Chapter 14 - The Little Things That Count

The importance of age, distance, track conditions and jockeys in picking winners.

Time, weight and consistency are the "big three" of the variables that might reasonably be expected to be fashioned into some method for predicting probable winners.

The "minor variables" start out with age, distance, track conditions and trail away into jockey, temperament of both rider and horse, and other intangibles. A dozen players will have a dozen ideas on dealing with these minor variables.

Track Conditions

Some players, for example, ignore track conditions on the ground that if conditions change and the trainer still lets his horse run, he must believe the animal can put forth a good effort in the rough going. Like so many general principles, there is enough logic to it to make it work many times. On the other hand, a trainer is not always the best judge, no more than a mother is the best judge of what her child can do. Often it takes a "neutral" person such as a school teacher to tell the real abilities and limitations of Junior.

The trainer of a small stable once told the owner and his party not to risk a dollar today because the track changed from fast to slow and the horse had shown an aversion to an off track. The owner and friends sat stunned in his grandstand box as the horse broke first and held the lead the whole route. But he paid only $19 for $2 which shows that many spectators had more confidence in him than his own stable.

The wise player might ignore track conditions over a distance race. But at six furlongs or less, the horse that breaks first has a distinct advantage. There is no exact way to measure the difference between the effort a horse can put forth on a fast track and on a slow one, but a good hunch might be that a horse which breaks fast can win if he is only about 80 per cent as good as he would have to be on a fast track.

Track conditions often must be considered if weight is an important factor. Horse A may be able to concede 10 pounds to the next best horse in the race provided the track is fast. In the heavy going of a slow or off track, Horse A might not be able to overcome the handicap of giving away 10 pounds to his nearest rival.

Some track conditions not only can be ignored but should be in order to avoid the wrong conclusions. For example, a sudden shower may cause little puddles to stand out here and there on the track. But down beneath, the rain has not yet penetrated and the underfooting may be as good as a fast track. The player who in such a case makes an allowance for an off track might find he figured badly.

Some tracks have races on the turf, or grass. A general rule is that a horse which shows good efforts on a slow track will do well on the turf. The softness of the turf is comparable to the "spongy" feeling of the off track. Many times these turf races come as the last race of the day. The class of horses usually is not too high in the last race, and, therefore, any advantage a horse may have looms up more in such a race than in a race where horses are of a better class. The better-type horses, for example, are more apt to be good on off tracks, too. But in this last race of the day on the turf, a good selection is a horse which has won easily on an off track and which has not shown consistent good efforts on a fast track.

The variable of track conditions, like all variables, sometimes yields good results when combined with another variable. For in considering track conditions, one class of horses will benefit greatly by an off course. That is the horse who is five or six or seven years old.

Ordinarily, these old horses, for horses are old at six and seven, are not good risks when they run against younger rivals. But on off tracks, the old horse may show a surprisingly good effort and perhaps a winning effort. The reason is simple. The soft going soothes the feet of the aged animal and puts new pep into him. The pounding of his feet on a fast track jars him and causes him discomfort. His heart may be in his work but his feet certainly are balking.

Horses that have bad feet also benefit from an off track for the same reason. It is the same effect as that experienced by a store clerk who is on his feet all day on concrete floors and then at night is able to parade around at home on heavy carpeting. Other things being equal, a baseball outfielder can stick around a few years more than an infielder. Of course, one reason is the outfielder does not see as much action during a game as a baseman or short stop. But an important factor also is the pounding the infielder's feet take on the hard ground. The outfielder does his running in a "meadow."

Age

As has been mentioned, age also is a variable to be considered. There are a number of general rules about age. In a race for three-year-olds and up, a four-year-old is a better risk than a three-year-old provided both horses are of about the same class. Naturally, a three-year-old which was good enough to win, or finish close up in the Kentucky Derby, Preakness, or Belmont Stakes can give a good account of himself against older horses. The rule, therefore, applies to "average" horses.

The rule doesn’t mean that a three-year-old can never beat older horses. It just means that the player should study past performances carefully before he selects a three-year-old in competition with older animals. Once a horse passes six years, he is on the way to looking forward to collecting his social security and spending the rest of his days romping in the pasture unless his owner, in disgust, decides to convert him into glue.

Old horses are bad risks. They may have a stout heart and a burning desire to turn in a good day's work, but their legs and stamina do not match their intentions and courage. In this respect, the horse is no different from the human athlete because in athletic competition the adage "youth must be served" is correct more times than it is wrong.

Sex

Sex is another minor variable which, at times, may prove important. Generally speaking, fillies and mares are no match for colts, geldings and stallions. The discrepancy between the two sexes is even greater in the spring when fillies and mares like to dream of romance. The weight scales recognize this difference, and that is the reason fillies get into the Kentucky Derby with 121 pounds, five pounds less than the weight carried by boy horses.

Once in a while a girl horse comes along which gives a good account of herself in any company. The "die hards" in the argument over the merits of girl horses vs. boy horses point to the long history of the Kentucky Derby in which a filly has won only one time.

On the other hand, Twilight Tear came along in 1945 to confound the boys who never will concede that a girl horse is superior. The Tear, although not entered in the Derby, later defeated the Derby winner and just about every other good horse that year. She ended up being named by sports writers as the outstanding horse of the year, the first time the honor was won by a lady.

But the next year along came Busher and repeated. But despite these records, in ordinary races a female horse usually does not rate as high as a male horse. The player, however, cannot arbitrarily eliminate every female horse. A good mare can give the men a run for their money if the classes of the two horses are about equal. This is true especially in late summer or early fall.

Since there are races for fillies and mares only, some of the past performances of female horses are of doubtful value when those females are entered in mixed races. A mare's record may look good in races in which she competed only against other women horses. But in mixed races she may do poorly. Her rating, then, a player should realize, was not based so much on her own performances as it was on the inferior performances of the other entries.

Jockey

More racing arguments can be aroused, too, over the variable of jockeys. A turf axiom is that a good boy and a fair horse is a better combination than a poor boy and a good horse. It's true that the horse himself must do the running, but the jockey can be of great help.

A good boy can rate a horse better so that the animal has something left for the race through the stretch. The good jockey can help his mount keep out of pockets and trouble and steer him into the best racing positions.

The trainer, who is supposed to know more about the horse than any other man, gives the jockey instructions on the kind of race he wants. The trainer bases it on his study of the horse's temperament and racing habits and also upon his evaluation of the other horses entered in that race. His instructions may be as perfect as the advice of a football coach, but once the gate opens and the race is on, the jockey and the horse are the two that must work it out.

A loud-speaker announcement of a change in riders sends many a fan scurrying to his racing paper to restudy the entries. If the change is from an apprentice to a full-fledged jockey, many fans will believe "big things are brewing." An apprentice jockey is one who has been riding less than a year or who has not yet had 40 winners. Horses ridden by apprentices are given a weight reduction bonus of five to seven pounds. This "bonus" means that a horse assigned 110 pounds might actually carry only 105 if ridden by an apprentice instead of a full-fledged jockey.

Sometimes the change is from a full-fledged jockey to an apprentice. Again many fans turn to their paper and start figuring all over. Most of the times the changes are routine and have no connection with any sudden development affecting the horse's immediate future.

Jockeys get sick, hurt, want to visit friends or relatives or, for many reasons, want a day off or want to get off on particular days, just like any other worker.

Again, a last-minute jockey change does not necessarily mean the player can ignore it. The change may bring to the horse a jockey who has ridden him in the only races he has won. This jockey may be free at the last minute because another horse which he contracted to ride is a late scratch. This is one change which the player can feel may enhance the horse's chances of winning.

The author of a racing article in a popular magazine a few years ago betrayed his ignorance of the whole subject by a flat statement that the best jockeys always ride the best horses. The author, had he known anything about racing, could have checked easily and exploded his own theory.

Most of the best riders are under contract to a particular stable. Larger stables, of course, have more than one contract rider. When the stable to which he is under contract has a horse entered in a race, the jockey rides that mount. It is not for him to choose or reject. He simply rides every horse sent postward by his employer just like all workers are subject to the rules of the firm.

The horse from the contract stable might be the worst entry in the race. A horse from a one-horse stable may gallop home easily in that race.

Some players like to hop aboard when a jockey is "hot." But playing jockeys instead of horses offers a double risk. The player not only wagers that the horse will be on the beam today but also that the jockey will be wide awake and alert. The biggest drawback to playing jockeys is the fact that no one can tell when a jockey is still "heating up" or when he is "cooling off."

Jockeys, like all athletes, have their days. Today, a rider gallops home first in five of the eight races on the card. For the rest of the week he may see the judges only when he reports for duty. The pattern of his wins and losses is more erratic by far than the wins and losses of favorites.

A second drawback to playing jockeys concerns their frailties, both of the body and mind. Jockeys get shaken up now and then or injured. Their mounts may stumble, fall, throw them or crush them against the fence. Jockeys get killed, but considering the jams around the curves and against the rails and the general danger of the sport, the number is relatively small.

"Frailties" of the mind result in suspensions. A rider gets set down for letting his horse drift over and bump another horse. Or the jockey may get so exuberant and intent upon winning that he ends up with a suspension for rough riding. Again, the stewards may decide his ride wasn't satisfactory—that neither owner, public nor horse got a fair ride. Suspensions are from a day or two to life. Many are for 30 days.

The player who follows jockeys may finally latch onto one who is becoming red hot. But by the time the player figures out how to take full advantage of the jockey's winning streak, he may be injured or suspended.

Post Position

Another minor variable considered by some selectors is post position. In general, however, post position means little for the player. Some studies have been made that purport to show the advantage of certain post positions. The "joker" in such studies is that some post positions do not appear in every race and thus many of them did not have an equal chance of scoring high.

At smaller tracks in particular, fields are sometimes limited to eight horses. The feature race of the day may have only six entries. If a track such as this one is included with others in a general study, it means that post positions nine, ten and up have been penalized.

On larger tracks, some races, especially the best ones, attract only eight, or fewer, horses. The study is still defective should relative positions be substituted for real numbers. For example, the study could designate positions as "farthest from the rail, next farthest," etc. Here again there is a defect. For "farthest from the rail" in an eight-horse rail is different from "farthest from the rail" in a 10, 12, or 14 horse race.

Like all general rules, there are some exceptions. In races of six furlongs or less, there is some advantage for post position number one provided that the horse is a fast breaker. The shorter the race the more advantage for post position number one, provided the horse breaks fast. A slow breaker in that position simply penalizes himself so much he may never get into contention. The pack just forces him back and he may never be able to overcome the disadvantage.

Number one post position offers a still greater advantage in short races when the race is slow or off. Again, it depends upon whether the horse breaks fast. A horse that breaks fast and grabs the rail when the track is off doesn't have to be the best horse in the race to win. Players have found pleasing results by playing Post Position No. 1 on off tracks if the distance is less than six furlongs. These include races at 5½ and 5 furlongs although tracks do not card too many races at such distances.

On the other extreme, an outside horse may have an advantage in a big field, especially a field so big that some horses must start outside the gates. The chief advantage here comes in races of more than six furlongs but not as far as a mile and an eighth. The advantage comes on fast tracks for the outside horse, if he breaks fast, can angle across the track in front of the pack and grab the rail.

A slow or off track may bog down the horse as he cuts across the field and he may pile up some of the horses or bump them. The chances then are that a win would do him no good because he would be disqualified.

Short races are not advantageous for these outside horses because sprinters break faster than route runners. Many of the horses would be sprinting right into the path of the horse cutting across them. The more central post positions are at the points of the greatest jams, but an alert jockey and a responding horse usually can get out of the jam before being thrown out of contention.

These, then, are the variables—major and minor— that a player needs to consider if he wants to become his own expert selector. Although they add up to a bulky package of information, the player can take heart that it is not any worse than many other sports. True, there are 20,000 race horses, but the average player will not come into contact with more than a small fraction of this number.

Most fans follow just one circuit which is near their homes. Some circuits—like the New York tracks—operate for many months within easy access for the same group of fans. Although horses come and go at tracks, a circuit will hold most of the horses from the day the first meet of the circuit opens until the closing day of the last meet.

Actually, a fan who gets to know 500 or 600 horses has a working basis to play at the whole circuit. This number compares favorably with the number of baseball players a fan must know if he follows one or two minor leagues in addition to the big leagues. A football enthusiast must know hundreds of players from colleges he never saw or he cannot follow the gridiron wars very intelligently.

The turf fan, then, is not too much of a martyr. Moreover, he has expert help should he want to listen to it.

Probably what disturbs a race fan more than the amount of information he must absorb is the seemingly easy way some fans hit upon winners. Two novices going to a minor track several years ago decided to play Trycook because the wife of one of them had just hired a new cook. On past performances, Trycook should not have been permitted to use the title of race horse. But the horse won and the two men alone held tickets on the winner. They collected $800 each.

A woman, seeing her first race, decided to play Busy Ike because she had a little boy whose nickname was Ike and who, she said, was always busy. Then she had another hunch. She found a horse bearing the same name as a woman neighbor she disliked. She reasoned that if the horse could run as fast as the neighbor's tongue, the race was a cinch.

Despite the fact that her husband, a veteran race fan, pointed out to her that neither horse had a chance because the one had not seen the judges at all during the current year and the other, although winning once, hadn't shown any return to form in five months. Moreover, the track was slow and the best efforts of the two horses always had been on fast tracks.

The woman, however, played the horses separately and coupled them in the daily double. She made about $350 for her six dollars, whereupon her husband threw away his racing paper, pencil and pad and decided just to read the names on the program and play hunches. He picked out a horse bearing the name of an old girl friend and was rewarded with $27.30 for his $2.

Some 15 years ago, when a minor track was opened in the East, fields were limited to eight horses because of the sharp turns. Track construction had been delayed and the track finally opened after most of the horses usually found on minor tracks in that section had scattered.

Most of the horses competing were even cheaper than the average horses found at minor tracks. Some fans quickly caught on that such horses have no form or racing sharpness. They began to play all possible daily double combinations which took $128. For two weeks, rewards were great. Twice, the double paid better than $1,000 and several hit between $700 and $800. The smallest double for the two weeks was $72.

The good fortune, however, faded after two weeks. By that time even these cheap horses were rounding into some kind of form that at least helped a selector to predict which one might beat the rest. But the coup de grace to sink the daily double bonanza came from dozens of fans who finally sensed what their more far-sighted brethren had discovered on the first day.

In July, 1955, the wife of a millionaire Chicago appliance manufacturer pitied a "poor skinny horse" that didn't have a chance. Moreover, the horse was a mare which further decreased her chances among all those men horses. The mare had not raced at all in 1954 and ran far back in her three starts of 1955.

The millionaire's wife, as a gesture of goodwill toward the poor old mare, bet $100 to win. For her confidence, the woman received $14,070, for the horse came from behind to win and paid $281.40. Since the $100 was the only wager on the mare, even her owner and trainer and stable hands thought she was just out for the ride.

These huge winnings, however, are the "spectaculars" of racing. They make the news columns because they happen so seldom.

The player who just plugs away may not wind up in the newspapers. But he usually winds up in the black if he gages the variables carefully and sticks to the results.

As long as thoroughbreds remain high-strung pieces of horse flesh, it will be the "little things" that make or break the player. Good, solid attributes can be measured but nobody can tell the effect of the "little things."

Race horses are subjected to as much temperament and moods as a highstrung opera singer or any human artist. A human performer always can cancel a performance when he doesn't feel up to it. If the trainer believes the horse should race that day, there isn't much the horse can do about the decision. But he can do something about the way he performs.

The major factors involved in evaluating a horse's abilities can be spotted easily although their effect on any particular day is unpredictable. A horse's breeding will tell whether he has "class" or whether he is just an ordinary animal among the other 20,000 thoroughbreds. Breeding determines whether he is a sprinter or a route runner; whether he does his best on fast or muddy tracks; whether he likes to close with a rush or whether he likes to grab an early lead and hang on. His perseverance and stamina are bred into him.

Smart Angles To Watch

But some of the more minor things that affect his performance, especially on a race-to-race basis, include:

1. His age as compared with other horses in the same race. Generally speaking, a three-year-old will riot do well in a race for three-year-olds AND UP. Some three-year-olds win, of course, when entered in mixed age company. But most of them do not win.

2. In the spring especially fillies and mares will not do as well against colts and horses as they will in the late summer or fall. Romance stirs the blood of horses as well as of human beings.

3. The post position the horse draws for the race. The first few positions nearest the rail benefit a fast breaker, especially in a sprint race. Even should he not take the lead early, he still will be likely to get away in good shape.

4. The way a horse responds to his rider's urging. Some horses will not exert themselves until the jockey goes to the whip. Others sulk or flinch at the whip.

5. The manner in which the jockey rides. Some horses prefer that their riders lie far up on their necks.

6. Horses that run well in the mud generally will do well on turf races (that is, races on the grass).

7. An aged horse probably will spring to life on an off track because the mud eases his feet. Other horses like to hear the pounding of their hoofs on the fast, dry track.

8. A good jockey and a fair horse are a better combination than a poor rider and a good horse.

9. An older horse which long since has mastered the "tricks" often does well with an apprentice on his back because the horse has been so thoroughly grounded in racing principles that he needs little guidance or help. In fact, owners break in new riders by giving them the mount on an older horse with instructions to: “just hang on and let the horse do both the work and the ‘master minding.’”

10. The best jockeys do not always ride the best horses. Top jockeys are under contract to a major stable and must ride every entry the stable sends out. Every stable has its "stars," its ordinary horses, and its "problem children."

11. Playing jockeys is not very profitable because no one, including the rider, knows when he is heading into a "hot streak" or to a "cool off." Moreover about the time he hits a "hot streak" he may be set down for an infraction of the rules.

12. In long races with large fields, the outside horses may do better than those nearest the rail, especially a fast breaker. A fast breaker can take off in a whirl and the jockey can cut over fast and either take the lead or place his horse in the best racing position.

13. "Horses for courses" is an axiom that has some merit. A check of past performances shows that some horses are "balls of fire" at one track and ordinary on another course. Each track is different in composition of the soil, sharpness of curves, and length of stretch. A horse which likes to come from behind fares better on a track with a long stretch.

14. "Blind stabbing" by a novice player will, at times, turn up winners at "box-car" mutuels. But the player cannot keep ahead by depending upon hunches or "inspiration.”'

15. There usually is a reason for a horse's bad performance. A study of the results chart many times will disclose this reason and tell the player whether to string along again with the horse or abandon him.

16. Racing luck, which simply means getting the "breaks," has a part in racing the same as in any other sport. But it can neither be measured nor depended upon.

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