Challenging the Old Norms of Thoroughbred performance and wagering

[Hesi]

Data that has been collected over many years has been presented by a few that disputes many of these accepted norms, that we are regularly talked about in thoroughbred circles.

These are all factors that many, including many on this site consider when looking for how well a horse will perform

All factors that are regularly discussed on Trackside or by tipsters in online form publications.  Factors that are not only considered by punters, but norms that have been passed down over many generations by the racing fraternity.

Factors that, to challenge them, you might be considered an idiot.  Of course a barrier draw will affect the result, of course weight will affect the chances etc etc

What are they?

Let's run through a few, feel free to comment

1.  Weight will stop a train.  Taken to the nth degree, this must be right, but within the tight frames of thoroughbred weighting perhaps not

2.  Wide barrier draws will affect the winning chances of a horse

3.  Fresh up.  A horse with good fresh up stats is more likely to win

4.  Second up, same

5.  Track conditions.  A horse with predominant good or heavy track form, is more likely to win on its preferred track conditions

6.  A horse with a sire that is known to produce heavy track winners, is more likely to produce the winner of a race run in those conditions

7.  Horses for courses, track specialists

8.  Horses winning at the same time of the year

9.  Horses jockey

10.  Horse coming from a form stable

11.  A horse that tightens in the betting is more likely to win, than one that drifts

12.  A senior jockey versus a claiming apprentice

13.  A horse that has good stats over the distance is more likely to win a race over that distance

Probably missed a few

[mardigras]

Many of those factors may give rise to a change in chance of winning. But that would be very individual based. And then it would be understanding whether any change in chance due to those things, resulted in a lesser change in price due to those things.  If the price reduces relatively, greater than the chance increases - where does the punter get any advantage from those factors?

Most of those things are information easily available to all, so form a big part of the everyday punter thoughts. Making them less likely to go unnoticed from the assessment done overall by punters - which affects price.

If you identify something that does affect chance, and it is something not easily identified by the public, then you have the potential to use that as the advantage is likely to exceed the price impact (since few others know it).

In the case of horses trained on the water walker, if that could demonstrate that it actually improved performance, and by extension, chance (and you had access to all horses that use the water walker), you might have a factor that could be of benefit. But remember that often you are betting into a market where the house holds a % advantage. So your deemed benefit is likely to need to exceed the house margin. Or bet early before the house identifies the inherent risk in the runner.

It's a bit like drugs. If the drugs improve performance (and therefore chance), and you know about it, but others don't, you can use that information to your advantage.

The factor I use that I believe gives me an advantage is the ability to assess horse performance relative to all other horses. That is not easy to do for most punters, as they are reading form, stats - not performance.

[curious]

On the water walker per se, I don't know of any specific research evidence confirming that it improves performance. There is evidence, reasonably solid, that use of a water treadmill(WT), significantly improves performance over the similar use of a dry treadmill(DT). It doesn't increase raw speed but it does increase endurance. The problem from a punting perspective, as mardi indicates above, is that I doubt anyone has that information for all runners in an event, so I don't see how it can be used to assess relative chance for that event.