Quote:
Originally Posted by ateamstupid
I hardly ever get a bigger laugh at the track than when I see someone point to the Form and go "he's working well" or "he's working like crap" as if they've seen the horse in the morning. Bullet works/# of works mean nothing without the context of the horse's trainer, and even then they're of minimal value. Assuming that a horse is working well because of 'fast' workouts/working badly because of 'slow' ones is a quick way to the poorhouse.
|
Exactly.
I think workouts only matter if an actual pattern can be ascertained (for either the trainer or the horse). If a trainer typically works his horses fast (Baffert) and you see a debut animal that isn't working fast....okay, maybe that tells you something. If a trainer doesn't have a pattern, however, or if you just don't know what that trainer's pattern is, then I'm not sure workouts tell you anything. For horses with experience I might look at a pattern in works too. If a horse consistently has a bullet work right before their best races, then okay, that might tell you something too.
The other thing that is just like this is when people talk about how a horse acts in the paddock or the post parade. I guess some people really do get info from that, but 99% of people that talk about that stuff are full of crap. Like workouts, I only really think it matters if you can determine a pattern. They'll invariably be some dude saying, "Oh! the favorite looks worked up and agitated in the paddock. I'm not betting him!" Of course, the dude has no idea if the horse looked "worked up and agitated" before any of the horse's previous starts, and if there is any connection between times he looked worked up and times he ran poorly.