Recent Racing

[Mad Gambler]

What is considered a cut off for a horses rect run? I figure between 14 and 21 days. Perhaps less than 21 days.

Any thoughts.

mad gambler

[crash]

Hi Mad,

21 days is a recognized standard. I like 16 days as it lets me know the horse pulled up well, but 21 should be a cut-off. On a Sat. 7,14 or 21 days only means a runners last start was on a Sat. which is often overlooked.

'Freshened' is often a term seen for longer periods than 21 days but not a spell period [60 days]. I put 'freshened ' down to meaning 'didn't pull up well [over-raced or ran a gut-buster] or had some minor injury of some sort'. Personally I sack these horses and any racing again in less than 6 days [one today was running again after 2 days...unplaced].

[gort]

Personally I sack these horses and any racing again in less than 6 days [one today was running again after 2 days...unplaced].Classic Benbara on Satruday raced after racing also on Wednesday last a break of 3 days. Great run and won at juicy odds. :-)
Blakemore published a study on fitness patterns and made some very interesting conclusions the main one being that sprints and distance races require very different breaks between races.

[crash]

I appreciate that there are 'exception to rule' examples of just about anything gort.
A horse won a race after 4yrs of outs yesterday and that's one horse I wouldn't have liked to have been following since it's last win. The general rule to sack horses that haven't won for at least a year [99% never win again] isn't going out my window because there are exceptions.

As for spells, horses can run an 'easy' distance race and a 'gut-buster' sprint [Takeover Targets last run looked like a gut-buster] or vis-a-vis. 2 to 3 weeks between races is an accepted standard of rest regardless of the type of distance a horse races.

[KennyVictor]

I studied various factors when putting together my computer based handicapping system and one of those was the break between races. Not taking into account any specifics like distance of the races, age of the horses, etc it was hard to draw any conclusions which was the "best" break between races. When averaged out even long breaks of several weeks didn't seem to produce any great advantage or disadvantage - with one exception.
If a horse had run within the last 7 days ON AVERAGE it had a slight advantage over other horses.
KV

[crash]

I'd agree about short breaks Kenny [6 days is my cut off point from similar studies], as it is a good bet the horse pulled up very well from it's last start. The general 21 day rule is a good one overall though.
I had 5 runners for a system I'm looking at on paper running today and 3 of them passed all the rules except the 21 day rule and were 'freshened' horses from 25 to 28 days. 1 placed 3rd and the other 2 were unplaced [all 3 started favorite]. The 2 within the 21 day rule both won.

Have a look at the stats for 1st up runners after 60 days or more break [2nd. up too for that matter] for the meaning of the word 'dismal', yet I'm sure there are systems that revolve around those horses.

[lomaca]

I studied various factors when putting together my computer based handicapping system and one of those was the break between races. Not taking into account any specifics like distance of the races, age of the horses, etc it was hard to draw any conclusions which was the "best" break between races. When averaged out even long breaks of several weeks didn't seem to produce any great advantage or disadvantage - with one exception.
If a horse had run within the last 7 days ON AVERAGE it had a slight advantage over other horses.
KV
Hi KV!
I do have Mr Blakemores books (Fitness etc.) and incorporated his ideas into my rating programme, about days between runs (as have others) and came to the conclusion that it was just that, "AN IDEA", and I have noticed since, that others think the same way about it.
Theoretically speaking it's a sound idea, horses, athletes need time to recuperate, and again theoretically, this time supposed to depend on the distance of the race ran. Unfortunatelly life does not always follow theory, short races are not always run flat out, as they are supposed be, according to the author, neither are mid or long distance races always slow paced middling affairs, and different training methods also throw a spanner in the works. In other words, some races of the same distance will take more out of horses then others.
I now have this feature in my rating programme as an option only. Sure, sometime if I run the programme solely on fitness alone, it will pick up winners but so would sticking a pin on a newspaper page!!
Now, as far as I am concerned, days to last start etc. are of little import, (within reason of course)
Good luck.

[Chrome Prince]

If a horse had run within the last 7 days ON AVERAGE it had a slight advantage over other horses.
KV

SPOT ON!

And if inherent class and class of opposition is factored into the days break, it is a very large and distinct advantage.

[topsy99]

in the old rem plante book he had a schedule of times since last start and it was something like this.
1 week 32% (cumulative)
2 69%
3 85%
4 91%

so anything else in speculative except for short races which up to 1100 have a strike of 33% from a spell.
1200 spell = 18%

with the super trainers with their own tracks may vary from the norm but
the statistics form a rule i think that up to 21 days is a good guide.

[crash]

Age, general fitness, effort expended [rather than distance] seem to be the 3 main ingredients that determine rest required by horses and human runners.

It's no coincidence that generally, both move to longer distances as they get older [if suitable] and also take longer to regain peak fitness and need a longer recovery period. Apart from the fact owners are often looking to maximize return on investment as quickly as possible, 7 to 14 day breaks are far more common for young horses. They are able to 'do it again' more quickly than older horses without injury or risk to peak fitness ;-))