Bounce theory
 

Does anyone believe in this theory? If so, are there statistics to back it up? I read it everyday in the form but I have a hard time buying into this. Can anyone give examples of quality horses "bouncing"?

I don't believe in it.

Too many factors going into why a horse throws a bad performance and even more involved in a career effort. Those have much more to do w/predicting how a horse will do in a future race than a bounce. IMO

And if someone wanted to predict what would be considered a bounce I think making note of how each horse comes back after a race would be supreme to looking at a race on paper.

I agree with what you said. A lot of talk going on about running Cigar Street back in 3 weeks in the LA Derby and a common opinion is he will bounce. If a horse is feeling good and the race didnt take a lot out of a horse why would bouncing be a factor? I have been trying to find examples of horses bouncing but hard to find stats.

A bounce is a physical reaction to a maximum effort.

Let's say you go to the gym every day. On each machine you can solidly do 25 reps.

As you begin to get stronger and in better shape one day you feel especially strong. So instead of your usual 25 you bang out 30 on each and feel like a badass doing it. You've just run a new top!

Next day you feel it more. Bit more stiffness and soreness. Nothing wrong with that. Great to feel that way. However if you went back the following day not only could you not repeat the 30 you'd be hard pressed to return to the old plateau of 25. What happened? You bounced.

When the body does something special and better than ever before it needs more time to recover.

Same with horses except they can't tell their trainer.

Good grief. Thoroughbred horses are not equal to some fat ass going to workout everyday.

Please Lord strike me with lightning so I don't have to read this horsesh.it any longer.

I think that's a good definition. Keeping with your workout analogy, you might have a superior horse after an effort if there was no long term injury, after the short term recovery is complete.

You'd also have to isolate any other causes as best you can. A lower Beyer reached as the result of a bad start would give us doubt about it being a "bounce" event.

If the track conditions were especially favorable one day, similar to the case where the gym athlete happened to workout when they FINALLY lubed the weight stack, and the horse ran better than he could otherwise and then reverts to normal performance - that would not be a bounce either.

And, absent of any cause we could find through observation or searching the recorded data, variations in performance just occur. To me, like your definition of a physical reaction, a real bounce would have to be an interdependence of performances - one driving the subsequent potential lower, actively.

:tro: :D

OK - same question to you - are "bounces" real or not? Are they causal or just variations in performance that can't be anticipated?

i'm pretty sure after a few days working out, the person who got to 30 could get back to 30 again-or higher. you know, just like a horse doesn't go right back to the track the day after a big effort to try to repeat it? i've seen horses run back a week after a win and win again. it doesn't happen often since most trainers are too chicken to try with their big horses, but trainers who know when their horses are at their peak do it successfully. bobby frankel immediately comes to mind, with a turf filly a few years back.

there's a theory that horses can't keep improving-that sooner or later they will either fail to duplicate a big effort or perhaps tail off. not quite the same as a bounce theory, which thinks a horse will fall back after one big effort. some horses have one big race and never duplicate it, whereas others have many-that's not the same thing at all.

I had the same problem. St Patrick's Day I drank 25 beers and a few shots of Jameson. Sunday I could barely drink water.

I'm not a horse trainer so my answer would be ridiculous. It's a complex issue and calling a bad performance a bounce is simple.

I do know that human athletes taper for big events for top performances and that it can take up to 6 months to get back to peak form.

I understand the theory. I wish I could find examples of top horses bouncing. In my opinion it's just the connections using that as an excuse to why their horse didnt perform to their expectations.

:tro:

Enough trainers believe it to have ruined racing at the highest level. The inbreeding for brilliance has been a factor, but nowadays the G1 animals plan a campaign built around training up to 5 races a year. No more finding an allowance to tighten up, and no more 10 race campaigns.

As for bouncing...I do believe reaction to top efforts has an impact, but just as often I think everyone is quick to say a horse bounced, when the race dynamics changed enough to prevent a repeat.

My 2 cents - (and not really even worth 2 cents)
I believe what Thunder Gulch says - that the top horses simply don't run enough to "bounce", but I see it in day to day claimers that run every 2-3 weeks - they will work themselves up to a fit/conditioned level, then bounce off a top effort - here is an example from today's 3rd at Tampa:



In very broad terms, the Beyers give you a fair account of this one's best efforts, and shows the bounce afterward

Thorograph does a much better job illustrating this point:



I'm sure there are sheet players that may disagree with this assessment, but for me, this horse is a major bounce candidate today, even though she actually fits the race and the 10-1 morning line will not be close to the post time line ('Im, guessing 9-2 to 6-1).

all that said, might be a good idea to throw a few bucks on her nose :D

Wow. Good stuff Elvis.

Thanks Vic.

The race just concluded - Royally Sweet could not have gotten a better trip under Goncalves, and looked like she would have no excuse at top of the stretch - but as expected, she faded quickly and wound up beating only one home.







She went off at 7-1 and actually took more money that the eventual 7-1 winner, who figured as well, but did not have this predictable bounce pattern in her form.

So this turned out to be a pretty practical example of "bounce theory" after all. take it or leave it, but it works for me ;)

or on the other hand...she improved from a 21 to a 41-i'd think people would have expected a bounce from her next out, since she doubled the effortfrom her previous. instead, she showed another improvement to a 53. further back, improved 11 points, and then added five on the next start. her best earlier was a 39-she didn't bounce, but moved up from that to the 44. also, note changes in distance from start to start. she dropped to a 21, but also shortened to 7f from a mile and 40. i think there's more to it than just looking at the beyer ups and downs. then there's the change in track from PID to Tam-surface change help her?
i think one trick is when to find a possible regression-but looking at her pp's, it looks like it's hard to say when that might come. she might improve a few more points next out, or she might not. if she improves again, i hope you have money on her!

Very interesting your observation of the race. Many trainers have told me they think the actual reaction to the previous huge effort doesn't happen until the exact moment the pressure is on to step up and do it again. Like at the quarter pole of the next race.

They eat well, they look well, they train strong, they're sitting perfect..................Nuthin.

Here's one thing that's an absolute fact. Whether bouncing does or does not exsist the theory has radically changed the game. Trainers get the Thoro-graph and Ragozin numbers and mark their charts and condition books as a direct result of those numbers.

Romanova, the winner of that race is out of a Nijinsky II mare. You dont see that much anymore.