Bounce theory

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.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

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.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

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.

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

[Danzig]

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.

[knickslions2]

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.

[rpncaine]

[Thunder Gulch]

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.

[Rudeboyelvis]

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

Originally Posted by joeydb

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 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.

[snakeb]

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.