Workout analysis

[joeydb]

I'm sure you guys have touched on this at some time, but I'll ask the question:

Do you guys know of any way to get a Beyer number, or maybe I should say a Beyer equivalent, of a workout time? Most of my handicapping is numerically based, and I can't compare a time to a Beyer figure. Since apparently the guys who compute the figures don't do them for workouts, I need an equation I can apply on my own to convert workouts to approximate speed figures.

A workout is different than a race of course, and I'm not saying that the same amount of energy is used, but even for a "ballpark" comparison this might be helpful.

(Sorry guys...just noticed I posted in "Selections", meant to put in the "Paddock" since this is kind of a general question)

Thanks,
Joe

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by joeydb

I'm sure you guys have touched on this at some time, but I'll ask the question:

Do you guys know of any way to get a Beyer number, or maybe I should say a Beyer equivalent, of a workout time? Most of my handicapping is numerically based, and I can't compare a time to a Beyer figure. Since apparently the guys who compute the figures don't do them for workouts, I need an equation I can apply on my own to convert workouts to approximate speed figures.

A workout is different than a race of course, and I'm not saying that the same amount of energy is used, but even for a "ballpark" comparison this might be helpful.

(Sorry guys...just noticed I posted in "Selections", meant to put in the "Paddock" since this is kind of a general question)

Thanks,
Joe

One thing you'll never be able to address quantifiably is how fast the workout was supposed to be. The only time I've ever seen Chuck get upset at workouts is when the horse went too fast. So if a trainer gives directions to the rider to go 102.00 and another trainer tells the rider to blow him out in 59.0, is one horse "faster" than another? Not really...that's why workouts are a very difficult handicapping tool.

[joeydb]

That makes sense. I guess I'm looking for something numerical to use for first time starters or maidens with short records. It's very frustrating to not be able to analyze the chances of firsters in a leg of the pick 6. I'm not good with bloodlines and in any case I couldn't get a good "odds" number from that.

[northeastbound123]

you may find more value in the dates of the works and spacing, can sometimes see a trainers intent as much as 42 days back

[TheSpyder]

Don't look at workouts for numbers, unless there's an unusually fast one. Some times the workout jock is 200 lbs., sometimes they are going 6 wide, sometimes they are working to a time. You're wasting you time looking at numbers.

[NTamm1215]

Workout viewing and publishing reports is a cottage industry in Southern California as a number of guys have made (part of) their living doing it. I know a lot of folks out there take it very seriously and a good bit of information is put into each report.

That being said, I'm glad that there are a lot of reports getting published about the West Coast Derby hopefuls at that just draws more attention towards each one.

NT

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by joeydb

That makes sense. I guess I'm looking for something numerical to use for first time starters or maidens with short records. It's very frustrating to not be able to analyze the chances of firsters in a leg of the pick 6. I'm not good with bloodlines and in any case I couldn't get a good "odds" number from that.

Regarding maidens, I look for good works from the gate followed by a strong, but not necessarily a bullet breeze, afterwards. When you're speaking two year olds, I do think seeing the horse in the paddock beforehand is important...or at least works for me.

[cakes44]

If you are basing any bets on workout times of maidens, you will NEVER catch an Asmussen first-timer, and he is lethal first time out, especially on dirt. You also won't get anything out of Baffert, because you'd think every single one of his first-timers is going to debut like Roman Ruler. It goes both ways.

I don't bet too many races with a bunch of firsters because it's such a guessing game, and a game of who you know as much as what you know, but I definitely look at spacing and consistency more than any times of workouts.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by GBBob

One thing you'll never be able to address quantifiably is how fast the workout was supposed to be. The only time I've ever seen Chuck get upset at workouts is when the horse went too fast. So if a trainer gives directions to the rider to go 102.00 and another trainer tells the rider to blow him out in 59.0, is one horse "faster" than another? Not really...that's why workouts are a very difficult handicapping tool.

The best advice in this thread.

Automatically assuming fast workouts are better than slower workouts, even with first-time starters, is a bad handicapping strategy. It's much more productive to try to learn trainers' patterns with their workouts. Some trainers (Wesley Ward, Bob Baffert come to mind) often work their horses much quicker than others (Steve Asmussen, Bill Mott). It's also more useful to pay attention to length and spacing of workouts when it comes to first-timers than times.

I for one wish they started publishing "workout figures" based on times, but only so I could bet against horses that had big A.M. figs.

[Payson Dave]

time only counts when you are in jail

[jrajf]

I used to love betting hores that worked on the turf and were racing on dirt..kind of a give away that they were "conditioning"..somewhat arcan and less nunerous now but they are still there..dabbling with the sythentic to dirt angle now and havent really caught anything..yet

[jrajf]

works for horses too

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

i think that works are usefull in some cases. they tell a story about what the horse is doing . in the case of firsters its pretty easy to tell who has the right stuff. works for some trainers are nothing to write home about but in other cases you can see what they are doing. these must be at places where the
drf clockers are present..not phone in times as in some prvt training centers.

[gamblin4ever]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

Regarding maidens, I look for good works from the gate followed by a strong, but not necessarily a bullet breeze, afterwards. When you're speaking two year olds, I do think seeing the horse in the paddock beforehand is important...or at least works for me.

What times would be considered strong on workouts?

I know some trainers work slow anyways(Assmusen),but not sure about times for strong workouts

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by gamblin4ever

What times would be considered strong on workouts?

I know some trainers work slow anyways(Assmusen),but not sure about times for strong workouts

Strong, probably wasn't the right word, but I do personally like to know they can work from the gate fairly quickly. I look for patterns within the horses works and what is typical of the trainer.

[GBBob]

Originally Posted by gamblin4ever

What times would be considered strong on workouts?

I know some trainers work slow anyways(Assmusen),but not sure about times for strong workouts

Just go to DRF.com, then Entries, then workouts. Pick a few good tracks and go from there to see the range of times each day

[gamblin4ever]

thanks sightseek and GBBob

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

note westcoast tracks have much faster works..