cool Coal Man. I'm not sure if that even qualifies as a call, I'm sure no one in North America would have made the opposite one. Prado also elected to stay on Barbaro, resisting the temptation to ride the speedy Keyed Entry.
Easily the worst call since 1996 was Jerry Bailey's decision to ride Worldly Manner, a horse that had not started since the previous September over Charismatic, a horse that Bailey had won the Lexington on just two weeks before the Derby. I wonder if that was on Ron Anderson's advice?
Actually Anderson's last two big clients, Bailey and Gomez are a combined 2 for 5 in the Derby when it comes to making the right choice.
Of course none of this actually impacts the decision they made this year but I thought it was at least an interesting little tidbit of information.
Garret Gomez and agent Ron Anderson made the biggest call of the spring when they chose Pioneerof the Nile over Dunkirk. I thought I'd take a look at the records of horses with new Derby jockey's as well as look at some of the past calls riders have made.
Horses that had a jockey who was riding them for the first time in the Derby went 66-2-2-1. Most of them failed badly because most of them were the no-hopers that none of the big names wanted to ride. The two exceptions were War Emblem who got the jockey change thanks to the sale and new stable and Charismatic.
It has commonly been held as a bad sign when the jockey that rode the horse in the last prep chooses not to ride that horse again in the Derby. That's probably fair but a study of the decisions jockey's have made from 96' to the present reveals that not all them make the right calls.
I looked at every case where a rider was on a different horse than he rode in the final prep or if he was on several in their final preps. I'm assuming that in all cases the riders them selves made the decision to get off a certain horse. I realize that sometimes it's the trainers decision but it's hard to gather that data. Riders made the right choices in 23 of the 40 cases. Meaning the horse they chose finished ahead of the horse or horses they did not choose.
Hardly any of these calls involved eventual race winners. In fact just three did. Kent D decided to stay on Big Brown instead of Cool Coal Man. I'm not sure if that even qualifies as a call, I'm sure no one in North America would have made the opposite one. Prado also elected to stay on Barbaro, resisting the temptation to ride the speedy Keyed Entry.
Easily the worst call since 1996 was Jerry Bailey's decision to ride Worldly Manner, a horse that had not started since the previous September over Charismatic, a horse that Bailey had won the Lexington on just two weeks before the Derby. I wonder if that was on Ron Anderson's advice?
Actually Anderson's last two big clients, Bailey and Gomez are a combined 2 for 5 in the Derby when it comes to making the right choice.
Of course none of this actually impacts the decision they made this year but I thought it was at least an interesting little tidbit of information.
Thursday, April 23, 2009
I Want....Speed?
I received a comment to my last post that I thought might be good to answer here.
Tony Bada Bing said...
So what might signal a regression? There is the danger that all his travel has caught up with him. I took a statistical look at horses that failed to better their worst workout time at their home track once they came to Churchill Downs.
Now there are plenty of problems with this measurement because trainers are looking for all different things once they ship their horses to CD from elsewhere. Also tracks play very differently so a :59 at one track is different from a :59 at another. That's why we have speed figures. I also only have the data that is available in the PP's. So it means comparing only the last 6 workouts and very often the distances don't match up. So horses mentioned in this statistic are specifically those that worked (for example) 5f at CD in 1:01 and a comparison of all their 5f works at other tracks showed that the CD workout was the slowest at 5f.
Horses that failed to turn in better workout times at CD than when they were at other tracks went 36-2-1-3 in the Derby. Results seem inconclusive but an interesting sub-stat is that 20 of those 36 horses were from California and those 20 went 2-1-3 in the Derby. Horses whose CD works compared poorly with central or eastern tracks went 16-0-0-0 in the Derby.
As I said before these stats have to be considered somewhat sketchy but if I am to draw any conclusion it's that horses tend to work faster in California than they do elsewhere. So it's not as worrisome if they fail to reproduce those raw times at Churchill Downs. Horses coming from Florida, New York and Arkansas might get a more wary eye cast over them if their CD works turn up slower.
For I Want Revenge specifically I'm not going to demand that he outdo his :58 1/5 workout from Hollywood to show that he's in good form. I would however demand that his next work be better than his last. His last was not particularly quick and I want all my Derby selections to have at least one really nice workout after their last prep. He hasn't had one yet so it'll have to come next time out.
Tony Bada Bing said...
"Thoughts on I Want Revenge possibly already running his best and peaking too soon. Do you think the two slow works following are an indication of this or if tosses a clunker in his final workout?"
I am personally not concerned about I Want Revenge having already peaked in the Gotham. Plenty of very good Derby horses ran their best prep race in their second last start before the Derby. Horses like Monarchos, Grindstone, Real Quiet, Victory Gallop, Smarty Jones, Closing Argument and Denis of Cork were all in their best pre-Derby form two starts away from the big dance.So what might signal a regression? There is the danger that all his travel has caught up with him. I took a statistical look at horses that failed to better their worst workout time at their home track once they came to Churchill Downs.
Now there are plenty of problems with this measurement because trainers are looking for all different things once they ship their horses to CD from elsewhere. Also tracks play very differently so a :59 at one track is different from a :59 at another. That's why we have speed figures. I also only have the data that is available in the PP's. So it means comparing only the last 6 workouts and very often the distances don't match up. So horses mentioned in this statistic are specifically those that worked (for example) 5f at CD in 1:01 and a comparison of all their 5f works at other tracks showed that the CD workout was the slowest at 5f.
Horses that failed to turn in better workout times at CD than when they were at other tracks went 36-2-1-3 in the Derby. Results seem inconclusive but an interesting sub-stat is that 20 of those 36 horses were from California and those 20 went 2-1-3 in the Derby. Horses whose CD works compared poorly with central or eastern tracks went 16-0-0-0 in the Derby.
As I said before these stats have to be considered somewhat sketchy but if I am to draw any conclusion it's that horses tend to work faster in California than they do elsewhere. So it's not as worrisome if they fail to reproduce those raw times at Churchill Downs. Horses coming from Florida, New York and Arkansas might get a more wary eye cast over them if their CD works turn up slower.
For I Want Revenge specifically I'm not going to demand that he outdo his :58 1/5 workout from Hollywood to show that he's in good form. I would however demand that his next work be better than his last. His last was not particularly quick and I want all my Derby selections to have at least one really nice workout after their last prep. He hasn't had one yet so it'll have to come next time out.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
Fitness Fortnight
Sunday morning saw a paradigm shift in the focus of race fans. We moved from being focused on the afternoons to the mornings.
For the next two weeks race results mean little to nothing with respect to the Derby. What matters is how the Derby contenders look in the morning.
As always I have a small collection of stats to help me monitor the progress of the Derby field. Workouts are a very tricky thing to read into because training methods vary so greatly. For Bob "The Bullet" Baffert trainees fast works are less meaningful only because they're ordinary but a sudden slow work could be a big negative.
For those wondering how to interpret the morning form of Pioneerof the Nile it is worth noting that Baffert has had 3 winners and 3 more horses hit the frame in the Derby and all of them had a bullet work at Churchill Downs after their last prep. 11 of his 16 Derby entrants had this angle going for them. The 5 horses that did not have a Churchill bullet ran out of the frame.
Bullets, which are simply the fastest work of the morning at that particular distance, can be a good indicator of race readiness. Although it's not something I'd absolutely require 10 of the last 13 winners did have a bullet work after their final prep race. Here are some quick stats for you (1996 to the present)
Worked a bullet since last prep race: 79-10-6-5
Worked a bullet at CD since last prep race: 61-8-6-4
Worked a bullet in their last pre-Derby workout: 49-9-3-2
Worked two bullets since their last prep race: 13-4-1-0
Did not have any bullet works since last prep race: 143-3-7-8
This isn't something you could solely hang your hat on but I think these numbers do show that horses who are working fast in the last few weeks leading up to the Derby are generally outperforming those who work slowly.
Another subset to keep and eye on is those horses that suddenly work a bullet before the Derby when they're not normally great workhorses. Barbaro and Grindstone both worked a bullet right before the Derby without having earned one in any of their last 6 workouts. In other words they weren't usually that fast in the morning but leading up to the Derby they were in great form.
To me the biggest negatives of morning workouts is when a horse works too quickly before a race and after their last prep race. Training methods are changing and from the year 2000 to the present day there has been a real trend towards freshness. Horses have longer spaces between races and even now they tend to have longer spaces between works.
I'm not a trainer but my thought is that the times when a workout could have the greatest impact on a horses fitness is right after a race and right before a race. After a race the horse is probably tired and could use a few days off. Trainers that coaxed a timed workout from their Derby starters less than 10 days after their final prep went 36-0-1-2 in the Derby since 2000. Papa Clem and Chocolate Candy have both been put back to work after just 8 days rest so it'll be interesting to see how that pair does.
Working too close to the race has also been a bit of a negative for Derby starters. Horses with a timed workout 3 days or less before the Derby have gone 15-1-1-0 in the Derby since 1996. Big Brown was the lone exception to this rule last year as he drilled a 3f bullet 2 days before the Derby. Among the group of those defeated was the 96' favorite Unbridled's Song.
Just a few things to keep an eye on over the next fortnight.
For the next two weeks race results mean little to nothing with respect to the Derby. What matters is how the Derby contenders look in the morning.
As always I have a small collection of stats to help me monitor the progress of the Derby field. Workouts are a very tricky thing to read into because training methods vary so greatly. For Bob "The Bullet" Baffert trainees fast works are less meaningful only because they're ordinary but a sudden slow work could be a big negative.
For those wondering how to interpret the morning form of Pioneerof the Nile it is worth noting that Baffert has had 3 winners and 3 more horses hit the frame in the Derby and all of them had a bullet work at Churchill Downs after their last prep. 11 of his 16 Derby entrants had this angle going for them. The 5 horses that did not have a Churchill bullet ran out of the frame.
Bullets, which are simply the fastest work of the morning at that particular distance, can be a good indicator of race readiness. Although it's not something I'd absolutely require 10 of the last 13 winners did have a bullet work after their final prep race. Here are some quick stats for you (1996 to the present)
Worked a bullet since last prep race: 79-10-6-5
Worked a bullet at CD since last prep race: 61-8-6-4
Worked a bullet in their last pre-Derby workout: 49-9-3-2
Worked two bullets since their last prep race: 13-4-1-0
Did not have any bullet works since last prep race: 143-3-7-8
This isn't something you could solely hang your hat on but I think these numbers do show that horses who are working fast in the last few weeks leading up to the Derby are generally outperforming those who work slowly.
Another subset to keep and eye on is those horses that suddenly work a bullet before the Derby when they're not normally great workhorses. Barbaro and Grindstone both worked a bullet right before the Derby without having earned one in any of their last 6 workouts. In other words they weren't usually that fast in the morning but leading up to the Derby they were in great form.
To me the biggest negatives of morning workouts is when a horse works too quickly before a race and after their last prep race. Training methods are changing and from the year 2000 to the present day there has been a real trend towards freshness. Horses have longer spaces between races and even now they tend to have longer spaces between works.
I'm not a trainer but my thought is that the times when a workout could have the greatest impact on a horses fitness is right after a race and right before a race. After a race the horse is probably tired and could use a few days off. Trainers that coaxed a timed workout from their Derby starters less than 10 days after their final prep went 36-0-1-2 in the Derby since 2000. Papa Clem and Chocolate Candy have both been put back to work after just 8 days rest so it'll be interesting to see how that pair does.
Working too close to the race has also been a bit of a negative for Derby starters. Horses with a timed workout 3 days or less before the Derby have gone 15-1-1-0 in the Derby since 1996. Big Brown was the lone exception to this rule last year as he drilled a 3f bullet 2 days before the Derby. Among the group of those defeated was the 96' favorite Unbridled's Song.
Just a few things to keep an eye on over the next fortnight.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Home Field Advantage?
We're getting right down to the nitty gritty of Derby Handicapping. People are settling on their selections and in a race with 20 entrants you realistically have a short list of about 5 horses. It's really no different from any other race you handicap. Most races have a field that is about half the size so obviously it's easier to narrow it down to 2 or 3 horses instead of 4 or 5.
How do you boil down the short list to come up with just one, your official Derby pick? Most handicappers get picky and are forced to use the slightest excuse to drop one of their main contenders. After all there is plenty to like and little to choose between your contenders, that's why they made the short list.
A popular angle that some people use in these situations is experience over the track. Every track has its subtleties and knowing if a horse likes Churchill Downs is an added bonus right? Surprisingly the numbers suggest that this isn't really true. Over the past 13 runnings 32 horses have entered the Derby with a prior win at Churchill Downs. Only Street Sense and Denis of Cork managed to hit the frame. A lot of well backed horses have sucked some money over this angle.
Horses that have run at Churchill Downs but have failed to win are actually a much better 31-3-1-2. In many cases those horses actually ran badly at Churchill in their only attempt.
As always you can make of this data whatever you will but for me this information leads me to resist using prior track experience as a refining angle. A good race, a bad race or even no race at Churchill Downs doesn't seem to make a big difference.
How do you boil down the short list to come up with just one, your official Derby pick? Most handicappers get picky and are forced to use the slightest excuse to drop one of their main contenders. After all there is plenty to like and little to choose between your contenders, that's why they made the short list.
A popular angle that some people use in these situations is experience over the track. Every track has its subtleties and knowing if a horse likes Churchill Downs is an added bonus right? Surprisingly the numbers suggest that this isn't really true. Over the past 13 runnings 32 horses have entered the Derby with a prior win at Churchill Downs. Only Street Sense and Denis of Cork managed to hit the frame. A lot of well backed horses have sucked some money over this angle.
Horses that have run at Churchill Downs but have failed to win are actually a much better 31-3-1-2. In many cases those horses actually ran badly at Churchill in their only attempt.
As always you can make of this data whatever you will but for me this information leads me to resist using prior track experience as a refining angle. A good race, a bad race or even no race at Churchill Downs doesn't seem to make a big difference.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Fastest Horse Wins
I'm curious for this: take the horses w/ the 5 highest beyers made in the last round of preps (like the winner of the Fl derby, 1st and 2nd in the Arkansas, and the BG winner) what's the record for those horses?
Handride
If you had focused solely on the horses that earned the five highest Beyer Speed Figures in their last prep races you would have at least always had a rooting interest in the stretch run.
From 1996 to the present the top five last highest Beyer earners compiled a record of 69-9-6-8 in the Derby. That's 9 winners from 13 runnings of the Derby and every single Derby I have data for included one of the top 5 hitting the frame on Derby day. I know those of you with agile minds will wonder how I got 69 horses from 13 top 5's. There were some ties in certain years which accounts for the extra few horses.
For those wondering who this year's fab five are here is the list:
Quality Road - 111
Dunkirk - 108
Friesan Fire - 104
I Want Revenge - 103
West Side Bernie - 101
Papa Clem - 101*
*Papa Clem's Beyer for the Arkansas Derby was just upgraded from 99 to 101
The good news is that a flat $2 win bet on each of these 69 contenders would have cost you $138 and returned $201.80 for a nice 46% ROI. You also could have had 4 exacta's and 2 trifecta's. As simplistic as betting the biggest figures is it's a pretty decent method for finding winners.
If you want an even more simplified method with less overhead try taking simply the horse that earned the highest last out Beyer figure.
2008 - Big Brown 1st (106)
2007 - Curlin 3rd (103)
2006 - Sinister Minister 16th (116)
2005 - Bellamy Road 7th (120)
2004 - The Cliffs Edge 5th (111)
2003 - Empire Maker 2nd (111)
2002 - War Emblem 1st (112)
2001 - Millennium Wind 11th (114)
2000 - Fusaichi Pegasus 1st (111)
1999 - Charismatic 1st (108) General Challenge 11th (108)
1998 - Halory Hunter 4th (111) Indian Charlie 3rd (111)
1997 - Silver Charm 1st (110) Free House 3rd (110)
1996 - Skip Away 12th (113)
1995 - Serena's Song 114 16th
1994 - Holy Bull 115 12th
1993 - Diazo 109 5th
1992 - Lil E. Tee 1st (107) Pine Bluff 5th (107) Devil His Due 107 12th
6 winners from 22 contenders in 17 runnings. It yielded a lower winning percentage but a much higher rate of return with a gaudy $122.60 flat bet profit and a 278% ROI.
Handride
If you had focused solely on the horses that earned the five highest Beyer Speed Figures in their last prep races you would have at least always had a rooting interest in the stretch run.
From 1996 to the present the top five last highest Beyer earners compiled a record of 69-9-6-8 in the Derby. That's 9 winners from 13 runnings of the Derby and every single Derby I have data for included one of the top 5 hitting the frame on Derby day. I know those of you with agile minds will wonder how I got 69 horses from 13 top 5's. There were some ties in certain years which accounts for the extra few horses.
For those wondering who this year's fab five are here is the list:
Quality Road - 111
Dunkirk - 108
Friesan Fire - 104
I Want Revenge - 103
West Side Bernie - 101
Papa Clem - 101*
*Papa Clem's Beyer for the Arkansas Derby was just upgraded from 99 to 101
The good news is that a flat $2 win bet on each of these 69 contenders would have cost you $138 and returned $201.80 for a nice 46% ROI. You also could have had 4 exacta's and 2 trifecta's. As simplistic as betting the biggest figures is it's a pretty decent method for finding winners.
If you want an even more simplified method with less overhead try taking simply the horse that earned the highest last out Beyer figure.
2008 - Big Brown 1st (106)
2007 - Curlin 3rd (103)
2006 - Sinister Minister 16th (116)
2005 - Bellamy Road 7th (120)
2004 - The Cliffs Edge 5th (111)
2003 - Empire Maker 2nd (111)
2002 - War Emblem 1st (112)
2001 - Millennium Wind 11th (114)
2000 - Fusaichi Pegasus 1st (111)
1999 - Charismatic 1st (108) General Challenge 11th (108)
1998 - Halory Hunter 4th (111) Indian Charlie 3rd (111)
1997 - Silver Charm 1st (110) Free House 3rd (110)
1996 - Skip Away 12th (113)
1995 - Serena's Song 114 16th
1994 - Holy Bull 115 12th
1993 - Diazo 109 5th
1992 - Lil E. Tee 1st (107) Pine Bluff 5th (107) Devil His Due 107 12th
6 winners from 22 contenders in 17 runnings. It yielded a lower winning percentage but a much higher rate of return with a gaudy $122.60 flat bet profit and a 278% ROI.
ABC's Of Derby Speed
In order to get a better look I have split all the Derby entrants into 6 separate Beyer Speed Figure patterns. "A" represents the highest speed figure in the horses last three races while "C" the lowest. I won't insult your intelligence by explaining what "B" indicates. The patterns are listed with the most recent race first so an A/B/C pattern is a horse with 3 improving Beyer figures going into the Derby. Here is how the patterns have performed in the Derby since 1996.
Beyer Pattern A/B/C: 80-4-7-5
Beyer Pattern A/C/B: 40-3-3-4
Beyer Pattern B/A/C: 41-4-2-3
Beyer Pattern B/C/A: 18-1-0-0
Beyer Pattern C/A/B: 27-0-1-1
Beyer Pattern C/B/A: 19-1-0-0
As you can see the majority of the winners came into the Derby with one of the first three patterns. The classic "three improving figures" pattern was easily the most common producing 34% of the Derby starters and yet it is not necessarily the pattern with the strongest results. Clearly A/C/B and B/A/C are strong patterns as well.
On the downside it seems clear from these pattern breakdowns that the two things you don't want to see from your horse is their best figure (A) coming 3 starts back. You also don't want to see their worst figure being earned in their final race. Horses with either factor working against them went 64-2-1-1. It clearly looks like the worst pattern subset to me. If you exclude two year old races for those with just two starts as a three year old the record of horses whose final Beyer was worse than their last two you get a cumulative record of 39-0-1-1. Not a real positive.
Beyer Pattern A/B/C: Dunkirk, Chocolate Candy, Friesan Fire, Giant Oak
Beyer Pattern A/C/B: Pioneerof the Nile, Musket Man, Papa Clem, West Side Bernie, Just a Coincidence
Beyer Pattern B/A/C: Quality Road, I Want Revenge, Win Willy, Hold Me Back, Flying Private
Beyer Pattern B/C/A: General Quarters, Mr. Hot Stuff
Beyer Pattern C/A/B:
Beyer Pattern C/B/A:
It seems like the majority of the Derby hopefuls this year have a positive pattern going for them. General Quarters and Mr. Hot Stuff are the only two with a negative pattern but no one is coming into the race with the dreaded C/A/B.
Beyer Pattern A/B/C: 80-4-7-5
Beyer Pattern A/C/B: 40-3-3-4
Beyer Pattern B/A/C: 41-4-2-3
Beyer Pattern B/C/A: 18-1-0-0
Beyer Pattern C/A/B: 27-0-1-1
Beyer Pattern C/B/A: 19-1-0-0
As you can see the majority of the winners came into the Derby with one of the first three patterns. The classic "three improving figures" pattern was easily the most common producing 34% of the Derby starters and yet it is not necessarily the pattern with the strongest results. Clearly A/C/B and B/A/C are strong patterns as well.
On the downside it seems clear from these pattern breakdowns that the two things you don't want to see from your horse is their best figure (A) coming 3 starts back. You also don't want to see their worst figure being earned in their final race. Horses with either factor working against them went 64-2-1-1. It clearly looks like the worst pattern subset to me. If you exclude two year old races for those with just two starts as a three year old the record of horses whose final Beyer was worse than their last two you get a cumulative record of 39-0-1-1. Not a real positive.
Beyer Pattern A/B/C: Dunkirk, Chocolate Candy, Friesan Fire, Giant Oak
Beyer Pattern A/C/B: Pioneerof the Nile, Musket Man, Papa Clem, West Side Bernie, Just a Coincidence
Beyer Pattern B/A/C: Quality Road, I Want Revenge, Win Willy, Hold Me Back, Flying Private
Beyer Pattern B/C/A: General Quarters, Mr. Hot Stuff
Beyer Pattern C/A/B:
Beyer Pattern C/B/A:
It seems like the majority of the Derby hopefuls this year have a positive pattern going for them. General Quarters and Mr. Hot Stuff are the only two with a negative pattern but no one is coming into the race with the dreaded C/A/B.
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Getting Trapped
Some recent message board conversations inspired me to highlight some of the traps that fans and handicappers fall into when considering the Derby.
I think the biggest one has always been the love that flows for those late running closers. If only they had some extra distance! They'll really come alive at 10f right? Generally the answer is wrong. If your horse hasn't shown enough speed to get into the top two places by the 1/8th pole in either of their final two preps then they're likely a sucker horse and you're getting trapped. 61 horses have entered the Derby since 1996 without showing enough tactical speed and none of them have won, only 6 even continued to do what they'd been doing in the preps. Plod up into a second or third place finish.
Tactical speed is king people, tactical speed. Even Giacomo showed it, if your horse isn't as tactically speedy as the plodder Giacomo then you're on the wrong horse. Amazing to think that 61 Derby entrants had shown LESS tactical speed than Giacomo.
Another popular derby sinkhole is that of consistent horses who fail to run fast races. As fans we become attached to the little horses that just get it done whether it be winning minor stakes or running in the money each time. The theory is that whatever the competition their consistency will stand them in good stead. Unfortunately running consistently slow races never helped a horse in the Derby. Since 1996, 33 entrants have come into the Derby without having missed the frame in any start as a three year old while also having never achieved a Beyer Speed Figure that equaled the prep winning average figure. Only Victory Gallop and Steppenwolfer hit the frame again in the Derby.
It must be noted that Victory Gallop is somewhat of an exception because although he did not achieve the prep winning average figure, which was 106, he did run a 101 and 105 so he was not really a slow horse like the rest of the 30+ on the list.
Consistency does you no good if you're consistently not good enough to compete in the Derby.
I think the biggest one has always been the love that flows for those late running closers. If only they had some extra distance! They'll really come alive at 10f right? Generally the answer is wrong. If your horse hasn't shown enough speed to get into the top two places by the 1/8th pole in either of their final two preps then they're likely a sucker horse and you're getting trapped. 61 horses have entered the Derby since 1996 without showing enough tactical speed and none of them have won, only 6 even continued to do what they'd been doing in the preps. Plod up into a second or third place finish.
Tactical speed is king people, tactical speed. Even Giacomo showed it, if your horse isn't as tactically speedy as the plodder Giacomo then you're on the wrong horse. Amazing to think that 61 Derby entrants had shown LESS tactical speed than Giacomo.
Another popular derby sinkhole is that of consistent horses who fail to run fast races. As fans we become attached to the little horses that just get it done whether it be winning minor stakes or running in the money each time. The theory is that whatever the competition their consistency will stand them in good stead. Unfortunately running consistently slow races never helped a horse in the Derby. Since 1996, 33 entrants have come into the Derby without having missed the frame in any start as a three year old while also having never achieved a Beyer Speed Figure that equaled the prep winning average figure. Only Victory Gallop and Steppenwolfer hit the frame again in the Derby.
It must be noted that Victory Gallop is somewhat of an exception because although he did not achieve the prep winning average figure, which was 106, he did run a 101 and 105 so he was not really a slow horse like the rest of the 30+ on the list.
Consistency does you no good if you're consistently not good enough to compete in the Derby.
Friday, April 03, 2009
Kentucky Speedballs
I can't remember a time when more buzz was generated from a Beyer Speed Figure revision. For those of you that missed it the Beyer Speed Figure number crunchers just decided that they got a slew of figures wrong including nearly every race at Gulfstream and Rachel Alexandra's prep races.
One of the biggest swings as a result of the revision is that Quality Road's Florida Derby figure went from 103 to 111.
Many people will scoff at the accuracy of numbers that vary so dramatically but just for the sake of argument and for those that do pay attention to the numbers I thought it would be interesting to note that Quality Road is now the answer to the following question: Who is the fastest horse to have competed in the Kentucky Derby?
A should add a few qualifiers to that statement. I'm measuring only the average of the route prep races from 1996 to the present but I'm quite sure that from 1992, when Beyers were first published, to 1996 (which is the first year I have complete data for) that no horse was faster. I'm sure because I do have some figures for many of the major players and they didn't quite measure up.
Here is a list of the top 10 horses by Average Beyer earned in prep races 8f or more.
Quality Road - 112.0
Indian Charlie - 111.50
Serena's Song - 109.3
Bellamy Road - 108.0
Point Given - 107.5
Lion Heart - 107.0
Fusaichi Pegasus - 106.7
Pine Bluff - 106.3
Big Brown - 106.0
Brother Derek - 106.0
Silver Charm - 106.0
If you measure the total earned from a horses final two prep races then Quality Road comes out as the second fastest behind the mighty Holy Bull.
Holy Bull - 228
Quality Road - 224
Indian Charlie - 223
Balto Star - 221
Serena's Song - 220
With or without the revision anyone can see that Quality Road is a fast horse but I thought it was worth noting that the revision does give him a unique place in history. I'm sure his connections are far more concerned with winning the race than appearing to be the fastest on paper because great numbers don't guarantee success. But they may also derive a small amount of pride knowing that they stack up so well against many fine horses from past Derbies.
One of the biggest swings as a result of the revision is that Quality Road's Florida Derby figure went from 103 to 111.
Many people will scoff at the accuracy of numbers that vary so dramatically but just for the sake of argument and for those that do pay attention to the numbers I thought it would be interesting to note that Quality Road is now the answer to the following question: Who is the fastest horse to have competed in the Kentucky Derby?
A should add a few qualifiers to that statement. I'm measuring only the average of the route prep races from 1996 to the present but I'm quite sure that from 1992, when Beyers were first published, to 1996 (which is the first year I have complete data for) that no horse was faster. I'm sure because I do have some figures for many of the major players and they didn't quite measure up.
Here is a list of the top 10 horses by Average Beyer earned in prep races 8f or more.
Quality Road - 112.0
Indian Charlie - 111.50
Serena's Song - 109.3
Bellamy Road - 108.0
Point Given - 107.5
Lion Heart - 107.0
Fusaichi Pegasus - 106.7
Pine Bluff - 106.3
Big Brown - 106.0
Brother Derek - 106.0
Silver Charm - 106.0
If you measure the total earned from a horses final two prep races then Quality Road comes out as the second fastest behind the mighty Holy Bull.
Holy Bull - 228
Quality Road - 224
Indian Charlie - 223
Balto Star - 221
Serena's Song - 220
With or without the revision anyone can see that Quality Road is a fast horse but I thought it was worth noting that the revision does give him a unique place in history. I'm sure his connections are far more concerned with winning the race than appearing to be the fastest on paper because great numbers don't guarantee success. But they may also derive a small amount of pride knowing that they stack up so well against many fine horses from past Derbies.
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
Rematch
Pletcher's television rant about the track condition at Gulfstream has been sparking debate all over webdom. Was there a bias? Was Dunkirk done in by the bias? How would they have fared on a fair track?
I think most fans would love that last question to be answered conclusively on Derby day. Dunkirk is on the earnings bubble but I think most people want to see him in the race and see how he fares against Quality Road in round two.
I decided to check back through my collection of statistics to see if there was any data that sheds some light on the likelihood of Dunkirk reversing the result in the Derby.
I isolated all the horses who were beaten by less than three lengths in their last prep race, then I looked at where they finished in the Derby in relation to the horse that defeated them. Unfortunately I found that there seems to be no edge at all given to either side. I found 45 separate rematches, 24 went to the prep winners and 21 to the prep losers.
I was actually a bit surprised that the prep winners didn't have any real edge over the prep losers.
I also took a look at horses who were beaten by more than three lengths in their last prep race. They fared a little worse against their prior conquerors having only reversed the order of finish 28 times in 71 rematches.
There isn't an easy answer on this one, at least not based on the statistics. It all comes down to the individuals.
I know the Breeders' Cup has fooled around with gimmick head to head wagers in the past but I wonder if the Derby couldn't get some interest in offering the same thing. Results are not as predictable as you'd think. Spanish Chestnut beating Bandini in the Derby still sounds like an impossible result years after the fact.
I think most fans would love that last question to be answered conclusively on Derby day. Dunkirk is on the earnings bubble but I think most people want to see him in the race and see how he fares against Quality Road in round two.
I decided to check back through my collection of statistics to see if there was any data that sheds some light on the likelihood of Dunkirk reversing the result in the Derby.
I isolated all the horses who were beaten by less than three lengths in their last prep race, then I looked at where they finished in the Derby in relation to the horse that defeated them. Unfortunately I found that there seems to be no edge at all given to either side. I found 45 separate rematches, 24 went to the prep winners and 21 to the prep losers.
I was actually a bit surprised that the prep winners didn't have any real edge over the prep losers.
I also took a look at horses who were beaten by more than three lengths in their last prep race. They fared a little worse against their prior conquerors having only reversed the order of finish 28 times in 71 rematches.
There isn't an easy answer on this one, at least not based on the statistics. It all comes down to the individuals.
I know the Breeders' Cup has fooled around with gimmick head to head wagers in the past but I wonder if the Derby couldn't get some interest in offering the same thing. Results are not as predictable as you'd think. Spanish Chestnut beating Bandini in the Derby still sounds like an impossible result years after the fact.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
Public Perception
Most handicappers try to make their money playing against the public. Everyone knows that the favorite wins about 30% of the time, that means all the other races give the bettor a chance to get a longer price. The general feeling is that the public is blind and ill informed, they simply lump onto the most obvious or hot horse. I've been looking over some stats and was surprised to find that the betting public has actually been a decent gauge of Derby talent over the years.
Consider a few of these numbers.
Horses that were 10/1 or more in their last prep went 46-1-2-1 in the Derby. The thought here is that by the time their last prep rolls around their quality should be clearly visible. Bettors don't usually ignore a quality horse in a prep race where usually no more than 3 quality horses are competing. Horses who are more than 10/1 may win the prep race in question but the public's original perception of their talent usually proves to be spot on as those last out longshots finish in the bottom half of the Derby field. Charismatic was the only longshot in a prep race to really get the public by surprise. He caught almost everyone by surprise.
68 of the 234 Derby entrants from 1996 to the present were favored in their final prep race. Those 68 horses accounted for 7 derby wins while the remaining 166 earned only 6 wins.
The so called "Big Four" prep races which has now turned into the "Big Six" with the Illinois Derby and Florida Derby have been dominated by favorites for more than a decade. There have been 63 renewals of these Big Six prep races since 1996 and an amazing 30 favorites have won. That's 47.6% for those without a calculator handy. The Illinois Derby was only included from 2002 to the present and the Florida Derby from 2005 to the present because prior to those years they weren't major final prep races.
The trend is clear, early in the spring lots of prep races have upsets since many horses come into their own as 3yo's and upstage the established 2yo form. By late spring the quality is more or less visible and favorites dominate the prep races. Even though longshots do pop up and win, most of them never amount to much in the Derby itself. The Derby is dominated by horses who were well backed in their last prep races.
It may be a statistical oddity but it is also interesting to note that horses who enter the Derby with three consecutive starting prices that have increased have done very poorly. The odds don't even have to be long, even a horse who was 4/1, 3/1 and 2/1 in his last three races counts. Horses with three increasing prices leading into the Derby have gone 51-0-2-4.
I don't think it's a terribly meaningful stat because there it's a huge stretch to claim that Point Given lost the Derby because his odds got increasingly longer as the preps went on. He was actually odds on in his last three races but his prices still increased each time. The only justification behind it is that it's a poor sign when a horse is increasingly ignored by the public as the races get tougher. The public often ignores the first class jump or two but if the horse has quality at some point the bettors will be backing them at the windows.
The point of all this is that you ought to focus on the favorites or at least those who were well backed in the final prep races. They're likely to be your keys to success in both the last preps and the Derby itself.
Consider a few of these numbers.
Horses that were 10/1 or more in their last prep went 46-1-2-1 in the Derby. The thought here is that by the time their last prep rolls around their quality should be clearly visible. Bettors don't usually ignore a quality horse in a prep race where usually no more than 3 quality horses are competing. Horses who are more than 10/1 may win the prep race in question but the public's original perception of their talent usually proves to be spot on as those last out longshots finish in the bottom half of the Derby field. Charismatic was the only longshot in a prep race to really get the public by surprise. He caught almost everyone by surprise.
68 of the 234 Derby entrants from 1996 to the present were favored in their final prep race. Those 68 horses accounted for 7 derby wins while the remaining 166 earned only 6 wins.
The so called "Big Four" prep races which has now turned into the "Big Six" with the Illinois Derby and Florida Derby have been dominated by favorites for more than a decade. There have been 63 renewals of these Big Six prep races since 1996 and an amazing 30 favorites have won. That's 47.6% for those without a calculator handy. The Illinois Derby was only included from 2002 to the present and the Florida Derby from 2005 to the present because prior to those years they weren't major final prep races.
The trend is clear, early in the spring lots of prep races have upsets since many horses come into their own as 3yo's and upstage the established 2yo form. By late spring the quality is more or less visible and favorites dominate the prep races. Even though longshots do pop up and win, most of them never amount to much in the Derby itself. The Derby is dominated by horses who were well backed in their last prep races.
It may be a statistical oddity but it is also interesting to note that horses who enter the Derby with three consecutive starting prices that have increased have done very poorly. The odds don't even have to be long, even a horse who was 4/1, 3/1 and 2/1 in his last three races counts. Horses with three increasing prices leading into the Derby have gone 51-0-2-4.
I don't think it's a terribly meaningful stat because there it's a huge stretch to claim that Point Given lost the Derby because his odds got increasingly longer as the preps went on. He was actually odds on in his last three races but his prices still increased each time. The only justification behind it is that it's a poor sign when a horse is increasingly ignored by the public as the races get tougher. The public often ignores the first class jump or two but if the horse has quality at some point the bettors will be backing them at the windows.
The point of all this is that you ought to focus on the favorites or at least those who were well backed in the final prep races. They're likely to be your keys to success in both the last preps and the Derby itself.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
The Final Round Begins
It's just about five weeks to the Derby and for the most part any race will be the contenders last pre-Derby race from here on out. The only real exception I see is for horses who don't do as well in the next two weeks. Connections might consider one last tilt in the Lexington but were talking about probably one horse at most who will run in the Derby having had more than one race in the final five weeks.
There are a ton of things to look for in final preps. Historically they have been the most important races. If the only racing you ever saw was the major preps over the next four weeks you'd still be just as well informed as anyone who had been watching every maiden since last June. I can't speak for everyone who follows the Derby Trail blow by blow but I do so primarily because I find it fun and interesting I don't live under the delusion that it gives me some great analytical advantage. If anything it could create harmful biases but once the final round rolls around I have to push aside all my feelings about who I like and what I have envisioned and just go with the facts as they are.
Here are a few key things to remember when evaluating final preps. All stats include only data from 1996 to the present.
A horse needs to be competitive in their final prep. Horses that finished out of the money in their last prep went 56-1-2-1 in the Derby. But more than just finishing top 3 they can't get blown away by the winner. Horses that were not at least within 3 lengths of the winner in their final prep went an amazing 91-0-4-2 in the Derby. As enamored as you may be with some late closer who made it into second or third behind a runaway winner the stats say it's best to leave those horses alone.
Horses need to close their final preps strongly. I look at closing fractions for the last 1/8th, 1/4 and 3/8th's of a mile. Interestingly enough horses that failed to run faster than the field average for all three of those splits went 119-1-7-5. Silver Charm was the only exception. 119 starters yielded only 1 winner while the 94 starters who did qualify with this angle accounted for 12 wins. Be careful not to get caught up with making arbitrary lines. Averages work well enough. Calculate the main track and synthetic track averages separately.
A lot of people think that Beyer Figures are too shaky to be measuring performances off of but it may surprise you to know that horses who regress by more than 2 Beyer points in their last prep went 66-1-3-2 in the Derby. Street Sense was the lone exception and he emerged from that wacky renewal of the Blue Grass stakes. For horses like I Want Revenge and Quality Road it means they need to run huge again and earn at least a 111 in their final preps to qualify for this angle. That's a really big task for both of them and I think these figures highlight the danger of peaking too soon.
It may seem narrow minded to force Derby contenders into the mold shaped by these four factors but the Derby is a very difficult race to win. As specific as some of this criteria seems none of these stats are that difficult for a good horse to achieve, they seem to tick off all the boxes as if by accident. If you find yourself stretching a line or making an excuse why a certain stat shouldn't apply you've probably been deluded into making a case for a horse that you should just leave alone.
There are a ton of things to look for in final preps. Historically they have been the most important races. If the only racing you ever saw was the major preps over the next four weeks you'd still be just as well informed as anyone who had been watching every maiden since last June. I can't speak for everyone who follows the Derby Trail blow by blow but I do so primarily because I find it fun and interesting I don't live under the delusion that it gives me some great analytical advantage. If anything it could create harmful biases but once the final round rolls around I have to push aside all my feelings about who I like and what I have envisioned and just go with the facts as they are.
Here are a few key things to remember when evaluating final preps. All stats include only data from 1996 to the present.
A horse needs to be competitive in their final prep. Horses that finished out of the money in their last prep went 56-1-2-1 in the Derby. But more than just finishing top 3 they can't get blown away by the winner. Horses that were not at least within 3 lengths of the winner in their final prep went an amazing 91-0-4-2 in the Derby. As enamored as you may be with some late closer who made it into second or third behind a runaway winner the stats say it's best to leave those horses alone.
Horses need to close their final preps strongly. I look at closing fractions for the last 1/8th, 1/4 and 3/8th's of a mile. Interestingly enough horses that failed to run faster than the field average for all three of those splits went 119-1-7-5. Silver Charm was the only exception. 119 starters yielded only 1 winner while the 94 starters who did qualify with this angle accounted for 12 wins. Be careful not to get caught up with making arbitrary lines. Averages work well enough. Calculate the main track and synthetic track averages separately.
A lot of people think that Beyer Figures are too shaky to be measuring performances off of but it may surprise you to know that horses who regress by more than 2 Beyer points in their last prep went 66-1-3-2 in the Derby. Street Sense was the lone exception and he emerged from that wacky renewal of the Blue Grass stakes. For horses like I Want Revenge and Quality Road it means they need to run huge again and earn at least a 111 in their final preps to qualify for this angle. That's a really big task for both of them and I think these figures highlight the danger of peaking too soon.
It may seem narrow minded to force Derby contenders into the mold shaped by these four factors but the Derby is a very difficult race to win. As specific as some of this criteria seems none of these stats are that difficult for a good horse to achieve, they seem to tick off all the boxes as if by accident. If you find yourself stretching a line or making an excuse why a certain stat shouldn't apply you've probably been deluded into making a case for a horse that you should just leave alone.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Les Dangereux
I think we've all noticed the trend of fewer prep races leading up to the Derby and even fewer career races in general but this year I think we've been blessed. I think it's significant that virtually all the major derby horses have already raced once this year. In past years we've had to wait until mid-March for horses like Street Sense, Favorite Trick, Lion Heart, Peace Rules and Point Given to make their debuts. Just last year the bookends of the Derby superfecta only made their 3yo debuts in March.
Although they may be few in number this year I wanted to highlight a group of horses that have statistically overachieved in the Derby for a number of years. They are the horses with two preps that earned triple digit figures in their seasonal debut.
There had been a stigma against horses with only two Derby prep races. it was said that no horse could win the Derby with just two races to get them into shape. Street Sense and Big Brown dispelled that myth in the past two years and hardly anyone has mentioned it since. Still horses with two prep races have only gone 40-2-4-1 in the Derby since 1996.
The most dangerous subset of those 40 was always the horses who managed to finish in the money in both of their prep races. Amazingly only 17 of the 40 horses finished in the frame in both starts. Those horses compiled a 17-2-3-1 record in the Derby. One could almost say that this was a positive angle to look out for.
Refine this group even further and you'll find that the best of these 17 horses earned high speed figures. It only makes sense as good horses tend to both earn high figures and finish placed in their races. Limit the criteria to horses who finished in the money in both preps and earned a triple digit Beyer Speed Figure in their first start as a 3yo and you get a group of 9 that went 2-2-1 in the Derby. More than half of these horses hit the frame. It's true that there has only been 9 of them in the last 13 years but it's definitely a group worth keeping a close eye on.
Terrain is the only stakes tested candidate I can think of right now who has a chance to fit the criteria. Of course the hard part is all in front of him, all he's managed so far is to have himself in a position to only have two preps. Affirmatif almost joined the ranks as a candidate with his 98 debut Beyer. Who knows, there still might be one or two out there. If someone makes it into the Derby and fits the bill it would be wise to consider them most dangerous indeed.
Although they may be few in number this year I wanted to highlight a group of horses that have statistically overachieved in the Derby for a number of years. They are the horses with two preps that earned triple digit figures in their seasonal debut.
There had been a stigma against horses with only two Derby prep races. it was said that no horse could win the Derby with just two races to get them into shape. Street Sense and Big Brown dispelled that myth in the past two years and hardly anyone has mentioned it since. Still horses with two prep races have only gone 40-2-4-1 in the Derby since 1996.
The most dangerous subset of those 40 was always the horses who managed to finish in the money in both of their prep races. Amazingly only 17 of the 40 horses finished in the frame in both starts. Those horses compiled a 17-2-3-1 record in the Derby. One could almost say that this was a positive angle to look out for.
Refine this group even further and you'll find that the best of these 17 horses earned high speed figures. It only makes sense as good horses tend to both earn high figures and finish placed in their races. Limit the criteria to horses who finished in the money in both preps and earned a triple digit Beyer Speed Figure in their first start as a 3yo and you get a group of 9 that went 2-2-1 in the Derby. More than half of these horses hit the frame. It's true that there has only been 9 of them in the last 13 years but it's definitely a group worth keeping a close eye on.
Terrain is the only stakes tested candidate I can think of right now who has a chance to fit the criteria. Of course the hard part is all in front of him, all he's managed so far is to have himself in a position to only have two preps. Affirmatif almost joined the ranks as a candidate with his 98 debut Beyer. Who knows, there still might be one or two out there. If someone makes it into the Derby and fits the bill it would be wise to consider them most dangerous indeed.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Prep Lite
Prep Lite, It's the new favorite brand of Cool-Aid for owners and trainers alike. Sure, some still buy the original recipe but the fresh new taste of Prep Lite is where it's at.
Back in 1996 the average number of career starts for a Derby entrant was 9.05. In 2008 that average had fallen to 6.30. The average number of prep races used to be 4.25 and for the first time last year it dipped below 3 (2008 - 2.90).
The interesting thing about the lack of starts for Derby entrants is that at one time the most inexperienced horses in the race were longshots. Sometimes they were well regarded but rarely did they perform up to expectations. If you took the 3 most inexperienced horses from each Derby from 2000-2006 only Congaree hit the frame.
Recently Prep Lite makers seem to have perfected the mixture because in just the last two years Big Brown, Hard Spun, Curlin and Denis of Cork were among the 3 most inexperienced horses in their Derby's. Inexperienced horses have gone from being under performing wild cards to legitimate contenders and favorites.
Last year even the guideline that required a pair of two turn preps was assaulted. Big Brown had two "route" prep races if you want to get technical because 8f on the dirt is considered to be a route but he only had one start around two turns and he was the first horse since 1996 to run well in the Derby after having just one start around two turns. The other 17 horses who tried it failed to make it into the top 3. Among them were Bellamy Road, Showing Up, Favorite Trick and Saarland.
It makes you wonder if perhaps trainers are getting their horses fitter with less prep work or if winning the Derby requires less stoutness than it once did. Remember that even if no horse in the Derby had a prep race someone would still have to win it. Perhaps the reduction in seasoning both in terms of a horses entire career and their prep schedule has resulted in an average lower level of fitness and thereby negating whatever disadvantage inexperience may bring. It's just a theory but in the last 5 years the average Beyer Speed figure earned while winning the Derby was 107.4. In the two 5 year periods prior to that it was 111 and 110.8. Make of that what you will.
Another stat opposing the fresh faces this year is for horses who failed to run a two turn race before March of their three year old season. Those horses have gone 31-1-2-2 in the Derby. Silver Charm was the one horse who defied the odds. He had a pair of two turn preps but never went around two turns until March in the San Felipe. The entire career of horses is taken into account so it would be entrants like Imperial Council and Quality Road who get included not Big Brown last year who had run a two turn race as a juvenile.
This year those guidelines will be tested once again with at least Quality Road and Theregoesjojo likely to have just one two turn prep before the Derby and the lightly raced Dunkirk, Imperial Council and Mr. Fantasy getting some serious attention. It's a new world out there, one where convention is challenged and those who prefer to sip something full bodied are in danger of losing touch.
Back in 1996 the average number of career starts for a Derby entrant was 9.05. In 2008 that average had fallen to 6.30. The average number of prep races used to be 4.25 and for the first time last year it dipped below 3 (2008 - 2.90).
The interesting thing about the lack of starts for Derby entrants is that at one time the most inexperienced horses in the race were longshots. Sometimes they were well regarded but rarely did they perform up to expectations. If you took the 3 most inexperienced horses from each Derby from 2000-2006 only Congaree hit the frame.
Recently Prep Lite makers seem to have perfected the mixture because in just the last two years Big Brown, Hard Spun, Curlin and Denis of Cork were among the 3 most inexperienced horses in their Derby's. Inexperienced horses have gone from being under performing wild cards to legitimate contenders and favorites.
Last year even the guideline that required a pair of two turn preps was assaulted. Big Brown had two "route" prep races if you want to get technical because 8f on the dirt is considered to be a route but he only had one start around two turns and he was the first horse since 1996 to run well in the Derby after having just one start around two turns. The other 17 horses who tried it failed to make it into the top 3. Among them were Bellamy Road, Showing Up, Favorite Trick and Saarland.
It makes you wonder if perhaps trainers are getting their horses fitter with less prep work or if winning the Derby requires less stoutness than it once did. Remember that even if no horse in the Derby had a prep race someone would still have to win it. Perhaps the reduction in seasoning both in terms of a horses entire career and their prep schedule has resulted in an average lower level of fitness and thereby negating whatever disadvantage inexperience may bring. It's just a theory but in the last 5 years the average Beyer Speed figure earned while winning the Derby was 107.4. In the two 5 year periods prior to that it was 111 and 110.8. Make of that what you will.
Another stat opposing the fresh faces this year is for horses who failed to run a two turn race before March of their three year old season. Those horses have gone 31-1-2-2 in the Derby. Silver Charm was the one horse who defied the odds. He had a pair of two turn preps but never went around two turns until March in the San Felipe. The entire career of horses is taken into account so it would be entrants like Imperial Council and Quality Road who get included not Big Brown last year who had run a two turn race as a juvenile.
This year those guidelines will be tested once again with at least Quality Road and Theregoesjojo likely to have just one two turn prep before the Derby and the lightly raced Dunkirk, Imperial Council and Mr. Fantasy getting some serious attention. It's a new world out there, one where convention is challenged and those who prefer to sip something full bodied are in danger of losing touch.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Experience
Experience is a tricky thing. As much as we like to make rules about what horses can or cannot do based on their experience the truth of the matter is that a horse need not experience something fully in order to excel at it. We see that all the time with first time starters that blow their rivals off the track.
The big "rule" that people are pondering this year is the "curse of Apollo". Going all the way back to 1882 no horse has won the Derby without racing as a 2yo. Many horses have tried including 10 in the last decade. Curlin managed the best of the recent competitors with a non-threatening third but with the way the modern thoroughbred is trained do we really think it matters if a horse ran last August? Does that really help their Derby chances?
If a trainer can't get enough fitness and the proper experiences into his horse during the spring then the horse likely shouldn't be running.
So does any experience matter? The experience I demand from my Derby selections is that they've faced large fields. The field size is one of the most difficult obstacles for Derby horses to overcome. No horse from 1996 to the present has won the Derby without first facing a field of at least 10. These horses weren't a bunch of longshots either. Horses like War Chant, Louis Quatorze, Halory Hunter, Curlin and Millennium Wind all succumbed to this factor. Many of them specifically had difficulty negotiating the traffic.
Another bit of experience I like to see is that horses have attempted stakes company at 9f. You might be surprised to learn that 17 horses have tried to win the Derby without a stakes prep at 9f. Only Eight Belles got anywhere close and even she didn't threaten the winner. I think going long at least once against good horses gets a horse battle ready.
If you combined these two experience factors and tossed every horse who violated them you'd have removed 50 Derby losers from contention. That's 21% of the total number of Derby starters. Not surprisingly many of the horses who failed to race as 2yo's also missed out on one of these experience factors but I feel much better banking on a statistic that has some merit instead of some old curse. One of these days an unraced 2yo will win the Derby. The first four months of the year is more than sufficient to get a horse ready as long as a trainer is getting the right kind of preps into a horse.
The big "rule" that people are pondering this year is the "curse of Apollo". Going all the way back to 1882 no horse has won the Derby without racing as a 2yo. Many horses have tried including 10 in the last decade. Curlin managed the best of the recent competitors with a non-threatening third but with the way the modern thoroughbred is trained do we really think it matters if a horse ran last August? Does that really help their Derby chances?
If a trainer can't get enough fitness and the proper experiences into his horse during the spring then the horse likely shouldn't be running.
So does any experience matter? The experience I demand from my Derby selections is that they've faced large fields. The field size is one of the most difficult obstacles for Derby horses to overcome. No horse from 1996 to the present has won the Derby without first facing a field of at least 10. These horses weren't a bunch of longshots either. Horses like War Chant, Louis Quatorze, Halory Hunter, Curlin and Millennium Wind all succumbed to this factor. Many of them specifically had difficulty negotiating the traffic.
Another bit of experience I like to see is that horses have attempted stakes company at 9f. You might be surprised to learn that 17 horses have tried to win the Derby without a stakes prep at 9f. Only Eight Belles got anywhere close and even she didn't threaten the winner. I think going long at least once against good horses gets a horse battle ready.
If you combined these two experience factors and tossed every horse who violated them you'd have removed 50 Derby losers from contention. That's 21% of the total number of Derby starters. Not surprisingly many of the horses who failed to race as 2yo's also missed out on one of these experience factors but I feel much better banking on a statistic that has some merit instead of some old curse. One of these days an unraced 2yo will win the Derby. The first four months of the year is more than sufficient to get a horse ready as long as a trainer is getting the right kind of preps into a horse.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
So Far, So Good
In most years a lot of discussion about the Derby trail is linked with the Beyer Speed Figures earned by the entrants. Speed is an undeniably important part of winning any race. The winner virtually always comes from one of the 4 or 5 fastest horses on paper.
There is always conjecture about what kind of figure it will take to win the Derby. I've said it many times and I'll say it again. Arbitrary numbers like 108 or 105 aren't good lines to draw in the sand because each horse only needs to beat the ones they're facing. If no horse in the race can run a 108 then the winner will likely win with a figure lower than 108. Always look at averages instead of single arbitrary figures.
Lately races like the Derby and it's preps seem to be earning lower and lower figures with each passing year. At one point in past years it was not unusual to see 5 or 6 horses in the race with 108+ figures. In the last 3 years we've seen only 6 horses total who have earned a 108+ Beyer Speed figure prior to the Derby. Bob Black Jack didn't even earn his 109 in a route race.
The crop this year actually looks pretty fast compared to recent years so perhaps we'll see a return to speed like that. Here are the average winning Beyer figures received for every route prep race run in January and February for the last five years.
2009 - 92.25
2008 - 90.61
2007 - 91.86
2006 - 96
2005 - 90.92
As you can see the Jan-Feb preps run this year have been faster on average than most of the recent years. 2006, the year of Barbaro, Brother Derek, Sweetnorthernsaint and Lawyer Ron, is the only season that is proving to be faster at this stage. This is definitely the fastest season of the synthetic track era.
Is it worrisome that only two horses, General Quarters and Old Fashioned, have ever earned a triple digit Beyer Figure going two turns? Not really, in the last five years there have been 64 separate performances by Derby entrants that have received 100+ Beyer Figures (two turn races only) and only 15 of them were achieved by this point in the season. These figures include two year old racing as well.
The vast, VAST majority of time big performances by Derby entrants come in March and April. A horses last two starts before the Derby are the only ones that really matter. Everything else just serves to get them to that point. So for this crop I'd say don't worry about Old Fashioned's latest low figure or the fact that Friesan Fire has been good but not brilliant. It's so far, so good and the really good ones will prove themselves in their next two starts.
There is always conjecture about what kind of figure it will take to win the Derby. I've said it many times and I'll say it again. Arbitrary numbers like 108 or 105 aren't good lines to draw in the sand because each horse only needs to beat the ones they're facing. If no horse in the race can run a 108 then the winner will likely win with a figure lower than 108. Always look at averages instead of single arbitrary figures.
Lately races like the Derby and it's preps seem to be earning lower and lower figures with each passing year. At one point in past years it was not unusual to see 5 or 6 horses in the race with 108+ figures. In the last 3 years we've seen only 6 horses total who have earned a 108+ Beyer Speed figure prior to the Derby. Bob Black Jack didn't even earn his 109 in a route race.
The crop this year actually looks pretty fast compared to recent years so perhaps we'll see a return to speed like that. Here are the average winning Beyer figures received for every route prep race run in January and February for the last five years.
2009 - 92.25
2008 - 90.61
2007 - 91.86
2006 - 96
2005 - 90.92
As you can see the Jan-Feb preps run this year have been faster on average than most of the recent years. 2006, the year of Barbaro, Brother Derek, Sweetnorthernsaint and Lawyer Ron, is the only season that is proving to be faster at this stage. This is definitely the fastest season of the synthetic track era.
Is it worrisome that only two horses, General Quarters and Old Fashioned, have ever earned a triple digit Beyer Figure going two turns? Not really, in the last five years there have been 64 separate performances by Derby entrants that have received 100+ Beyer Figures (two turn races only) and only 15 of them were achieved by this point in the season. These figures include two year old racing as well.
The vast, VAST majority of time big performances by Derby entrants come in March and April. A horses last two starts before the Derby are the only ones that really matter. Everything else just serves to get them to that point. So for this crop I'd say don't worry about Old Fashioned's latest low figure or the fact that Friesan Fire has been good but not brilliant. It's so far, so good and the really good ones will prove themselves in their next two starts.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Silly Stats
You have to love the sheer number of statistics and trends you can come up with for the Derby. Some of them are fluky, some of them weird and some are just plain misleading. I find looking at the numbers fun even if many of them take you away from horses you should be considering. Here are a few random stats for you to enjoy before disregarding completely.
Rookie Derby trainers have won 5 of the last 6 Kentucky Derbies. Every year we focus in on the top two year olds from the Pletcher, Baffert and Zito barns but since 2003 the Derby has been all about first timers getting into the limelight. Derby rookies have brought 33 horses to the derby in the last 6 runnings and have walked away with 5 wins and another 5 top three placings. The only veteran trainer to win a Derby since 2003 was Carl Nafzger whose Street Sense denied Hard Spun who just happened to be trained by a Derby rookie.
I generally support any move a trainer makes that improves a horse but it would seem like making equipment changes on the TC trail is an odd negative. From 1996 to the present there has been 32 horses who had blinkers either added or removed sometime during their three year old campaign. None of them won and only three even managed to hit the board!
I live in Canada and right now in mid-February I wish I lived somewhere warmer like California or Florida. Some Derby horses agree with me. Derby entrants that were based in Kentucky or New York during the first two wintry months of the year are 12-0-0-1 in the Derby since 1996.
Can a horse be too good for the Derby? Horses who have earned four or more triple digit Beyer Speed figures prior to the Derby have a shocking 15-0-1-0 record. The only horse who hit the frame was Captain Bodgit. There were a lot of well backed horses on that list as well.
The last of our silly stats for the week has to do with the final odds for the Derby entrants in their preps. Apparently it's a bad sign if the bettors like you less as the Derby trail goes on because horses with three increasing final odds going into the Derby are 51-0-2-4. That's right, 51 horses and no winners. Who knew the public was so sharp?
Rookie Derby trainers have won 5 of the last 6 Kentucky Derbies. Every year we focus in on the top two year olds from the Pletcher, Baffert and Zito barns but since 2003 the Derby has been all about first timers getting into the limelight. Derby rookies have brought 33 horses to the derby in the last 6 runnings and have walked away with 5 wins and another 5 top three placings. The only veteran trainer to win a Derby since 2003 was Carl Nafzger whose Street Sense denied Hard Spun who just happened to be trained by a Derby rookie.
I generally support any move a trainer makes that improves a horse but it would seem like making equipment changes on the TC trail is an odd negative. From 1996 to the present there has been 32 horses who had blinkers either added or removed sometime during their three year old campaign. None of them won and only three even managed to hit the board!
I live in Canada and right now in mid-February I wish I lived somewhere warmer like California or Florida. Some Derby horses agree with me. Derby entrants that were based in Kentucky or New York during the first two wintry months of the year are 12-0-0-1 in the Derby since 1996.
Can a horse be too good for the Derby? Horses who have earned four or more triple digit Beyer Speed figures prior to the Derby have a shocking 15-0-1-0 record. The only horse who hit the frame was Captain Bodgit. There were a lot of well backed horses on that list as well.
The last of our silly stats for the week has to do with the final odds for the Derby entrants in their preps. Apparently it's a bad sign if the bettors like you less as the Derby trail goes on because horses with three increasing final odds going into the Derby are 51-0-2-4. That's right, 51 horses and no winners. Who knew the public was so sharp?
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
The Tactics Of Speed
So much of my focus on the Derby Trail is centered around speed. If you can answer the question "are they fast enough?" with an affirmative nod than you've come a long way in determining the likely winner.
Speed is about more than just numbers though. In determining a horses capability for speed one must also consider the position they put themselves in races. The Derby is run on traditional dirt and traditional dirt has always favored speed, not high Beyer figures, but early speed.
You'll hear me mention it over and over. I want horses with tactical speed not plodders. What I mean by tactical speed is horses who have enough speed to be in a contending position when the real running starts. A lot of talented horses routinely leave themselves too much to do. In the preps you get races where the pace falls apart or you have small fields that are easy to maneuver through and these late closers don't get punished. In the Derby they do.
I know certain exceptions are likely springing to mind and you're recalling the Derby stretch runs of Street Sense, Giacomo or Grindstone. These horses are actually not exceptions, they are in fact the reason why you should never back a plodder. I'll get back to this after defining the term plodder a little better.
I'm not referring to horses who are at the back of the pack in the first quarter mile I'm referring to the horses who are still many lengths back when they enter the stretch. It's not that easy to make up significant ground in the stretch and a horse needs to show that they have enough speed to get in a place they can win from. One way you can attempt to quantify this factor is to look at a horses position in the second last call in the past performances. Horses who failed to be in the top two places in that second last call in either of their last two prep races have a terrible 65-0-3-4 record in the Derby since 1996. 65 horses and no winners, in fact even the 7 horses who managed to run in the money were well beaten, they just clunked up and managed to beat everyone else without threatening the winner.
The stats are no kinder if you look at horses who won a two turn prep race coming from well back. Derby entrants who won a two turn prep race without being first or second at the 1/8th pole are 31-0-2-4.
The reason why late runners have such a hard time in the Derby is because there are late runners in the race who have already proven that they have tactical speed. Street Sense, Giacomo, Fusaichi Pegasus, Monarchos and all the other Derby winners who won from off the pace had demonstrated in a prep race that they had the speed to get in contention early. What that means is that even if they're asked to come from well out of it they're getting first run on the real plodders like Jazil, Impeachment, Invisible Ink and Tiago. Those horses can, and did, run well in the Derby but their lack of speed meant that the winners had already won the race by the time they got going.
Plodders don't win a race like the Derby specifically because of the presence of speedier closers. Any pace scenario that would favor such a late runner also favors closers with better tactical speed. They get by in the preps because the fields are lower quality. When the pace collapses it's easier to swallow up the competition. They attract fans as well because big late moves are eye catching and we think that with added distance their late kicks will have more venom. The opposite is true, it's easier to close in shorter races.
When evaluating speed don't just look at the figures. Look for those horses who get themselves in positions that they can consistently win from. Tactical speed is every bit as important as a nice triple digit Beyer.
Speed is about more than just numbers though. In determining a horses capability for speed one must also consider the position they put themselves in races. The Derby is run on traditional dirt and traditional dirt has always favored speed, not high Beyer figures, but early speed.
You'll hear me mention it over and over. I want horses with tactical speed not plodders. What I mean by tactical speed is horses who have enough speed to be in a contending position when the real running starts. A lot of talented horses routinely leave themselves too much to do. In the preps you get races where the pace falls apart or you have small fields that are easy to maneuver through and these late closers don't get punished. In the Derby they do.
I know certain exceptions are likely springing to mind and you're recalling the Derby stretch runs of Street Sense, Giacomo or Grindstone. These horses are actually not exceptions, they are in fact the reason why you should never back a plodder. I'll get back to this after defining the term plodder a little better.
I'm not referring to horses who are at the back of the pack in the first quarter mile I'm referring to the horses who are still many lengths back when they enter the stretch. It's not that easy to make up significant ground in the stretch and a horse needs to show that they have enough speed to get in a place they can win from. One way you can attempt to quantify this factor is to look at a horses position in the second last call in the past performances. Horses who failed to be in the top two places in that second last call in either of their last two prep races have a terrible 65-0-3-4 record in the Derby since 1996. 65 horses and no winners, in fact even the 7 horses who managed to run in the money were well beaten, they just clunked up and managed to beat everyone else without threatening the winner.
The stats are no kinder if you look at horses who won a two turn prep race coming from well back. Derby entrants who won a two turn prep race without being first or second at the 1/8th pole are 31-0-2-4.
The reason why late runners have such a hard time in the Derby is because there are late runners in the race who have already proven that they have tactical speed. Street Sense, Giacomo, Fusaichi Pegasus, Monarchos and all the other Derby winners who won from off the pace had demonstrated in a prep race that they had the speed to get in contention early. What that means is that even if they're asked to come from well out of it they're getting first run on the real plodders like Jazil, Impeachment, Invisible Ink and Tiago. Those horses can, and did, run well in the Derby but their lack of speed meant that the winners had already won the race by the time they got going.
Plodders don't win a race like the Derby specifically because of the presence of speedier closers. Any pace scenario that would favor such a late runner also favors closers with better tactical speed. They get by in the preps because the fields are lower quality. When the pace collapses it's easier to swallow up the competition. They attract fans as well because big late moves are eye catching and we think that with added distance their late kicks will have more venom. The opposite is true, it's easier to close in shorter races.
When evaluating speed don't just look at the figures. Look for those horses who get themselves in positions that they can consistently win from. Tactical speed is every bit as important as a nice triple digit Beyer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)