Chapter 11 - Time Waits For No Man-Or Horse Either

Using "speed" to help you pick winners.

Of all the major variables, the one respected most by the majority of players and selectors is time.

In a way, one of the premises upon which racing was built involves time, for the rallying cry of sportsmen and gentlemen down through several hundreds of years has been: "Racing will improve the breed of horses." It follows then that the surest way to tell if the horse has responded to man's noblest efforts in his behalf and whether he has improved is to check his racing time.

But for the average two-buck bettor, the conception of time does not extend much beyond the span between the two races that make up the daily double. So to him, time means the horse's time in the present. History does not pay off at the finish line. Time that may come in the future from more improvement is too nebulous for the player to handicap it.

Actually, when the player is talking about time he means time as converted into speed. Obviously, if three horses in one race should set a new track record, the bettor's chief interest in time or speed would still be whether the horse carrying his $2 got down ahead of the other two record breakers. If his horse set a track record but still was behind two other horses, the fan has lost $2. He doesn't find much consolation on the way home by continually reminding himself that his horse's race was good enough to crack a track mark.

Despite its limitations, time (which it must be kept in mind is usually converted into speed) is relied upon heavily by many selectors and players. The Racing Form recognizes time in several forms. Above the past performances for each race, the Form prints the best time made by each entry for the distance he is running today. It also lists in the past performances, a speed rating for each horse.

A check shows that neither figure alone can be played profitably. That is, the player who selects the horse which made the best time at today's distance finds he cannot win on a flat play over any reasonable period. Nor will the highest speed rating bring him any consistent profits. In System No. 3, Chapter 21, note that speed can be used profitably when confined to particular types of races.

There are several obvious reasons that prevent speed alone from being the answer to the player's dreams and ambitions. One reason can be understood readily by reference to other sports. The bowler who tonight rolls a perfect score of 300 may not roll more than 200 tomorrow night.

Quite often, the hero of the World Series is a player who got little space in advance publicity. The stars, who monopolized the news columns, frequently wind up the Series as goats or as just some more players.

An athlete in any sport may suddenly catch fire one day and excel everything he ever had done. A .200 hitter might suddenly blossom out and hit the ball over the fence in three successive times at bat. Or the poor fielder may dart back to the fence, reach up with one hand and spear a potential homer, and rifle the ball back to the infield in time to catch a man trying to race home from third base. The next day the .200 hitter is back to his mediocre average, and the sensational fielder drops one that comes right into his hands.

Thus, a horse's best time may represent his one, big all-out effort which he never again may duplicate. Then, too, his best time at today's distance may have been several months to a year or more ago. Only an optimist expects him to run back to that time today.

Since horses do not keep scrap books nor sign autograph cards, they are little interested in bettering their own mark each time they run. The fan isn't interested either as long as the horse's speed today is slightly faster than the next fastest horse in the race.

The failure of horses to run back to their best speed can be seen graphically by checking horses which set new track records. Often, these horses will have shown only fair or good performances. Then one day, the horse lights out from the barrier and ends up with a new track record.

A casual study of the past performances of this animal indicates that at last he has arrived at peak form. Four or five days later, he may be entered at about the same distance and weight. The form players load up and then are shocked when the horse runs only a fair and sometimes even a dismal race

Several players, however, have profited by this situation. Instead of watching the horse that set the record, they keep their eyes on the horses that ran second and third and sometimes fourth or fifth if these horses were within a length of the winner at the finish. These horses will show a pretty reasonable consistency in winning after they have run close behind a track record breaker.The second obvious reason why time alone is not a magic key to profits is that time (or speed) is not as important in itself as the manner in which it was done. Competition may have spurred the horse onward that day. Or track conditions may have favored him.

Some horses are called "morning glories" because they perform brilliantly in early morning workouts but behave poorly in actual racing. Other horses like to loaf along during a race and exert only enough energy to win.

The great Exterminator was such a loafing horse. Early in his career, he got into his head that the idea of racing was not to set track records but just to beat the other horses. Once he was in front, he saw no sense in exerting himself just so some track statistician could put down a new record figure.

When he was trailing, he came from behind with a whirlwind rush, but then he slowed down just enough to keep his lead. As a result, Exterminator's record, as written down in the books, is far less exciting than his actual performances out on the track.

There are many such horses or at least horses with that tendency to exert themselves only as necessary. Speed ratings mean little in figuring these types of horses.

The difference in tracks is another reason that suggests caution in the emphasis upon time. The banking of the curves, the sharpness of the runs, the length of the stretch where the real racing is done, the nature of the soil and many other factors differ from track to track. Six furlongs in 1:10 at one track may be only fair time for another track.

Many selectors (or handicappers) have endeavored to reduce all speed to a common denominator by devising formulas which will compensate for all track variations. What they are trying to do is to arrive at a weighted mathematical method by which six furlongs at any one track can be fitted to any other particular track for the purpose of comparing horses entered in a particular race.

Let's assume that at Track A today, eight horses are entered in a six-furlong race. All eight horses are running for the first time at Track A. The eight raced last time on eight different tracks, and their times ranged from 1:11 to 1:12 1/ 5.

Obviously, such a scrambled field cannot be compared unless we devise some "yardstick" by which to measure them. The attempted measurement actually is not horse with horse but horse with track. The idea is to see what may be expected today of each other horse on Track A.

The simplest way to proceed is to check several hundred six-furlong races at each track, grouping together as many variables as can be done logically. Thus, if possible, we might check separately all six-furlong races for three-year-olds, races at weight for scale, etc. Track conditions also should be noted.

What we want to do is to strike an "average" time for six furlongs although here again the "mean" time might be better. The check may finally arrive at the figure 1:11 which can be called the standard time for six furlongs at that track. Naturally, horses at that track at times will do better than 1:11 and at times will do worse. Here again we don't worry about individual races but rather about a series of enough races that can establish a standard.

Each track is checked in the same manner and, of course, all distances besides six furlongs also are checked to get standards for them. When this work is finished, we have a standard for each track. (Of course, all this compilation has been done by the professionals and track time standards are quoted in the Past Performance Charts in the racing papers.)

With these standards, it is possible to compare tracks. If the standard at Track A is 1:11 and at Track B it is 1:11 2/5, we can assume that Track B is two-fifths of a second slower than Track A.

A horse which ran the last time on Track A could be figured today for Track B by adding two-fifths to the time he made the last time. If he ran six furlongs last time on Track A in 1:11 2/5, we would expect that his time today on Track B would be at least 1:11 4/5. That is the speed rating we would use today on Track B to compare him with the other entries.

Conversely, if a Track B horse went to Track A we would subtract two-fifths from his last time to calculate his possible time today on Track A. In the race we have cited—the race with eight horses, all of which ran last time on a different track—we would have to know the standards for those tracks and then add or subtract in order to transform the time on those tracks to the possible times that can be expected today.

This elaborate chart of standards, once arrived at, must be kept up to date because tracks change. The track may be re-surfaced which may change times or its curves may be banked still further or its stretches may be graded slightly differently.

Sometimes a better class of horses will get the standard out of kilter. A new track especially, facing competition from other tracks, may be able to attract only a mediocre crop of horses for its first year or two. Gradually, the class of horses may become better as owners get to like the new track or get miffed at the old track where they customarily race at that time of year.

The change-over from fall to winter racing and from winter to spring also may get the standards out of kilter. For a number of years fans, who noted good but not winning efforts of horses on northern tracks in the fall, saw those horses romp home at big mutuels on their first races in the South, provided there was not more than 10 days or two weeks between that race in the North and the race down in Dixie.

On the other hand, the same situation has prevailed many times in the change-over from winter to spring. A horse which makes a good but not necessarily a winning effort on a southern track usually gives a good account of himself in his first northern outing, provided, too, that the northern race is run within 10 days or two weeks.

Other selectors and handicappers have tried to arrive at standards by other methods. Some base it on the track records. They assume that if Track A record is 1:10 and Track B record is 1:11, that A is a full second faster.

For general comparisons, this method of setting standards may be fairly satisfactory, but it doesn't lend itself to preciseness or exactness. For the 1:10 record at Track A may have been the result of a "fluke." For example, one small eastern track is near the state of a prominent horse farm owned by a woman. Although her stable is too high-class to race at the small track, she does send one of her horses over each meet just as a goodwill gesture to her neighbors. Although she chooses only an average horse from her stable, it still is better than most entries at that small track; and three of the track records were set by her horses. These records are worthless as standards since they were not set by the class of horses that ordinarily run at that track.

Another defect in such standards is a fact already discussed. Some horses run best only when pressed. In fact, most racing is horse against horse and not horse against time. The jockey is far more concerned about getting out in front and keeping on the wing than he is about what the ultimate time will be at the finish. Of course, the jockey is pleased if the horse should set a track record, but the thing he wants first is to win.

Some track records endure for years which leads to a suspicion that they were set amid unusual circumstances. They may have been set by "super" horses, or by horses which made a "super" effort that day.

Selectors and handicappers generally figure that one-fifth of a second is equivalent to one length. Racing time is divided by fifths of a second merely for convenience.

Technically, therefore, it should be possible on the basis of standards for each track to predict how many lengths a horse will be behind or in front of another horse in today*s race. Here again some caution must be used. The two horses must be relatively of the same class and be racing at their best distance.

Even the lengths shown in race result charts must be used with caution. Horse A wins today and the chart shows at the finish he was four lengths ahead of Horse B. That may prove that Horse A is four lengths better than Horse B or four-fifths of a second faster.

But a horse is a valuable piece of animal flesh. A jockey who sees that he has no chance of winning doesn't beat his horse to death to get him up another length or two just to make some selector's method turn out right. Many times the chart will say: "Horse B was not persevered with after being knocked out of the contention."

Unfortunately, past performances do not give this detailed information about what happened in the horse's last race. Only the chart gives some evaluation of his effort. If the player takes the time and trouble to look up the chart on each horse's last race he will be in a much better position to determine how much emphasis to place today upon time or beaten lengths.

Players have done well by heeding the comments in the result charts. A horse is worth playing in his next outing if the chart makes such comment as: "was going good until jostled at the stretch turn," "came with a burst when he finally found racing room on the outside," ©tc. What the player is looking for, in other words, is comment that indicates the horse lost not because of some fault of his own but because of a bad ride, bad breaks, etc.

Touts and tipsters often boast that they have some inside news straight from the horse's mouth. Often, they disclose that their docker caught the horse in a secret morning workout during which he blazed down the track like a comet.

Few tipsters employ dockers or anyone else except men to answer telephones, send wires and other chores to keep the "boiler factory" operating. Racing papers do employ dockers, and the average fan by buying a paper can see how each horse has been doing in recent workouts.

After all, the only way a trainer can tell if his horse is rounding into condition is to try him out. He can't race him in the barn or in the back yard. He must bring him out to the track where dockers can spot him.

The last three for four workouts of each horse are printed immediately below his performances for his last six, eight or more races. The player can profit by noting these workouts. The best betting risk is usually not the horse that was very good in his last workout but the one whose best time was in his next to last workout.

The reason lies in the trainees tactics. Let's assume three workouts are given for the horse and they read like this:

June 1,5/8, fast, 1:03 2/5; June 6, 5/8, fast, 1:02 1/5; June 8, 5/8, fast, 1:04.

Translated, it means that on June 1 the horse was worked at a distance of five-eighths of a mile and he ran it in one minute, 3 and two-fifths seconds. The track was fast. On June 6, he clipped off the same distance in much less time. On June 8, under the same conditions, his time was much slower.

Despite the horse's apparent falling off in form, the chances are that the player who reads between the lines will find the horse is sharp and ready for racing today— June 10.

The first workout listed (although undoubtedly the horse had a number of workouts in May) showed the horse was rounding to form. The next workout showed he was on edge—he had clipped off a fast five-eighths of a mile.

The trainer, satisfied that the horse was fit and ready, gave him a breeze on June 8 just to keep him in shape and limbered up. There is a good chance that in today's race the horse will run somewhere near that second workout.

A check shows that few horses win when their last workout was the best, especially if the workout time is sensational. In effect, the horse is being asked to give two consecutive "all-out" performances, and many horses, just like many human beings, are not capable of such sustained effort.

Time can help the player eliminate horses, especially if there are 10 or more entered in the race. Some of those horses will have no best effort that is less than two full seconds behind the time of four or five of the entires. Unless other conditions make them possible contenders, the player can dismiss them because there are many more chances of their losing than of winning.

The track's record time for the distance is published for each race with the Past Performance data in the racing papers. This figure enables a comparison with the time records of the horses going to the post. For the fans who look for record-breakers, here are the fastest runs in American Racing at some of the more popular distances'.

American Records At Popular Distances

A fast time, although it may not be a winning time, is one sign that the horse was pretty serious about his work. And horses develop habits the same as human beings. A horse that develops the habit of getting down to business and of always turning in a good effort is the one who will do most for the player over a long pull. And time is one factor in plotting such horses.

Thus, like all other selection factors, time must be considered. But even the horse must think it's foolish to put too much stress upon it.

And after all, the race is the thing—not a stop watch.

In using time as a basis for making selections, the player should make certain he knows exactly what that time means in terms of today's racing. He must know under what exact conditions the time was made by the horse. The player should consider these factors:

1. What does the result chart say about the race in which the time was set? (If the player does not have available the back copy of the racing paper which printed the result of the horse's last race he can get some evaluation by looking at the comment at the end of the line of each of the horse's past performances. Generally, there will be one or two words such as: "driving," "handily," "all out," "tired," "quit," etc. The comment also will indicate whether the time set a new track record.)

2. If the time is indicated as being a new track record, the player should give some thought to the likelihood that the effort took a lot out of the horse. Unless the horse is of top caliber there is little chance that he will run back to that form in his next race.

3. The time factor is uncertain if the comment is "driving," "all out," etc. for it indicates that the horse was giving his last ounce of energy. Such an effort, too, may take too much out of him.

4. Track conditions, of course, must be checked. A rather mediocre time still might be important if the track that day were even only slightly off.

5. If the best time of the horse was set in his first race following a long layoff it cannot be regarded too reliably.

Horses are like human beings. The first game of the season finds many golfers banging away in midsummer form. The excitement and eagerness of getting on the links again after a winter's layoff give many amateurs zest and freshness. Often the score of their first round of the sea son is better than they will make for a month or more to come.

6. The jockey cannot be overlooked. Although jockeys receive riding instructions from the trainer, the stables are less exact on lower-class horses. The trainer may tell the jockey to do the best possible. The jockey may like to hang off the pace and close with a rush. Or, the jockey may like to dart into the lead and hope the horse can withstand any late rushes of his rivals. The past performances indicate the success or failure of such tactics.

If the horse closed with a rush but didn't win, the jockey is likely to stir him up earlier in the race this time.

7. A horse which was pressing his rivals the whole distance is a better risk than one which took an early lead and lost or one which tried to close with a rush.

8. In checking workouts, the most recent workout is not the one which should be given the most weight. The next to the last workout is a more reliable indication of the horse's true form. For that is the one that told the trainer that the horse either is still dull or is now fit and ready.

And a distance of five-eighths of a mile is the best work out for checking. A horse which in his third last workout ran the five-eighths in 1:03 to 1:05 and then in his next to last workout covered the same distance in 1:01 to 1:02 merits careful study, especially if his very latest workout is the same or worse than his third to last workout.

These times indicate that in his third to last workout, the trainer had him rounding to shape. His next to last workout proved he now was ready. The latest workout was only for the purpose of keeping him on edge until racing today.

Racing papers also make comments on workouts. If the second last workout says the horse did the distance "breezing," or "handily," it gives the player one more sign that the animal is ready.

9. The class of horses against which the time was made also must be considered. Here again, however, the situation is somewhat complex. If the horse made good time running against $5,000 horses and today he is entered against $3,500 animals, his stock should go up.

For it showed he was making a game effort to match strides with the leaders although he may not have been equal to winning in that company. In this case, time is a fairly good gauge of his "gameness."

If his time were poor in such top company, it might mean the horse didn't exert himself when he realized that he was over-matched. Horses, like human beings, often lose their will to win if they constantly are made to race over their heads. It’s like a mid-80 golfer who starts to play with a professional. The amateur, knowing he has little chance of beating the professional, will have neither the will nor the zest that he would display against his own kind.

Sometimes, when such horses are dropped down in their own company, they fail to respond because they have picked up the "losing habit."

10. Finally, the cheaper the horse the less time becomes a factor. Cheaper horses are inferior for the simple reason that they cannot maintain consistent high performances. It takes longer to get them into shape and once brought to racing peak they cannot hold their form very long. Ten days is about the limit at which a poor horse can be expected to run at top form. But even when at top form, it is a gamble whether he will run two successive good races.

Are You Ready To Move Onto The Next Lesson? Click Here….