**Please Note: As part of regular maintenance, a complete update of our par times database was made on April 4th 2008. You will notice a few subtle changes in previously earned numbers and increased accuracy should be expected.

 

 

 

What makes these ratings superior?

Ordinary speed figures do not take into account the effects of early pace on final time. This failure results in distorted figures for many horses. I have developed a sound method for dealing with this problem. My performance ratings are a combination of pace, final time and weight carried.  Adjustments are made for changes in distance, surface and track speed.  If you're a good handicapper and also familiar with speed figures, I think you'll find these ratings both unique and effective. The lower a horse's performance rating, the better its overall effort was.

up

 

How do I use these ratings to handicap a race?

Those of you who are already proficient at handicapping with the 'Ragozin Sheets' or 'Thorograph' will have little difficulty adapting to the On-Target format. However, the rest of you will probably be in need of some instruction, and rather than give you a re-hash of what has already been written on the esoteric subject of condition-cycle handicapping, I'll direct you to places where you can learn at your own pace. First of all, there are several good books on the subject of handicapping with performance ratings... I recommend starting with the following:

  • Figure Handicapping (by James Quinn)
  • Dave Litfin's Expert Handicapping (by Dave Litfin)
  • The Odds Must Be Crazy (by Len Ragozin)

There are other books you'll find on the shelves as well, but these three in particular have some sections which discuss handicapping with "sheet style" numbers. You'll be prepared to handicap properly with On-Target after reading these books. I also recommend visiting the websites of my competitors @ www.thorograph.com or www.thesheets.com where you'll find the staff to be knowledgeable and experienced. Thorograph has a brief audio seminar online which is worth listening to. The Ragozin site has seminar audio tapes for sale at a reasonable price. Both sites have ongoing bulletin board discussions trumpeting the accuracy of their products and how to handicap with them. Keep an open mind while you learn any new techniques and adapt your handicapping style to fit what works best at specific tracks. Find a track where the form of the horses is not so volatile during a certain time of the year. Avoid tracks where the horses constantly seem to 'wake up' for no apparent reason and run single isolated numbers. Some tracks are much easier to beat than others... find one that you have the best success with and stick to it.

up

 

How important will pace be in today's race?

The early pace of today's race is sometimes a very important factor. A fast and contested pace will have a detrimental impact on the final times of the frontrunner(s). The early positioning of a horse can also be critical. Some horses will only do their best running from certain positions.... e.g.   'need the lead types' rarely put forth a good effort when running from off the pace.  Pay attention to each individual horse's early speed point total as well as its post position, and preferred running style. Taking those factors into account, attempt to visualize the positioning of the horses during the first quarter of a mile. If today's race will be run at 8.5 furlongs around two-turns and there are four horses with 6 or more speed points, the horse with the outside post position of those four horses will probably end up racing wide around the first turn. Few horses can overcome such a wide trip early in a race even if they hold a slight performance rating edge. But try not to place a great deal of emphasis on anticipated pace scenarios because things don't always unfold as planned. The tactics of one or two riders or a slow break from the gate can change everything. In situations where the early pace scenario is not obvious, I advocate ignoring early pace altogether and let the chips fall where they may.  On the other hand if you're absolutely convinced that a pace scenario shapes up way too fast, with four or five horses showing Quirin speed point totals of 6+, then you might consider adding two or more points to all the performance ratings of those frontrunners in anticipation of a pace scenario that will hurt their chances.

up

 

What about current condition and form cycles?

Current condition is an elusive factor and even a horse's trainer can be fooled by it. With regularity, there are horses in apparently good form that simply do not fully extend during the running of their race. Sometimes a dull effort can be anticipated by viewing the horse's condition pre-race. But all things considered, unless you will be attending the races on a daily basis and taking notes on the appearance of many horses, I don't think it pays to be overly strict with the 'body-language' factor.  However, one positive condition angle worth keeping your eye on is the 'fresh horse'.  A fresh horse has been away from the races for a month or two in the recent past. Look for horses making their 2nd, 3rd or 4th starts after this type of layoff when they show a slight improvement in their last race and a few good back numbers.  Such horses will usually move forward and recapture 'peak condition' in the very near future.   Be careful with a horse that ran a much faster number in its last race than it shows in the recent past.  If the horse returns on short rest from such a big effort it may not be fully recovered. Other times a horse may run a fast race under 'ideal conditions'.  Multiple factors such as a favorable pace, biased surface, post position and a 'peak' in the form cycle most likely converged all at once, setting the stage for a dominant victory. Do not bank on a repeat performance today unless the conditions are identical, and in this game they rarely are.  As a general rule, do not be too hasty in your eliminations on the basis of current form alone, especially with horses that show strong back numbers. You might just overlook the 'class of the field'.

up

 

Are 'age restricted races' for two or three-year-olds worth handicapping?

Young horses will very often make large improvements from one race to the next as they develop and gain experience. Use caution when handicapping these youngsters. Unless a horse really catches your eye and is going off at a nice price, you should consider passing the race. Five point jumps in performance are not uncommon with lightly-raced horses, so naturally you should demand higher odds before risking your money.

up

 

Does a rating of 15 earned at the six-furlong distance equal a 15 at a mile?

Yes both performances are equivalent. Be advised, this means very little in some cases. Many horses have distance limitations so you'll need to pay some attention to this factor.  Few horses showing a top figure at six-furlongs are physically equipped to duplicate that same figure at ten-furlongs and the reverse is also true. You will find the ratings to be fairly interchangeable at related distances . Keep an eye on horses that are racing at a very comfortable distance. For example those horses with multiple wins at an odd distance like seven-furlongs deserve a close look when they are running at exactly seven-furlongs. This type of specialist can't always be trusted to duplicate good seven-furlong numbers when racing at the six-furlong distance.

up

 

How much does today's assigned weight count?

Weight is typically a minor factor. But you should take notice if a horse is getting a large break in the weights. Let's say a horse is getting a 10 pound break from the top weighted horse in the field today... in that case you should add 1½ points to all the ratings of the top weighted horse when making your comparisons between the two runners. This (1½ points per 10 pounds) is only a guideline because some horses carry additional weight more easily than others.

up

 

How many lengths does one point equal?

With these ratings it varies by distance. If today's race distance is five-furlongs, then a point equals 1 length. If the distance is ten-furlongs then a point equals 2 lengths because the race is now twice as far. A simple formula of today's distance in furlongs divided by 5 will tell you exactly how many lengths one point represents at all distances.

up

 

Why is the trainer's win percentage different from what I see in the track program?

We're now using the trainer's record over the past 30 days. This should help greatly in keeping tabs on which trainers have been going well (or bad) lately.

up

 

Which factors influenced your decision to leave 'ground loss' out of the calculations?

This is probably the most complex question that I have to answer, but I'll do my best to explain the decision. First, the negative effect of losing ground (racing wide) on the turn, is largely dependent upon the pace during that segment of the race. Racing wide while traveling at a slow pace has much less impact on a horse's performance than it does vs. a fast pace. For example, in a two-turn dirt mile, racing four wide on the first turn through a first quarter in :25 flat is nothing of note... from a tactical standpoint it's much better sitting there than 9 lengths back on the rail. By contrast, four wide through :22 flat and your horse will be eased through the stretch. My point is this-- If the negative impact of racing wide is largely dependent upon pace (which we do adjust for) then I'm not convinced that ground loss is even worth trying to quantify. I'm not saying it means nothing, but I think in most cases it's being seriously overrated by many people who are using the traditional rule of thumb. The traditional rule of thumb says that a horse loses one length for every path it races away from the rail on the turn. This might be sound geometry but it completely ignores several important issues, one of which is momentum. The horse which hugs the inside rail must slow down ever so slightly to negotiate a tighter line, thereby losing a small amount of momentum vs. the outside horses. There is also the factor of bank angle on the turns. The turns on a racetrack are banked, as are the stretches to a lesser degree. These bank angles (which vary by track) allow for surface drainage of excess water toward the inside rail, but in addition to this, they allow horses to carry their momentum into the turns far better than they otherwise could. In my opinion these factors tend to offset the amount of ground loss predicted by the geometric rule of thumb. I'd like to address several other important factors which have influenced my decision here as well. Some horses have either a mental preference to race inside/outside of horses or else they possess a running style which often dictates their natural propensity to run wide on the turn, race after race. For example-- Horses with 8 early speed points will rarely be more than 2 paths wide around the turn simply because they are often leading the race. On the other hand, those horses with 0 early speed points will usually be seen swinging wide on the turn while circling all of those horses which have been burned up contesting the pace. Now let's say for the sake of argument that I knew exactly how much of a minor adjustment to make in terms of feet per path from a physics standpoint (given various bank angles and all the rest) what would be the point in adjusting 90% of a closer's numbers over to the rail path when I'd have to mentally re-adjust 90% of its numbers back into the 4 path while I'm busy handicapping the race? This (in my opinion) just introduces confusion and makes more work for the handicapper... and that isn't what On Target is all about. Last but not least, I'll close this issue out with the track bias factor. Anyone who has followed racing for any length of time has encountered a situation where the track surface hasn't been playing 100% fair. For example the rail path can become deep for extended periods of time and for a variety of reasons. I see no point in giving a horse who raced wide during this kind of situation any type of 'numerical reward' when he was already running on better footing to begin with. So all of the above really sums up my position on the whole ground loss issue. My advice isn't so much to ignore ground loss altogether, because in certain extreme situations it will have some effect. It's probably best to use your own judgment in those situations where you're really confident that a horse will be at a disadvantage today due to its post position, running style and the distance from starting gate to first turn.

up

 

Is there any signifigance in the small [h] that sometimes appears beside the weight carried of certain horses?

Yes the small [h] symbol is there to quickly alert you to a horse that is displaying a "hanging record". For example a horse with a lifetime record of 22 starts, 1 win, 6 places and 4 shows appears to have a preference for finishing just short of winning its races at crunch time. Generally I consider this to be a minor factor, however if I'm thinking of playing a horse to win that displays a hanging record, I'll probably demand slightly higher odds to offset the additional risk. That is, I'll be demanding slightly higher odds vs. what I'd normally be willing to accept on a horse showing similar performance ratings with no [h]. Also, if I decide to bet exactas using such a horse on top, I'll be more apt to reverse the exactas just in case this horse is still up to his old tricks. In extreme cases I may even play the horse more heavily underneath. Just to clarify though, I would take a quick look at the horse's last ten races to see how it has fared of late. If you see the horse has won on several occasions in its last ten races, then it may be over the bad habit due to a change in training or equipment such as blinkers etc.

up

 

What are Quirin's Early Speed Points?

Found to the right of each horse's name, early speed points measure the horse's recent ability to show frontrunning speed at the first call of today's distance. 8 speed points indicates a horse which is likely to be amongst the frontrunners today if not leading and a total of 0 suggests the horse will probably be trying to run from well off the early pace based on recent races. The 'first call' is defined as the first quarter mile in sprints and the half mile point in routes. Early Speed Point totals are purely measures of running style and unlike the performance ratings themselves, Early Speed Points are not based on fractional time... they are designed to show you how a race might play out today from an early pace standpoint. You can often visualize how a horses pace trip will develop today simply by taking a 30 second glance at the speed points. I often use them as a final step in the handicapping process. For an obvious hypothetical example you might see a horse with 6 speed points in a race where no other horse has more than 2 points. This horse will probably be all alone on the lead today and is unlikely to face the type of contested early pace pressure which is an ever present threat to all frontrunners. The main thing to understand however, is you should always be sure to select a horse based upon performance ratings and not early speed points. For example, if you happen to be down to two contenders with comparable performance ratings, one of which is a horse with 7 speed points and the other is a horse with 2 speed points, but there are 4 other runners in this race with 7 or more speed points, then assuming the odds and everything else being equal, I would lean to the horse with 2 speed points every time. The reason is I would be anticipating this particular scenario to work slightly against the 7 point horse. Again, you can use speed points simply as a final step in the handicapping process just to make sure you don't bet too heavily on a horse that figures strong on past numbers but may be running against what looks to be an inordinate amount of pace pressure today. When it comes down to the bottom line in this game, every losing bet where you've either scaled down your bet sizes because of perceived danger or avoided making it altogether is as good as cashing a ticket. Close decisions about leaning one way or the other when you happen to have a race down to 2 or 3 horses can be made very easily with speed points particularly if the situation happens to shape up as being abnormally fast. The name 'Quirin' is the name of William Quirin who, in his outstanding book, 'Winning at the Races' - first set down the rules as to how speed points should be calculated.

 

up

 

In the column listing of equipment carried in previous races, I understand 'b' = blinkers and 'f' = front bandages, but what does 'c' stand for?

Here are the letters used for the abbreviations and the equipment each one represents:

a = aluminum pads, j = aluminum pad, b = blinkers, c = mud caulks, f =front bandages, m = block heels, n = no whip, r = bar shoe, s = nasal strip, t = turndowns.

 

up

 

Why don't the reports include information as to the class of past races?

Generally speaking there are two basic reasons why traditional handicappers have any need to know about the class of past races. Number one on the list would be to explain or excuse a poor finish where the horse in question had been entered "way over its head" in class. However, the real question in my judgment is this: How is class actually demonstrated on the track? There is only one way that a horse of better class can assert its superior ability during the running of a race, and that's by increasing its pace to the point where the inferior horse simply can't cope with it. These pace increases, rather than the class levels themselves, are the foundation of On-Target performance ratings. If a horse steps up sharply in class today, I would argue that unless it contests a faster pace vs. its previous races, there is no rational basis why we should expect a slower final time from the horse. For example, if a horse moves from a claiming victory at the $25,000 level where it made all the pace with fractions of :22, :45, 1:10 into a $50,000 claiming race which features fractions of :22-2/5, :45-3/5, 1:10 assuming equal footing the last thing I would expect is a slower final time from the horse. In this hypothetical case, the so called "class level" or superior ability of the $50,000 horses (if it existed at all) was simply not demonstrated at a point in the race where it could impact the $25,000 horse's final time to a significant degree, therefore it was invalid. This is one of the reasons why On-Target gives you an edge over handicappers who simply are not exerting themselves to look beyond the obvious. We deal only in demonstrated ability based on the clock, and at this stage of the racing game that's what it takes to win. If you were to instead second guess the numbers themselves, and ignore this $25,000 horse at the $50,000 level when it already demonstrated superior ability on the clock, then you'd absolutely be losing any edge On-Target could ever provide. Now let's address part two: Trainer intent as it relates to up and down class movement. Many people will tell you that without looking at class levels, you won't be able to judge a trainer's intent or what the trainer might be thinking of the horse's chances today. For example the horse just won for $35,000 two weeks ago and now in the very next start he's been entered for $25,000. Bad sign? After it loses, of course.... however, when it wins what is it? Well to prevent a lesion from forming on our brain, the result must immediately go in one ear and out the other, otherwise heaven forbid we have to admit to ourselves that we're playing what's partly a random guessing game. (Hey that's racing my friends, learn to live with the uncertainty or don't bother playing this game.) Nevertheless your mind will be further massaged to remove all bad memories when this "negative class drop angle" appears fully regurgitated in the next handicapping book as a wiseguys way to toss "bad favorites". OK, whatever. The fact is, any given trainer will always be trying to keep the other trainers on the grounds guessing. That's an important part of a trainer's job. For example if the trainer only drops a horse sharply in class when it has a "bad wheel" then after two or three times of unloading these projects on the unsuspecting buyer I can assure you there won't be any takers if he ever needs to unload a fourth one. The reverse is also true-- if the trainer keeps dropping down to steal races with sound, fit horses, then eventually he'll have a pocketful of purse money and no horses left in the barn. So what the claiming game really boils down to is a poker standoff between trainers who are constantly trying to keep one another on their toes. If a claiming trainer's priority is to keep all of the other trainers on the grounds guessing about his horses, then I'm not about to waste any of my time trying to be the best guesser of the bunch. So my advice is to judge a horse's soundness by the direction of its numbers, how it generally reacts off of big efforts, its time between races, paddock and pre-race appearance etc. I'm content to let the trainers place their horses where they want to rather than trying to play mind reader. I'll let the other handicappers waste their time taking those guesses, and hey if they can gain a tiny little edge looking at that kind of thing then more power to them. From both a time management standpoint and a second guessing yourself standpoint I just don't see any upside there. That's my philosophy and as you can see it's reflected in the format of On-Target. I believe we gain an edge by not listing previous class levels and unlike other rating services our numbers are pace adjusted so there's really no need to list them. I prefer to keep the format clean, uncluttered and user-friendly. Trust me, one thing you'll learn after 10 years of fulltime play is that there aren't any rules in this game, and even guidelines are hard to come by. For every instance where you happen to guess right about a trainer's intent or a horse's soundness strictly by looking at class levels, there will be another race right around the corner where you'll guess wrong.

 

up

 

In terms of accuracy, are there any special situations to be aware of when using the ratings?

Yes there are a few situations where the accuracy of a past rating may be less than ideal. Those of you who've been using On-Target for some time will probably recall my annoucement about Gulfstream Park turf races at 11 furlongs. The published internal fractions of those races in particular are being hand-timed by the track and are known to be suspect. Other situations to be aware of -- Races carded at extremely short distances, or marathon races at any track where these distances are rarely if ever carded. For example races at 4.5 furlongs are rarely carded except for a few instances each year with 2yo's. Most of the time in those races our rating will be estimated. Fortunately races at such distances are more or less all out dashes from the gate with stamina playing little role, so early pace has a very moderate impact on final time there. In any case you should always use those ratings with caution for several reasons. First, 'par times' are difficult to calculate at dash distances when just a few races per year are being run. We do the best we can with them, and we're continually trying to improve our pars at these distances, but understand it's only an estimate based on a small sample size. So just use caution and good judgment. For example if a horse comes out and romps by 10 lengths at 4.5 furlongs earning a rating of 9, and he's facing another horse today at 6 furlongs that ran a 15 last time out which was also earned at 6 furlongs, the horse with the 9 is no easy pick today. That particular number may not carry over on grounds of a radical distance switch or just plain accuracy. There's also the other end of the spectrum to be aware of as well. If a horse earned a rating of 9 in a 14 furlong dirt marathon event, and prior to that he generally had been running ratings around 15 at normal route distances of 8.5 furlongs, please do not expect another 9 today if the horse cuts back to 8.5 furlongs... that's a radical distance switch and it will not carry over very often.

 

up

 

Hey wait a minute, these two horses are coming out of the same race and "Horse A" defeated "Horse B" by several lengths but you have the performances rated virtually the same. How can this be?

This is probably the most frequently asked question we receive from new subscribers. In a word, the answer is: Pace...

In this case, the early pace of "Horse B" was significantly faster than it needed to be, and therefore "Horse B's" final time slowed to the point where "Horse A" was able to finish ahead of him. Everything else being equal today, if "Horse B" puts forth a similar overall effort but sets a more normal early pace, then "Horse A" will not defeat "Horse B" without an improved effort. It may be difficult for many players to grasp, however you must accept this fact: Horses become overextended by running just fractions of a second faster than they should ideally be traveling early in a race. For example at six furlongs, the average $35,000 claiming race features an early pace which is a mere 2 or 3 fifths of a second faster than the average early pace of a $14,000 race. If you take a $14,000 claiming horse which set an average early pace for a $14,000 race but ran a final time which was a couple of lengths faster than average, you'd be making a serious mistake if you expected this horse to be a contender for $35,000 on the basis of its final time alone. The mere half-second difference in early pace will almost surely overextend the $14,000 horse by the time it ever hits the stretch. The horse's time through the final quarter mile will likely fall off by more than a full second when all is said and done. I realize for many of you this may be a whole new way of looking at the dynamics of a race and it's going to take some time for you to adjust your handicapping when using On-Target. The main point I'd like to stress to our subscribers is to trust in the accuracy of the numbers. On-Target Performance Ratings have been thoroughly tested over a long period of time and have held up extremely well.

up

 

Have another question? click here to send e-mail

 

Home