7 Days Rest

[ArlJim78]

this thread made me curious so I ran a query on my database for days since last start. this database contains about 8000 races. below are the impact values for the days 3-20. Above a value of 8, the impact values all seem to be centered about 1, with few exceptions. Impact values greater than 1 mean that the value resulted in more than its fair share of wins, less than 1 means that value underperformed compared to the whole.
with that said I found the results interesting.

days since
last race-----Impact value
___3__________2.38
___4__________1.62
___5__________1.38
___6__________0.58
___7__________0.81
___8__________0.95
___9__________0.95
__10__________1.12
__11__________0.88
__12__________0.98
__13__________1.03
__14__________1.00
__15__________1.01
__16__________0.91
__17__________0.94
__18__________1.07
__19__________0.93
__20__________1.12

starts in the 3-5 day range while rare offer solid returns.

6 and 7 days between starts noticeably underperformed, particularily 6 days.

I have my own theory as to why this is, a drop off going down to six days and then an upswing again below that point. I'd be interested to know what others think about that.

another point of interest, although probably not significant, are that the two highest days are 10 and 20. I have no clue why that would be, probably just coincidence.

[TheSpyder]

Jim,

Interesting stuff. 8000 races! What software do you use? The Jimonator 2000 or one off brisnet or something? How long did it take you to run that info?

I wish I had the time...and the brains to look into races that much.

Thanks,

Spyder

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

this thread made me curious so I ran a query on my database for days since last start. this database contains about 8000 races. below are the impact values for the days 3-20. Above a value of 8, the impact values all seem to be centered about 1, with few exceptions. Impact values greater than 1 mean that the value resulted in more than its fair share of wins, less than 1 means that value underperformed compared to the whole.
with that said I found the results interesting.

days since
last race-----Impact value
___3__________2.38
___4__________1.62
___5__________1.38
___6__________0.58
___7__________0.81
___8__________0.95
___9__________0.95
__10__________1.12
__11__________0.88
__12__________0.98
__13__________1.03
__14__________1.00
__15__________1.01
__16__________0.91
__17__________0.94
__18__________1.07
__19__________0.93
__20__________1.12

starts in the 3-5 day range while rare offer solid returns.

6 and 7 days between starts noticeably underperformed, particularily 6 days.

I have my own theory as to why this is, a drop off going down to six days and then an upswing again below that point. I'd be interested to know what others think about that.

another point of interest, although probably not significant, are that the two highest days are 10 and 20. I have no clue why that would be, probably just coincidence.

[Scav]

Isn't the data from this information a bit skewed in that there is many more instances for horses returning in 10 days and up, and less instances of 9 and down? I would have to guess that maybe out of those 8k races, maybe 200 of them had starters within the race off less then 6 days rest.....

[TheSpyder]

That's true and someone that knows statistics (too long ago for me) should be able to tell from the data points how many are needed to be statistically significant. Much like a trainer who is averaging 50% wins and has one out of two winners. Got a feeling Jim's all over it...we'll see.

Originally Posted by Scav

Isn't the data from this information a bit skewed in that there is many more instances for horses returning in 10 days and up, and less instances of 9 and down? I would have to guess that maybe out of those 8k races, maybe 200 of them had starters within the race off less then 6 days rest.....

[hailrazer]

Originally Posted by Scav

Isn't the data from this information a bit skewed in that there is many more instances for horses returning in 10 days and up, and less instances of 9 and down? I would have to guess that maybe out of those 8k races, maybe 200 of them had starters within the race off less then 6 days rest.....

My take is that if a trainer is confident enough to run his horse back in 3 or 4 days, the horse is likely sitting on a big effort and he wants to take advantage while he can. Tough to toss a horse running back so quickly when the trainer shows the confidence and takes the risk of garnering criticism in the case the horse runs poorly or worse....

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Scav

Isn't the data from this information a bit skewed in that there is many more instances for horses returning in 10 days and up, and less instances of 9 and down? I would have to guess that maybe out of those 8k races, maybe 200 of them had starters within the race off less then 6 days rest.....

you were close, in my sample there were only 164 starters running on five days or less rest out of a total of 65,928 runners, so its really not significant. but to answer your question its not skewed either, those horses won at a significantly higher percentage than the whole. i think its like hailrazer said, when someone runs back that fast its for a good reason hence the higher win percent.

the lower numbers for 6 (259 runners) and 7(569 runners) day turnarounds I think are just from trainers trying to push the envelope when perhaps they shouldn't.

14 days is one of the more common time frames, 2970 runners.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

you were close, in my sample there were only 164 starters running on five days or less rest out of a total of 65,928 runners, so its really not significant. but to answer your question its not skewed either, those horses won at a significantly higher percentage than the whole. i think its like hailrazer said, when someone runs back that fast its for a good reason hence the higher win percent.

the lower numbers for 6 (259 runners) and 7(569 runners) day turnarounds I think are just from trainers trying to push the envelope when perhaps they shouldn't.

14 days is one of the more common time frames, 2970 runners.

Might as well break down the 164 into 3,4,5. How many 3's?

--Dunbar

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

Might as well break down the 164 into 3,4,5. How many 3's?

--Dunbar

going by memory because the data is at home. it was roughly like this
5 days - 120 runners
4 days - 30 runners
3 days - 14 runners (i do remember there were 4 winners out of 14 attempts)

I did a little more breakdown on this last night by various tracks and not too surprisingly the large majority of these quick turnarounds occurred at Aqueduct. its very rare at most other tracks.

[horseofcourse]

On The Bill Daily won race 8 on 7 days rest 6/1 at Pocatello Downs. I'm sure you're all extremely thrilled by that fact. I lost that one as I bet on the fact that t-breds aren't supposed to run well on that short of rest. I do much better on the Quarter Horses! I will still sleep well quite confident in the fact that I am likely the all time leading better on this board at Pocatello Downs!.

[NoLuvForPletch]

I'm guessing that if a horse runs back in 3, 4 or 5 days it very well could have been the plan to do so. 6, 7 or 8 days gives the trainer just enough time to think about the bad trip, lack of pace in the race for his closer, poor break, etc...and wrongly determine the horse is no worse for wear, and enter him/her to less than desirable results.

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by TheSpyder

Jim,

Interesting stuff. 8000 races! What software do you use? The Jimonator 2000 or one off brisnet or something? How long did it take you to run that info?

I wish I had the time...and the brains to look into races that much.

Thanks,

Spyder

not my software, i don't have the brains for that. its called jcapper and it works off of bris datafiles which i download daily.

funny you should ask about the time because to run a query against the entire database takes only about 1-2 minutes. but anytime I want to compile or rebuild the entire database it can take a long time. the last time I did it it took about 3 hours.

to make it manageable i break down the data by track so I can deal with only one track at a time which is usually the best way to look at the data anyhow.