|
|
HANDICAPPING FEATURE SEPTEMBER 26, 2007 Using the Jockey Factor in the Handicapping Process by Steve Zacks Nothing is more frustrating than doing all the work to find the right horse and having things go awry during the running of the race! Things happen at the gate when a horse is not ready and the latch opens, the horse gets tangled up leaving and then bumped, a rider decides to take the overland route losing several lengths and the winner comes up the inside path he has vacated to win by a half-length, or the expected lone "E" duels on an unrealistically fast pace with a 99-1 shot and tires late in the race to be passed by a staggering closer. It happens all the time and to every horseplayer out there at one time or another. While not all of these events are the jockey's fault, they do beg the question of whether one can intelligently use the jockey factor in the handicapping process. While all is not likely so simple, the jockey factor can play a part of the process. If every jockey's intent is to only ride the best horse, or the jockey and his agent's opinion of the best horse, the jockey factor can be placed very high in the selection process; however, a rider's appearance on a horse that does not necessarily mean that the horse is well-meant today. Here are a few of those reasons: -- the jockey might be riding as a courtesy for a barn for which he rides a
top stakes horse, or many live horses; Perhaps the best approach to evaluate the rider in a race is to put yourself in the trainer's shoes. It should not be unreasonable to assume that if you, as a good handicapper, like the horse today, then the trainer would too! Should today's race be merely a learning experience or a conditioning race for the horse, then the trainer opts for a rider who will follow instructions and who can accomplish what he wants the horse to get out of today's race. To hone speed you get a good gate boy or a bug boy, to teach a horse to rate you get a strong rider to take a hold, etc. However, if the trainer has a live and racing-sound horse in sharp condition and properly situated as to distance, surface and class, which jockey does he try to get? Other than the trainers who do not really believe that the rider makes that much of a difference, or want a rider who will follow instructions, he would obviously try to get the best rider he can so as to not waste all that hard pre-race preparation. The three most likely choices come from amongst these categories: 1 -- The barn has a current go-to rider that they use for most of their live runners (Velazquez for Pletcher, Baird for Catalano, Desormeaux for Mott etc.) 2 -- A rider who has won on the horse before; even better if he has won more than once; this is an added plus if the horse itself has some peculiarities or idiosyncrasies of its own. (A scan of the past performances at any track will show several horses who run much better for certain riders -- and not always the top-tier ones either.) 3 -- A top-five or top-tier rider at the current meeting. At every track there is a group of leading riders which may number three or five or seven; there is a divide between this group and the rest in terms of numbers of wins. (After the first three weeks of the Belmont fall meet, the top seven riders have won three-quarters of the meet's races. At Arlington in 2007, the top trio won almost 40 percent of the races. These are significant numbers.) Generally speaking, jockeys do NOT win races; the best can only ensure that the best horse does not lose. Jockeys cannot give the horse extra conditioning or speed or stamina. They can, however, ensure that the horse saves as much ground as possible, has clear sailing when asked to run, has not squandered its energy resources foolishly in an unnecessary duel and does not lose valuable momentum by properly timing the move coming out of the turn. Jockeys lose races, many races, by making mistakes -- some foolish ones. No one is suggesting that they have an easy task or that the horses will always do what they ask of them. Everyone respects their courage for it is a tough and dangerous job. The cream of the crop understand pace, ground loss, momentum and timing. Hot riders are confident and convey that confidence to the horses they ride. They understand the bias if there is one and where to place their horses in terms of paths and early or late. They move at the right time and know when to go wide early and when to await room. Some have detectable preferences and you can find out what these are by looking at the past performances and the charts and seeing where jockeys place their horses. Frequently these trends become very evident with only a few days of observation. Professional riders even know the likely tendencies of those they ride against. The BRIS Ultimate Past Performances provide jockey statistics which can help in the process. If you are approaching a new track and are unfamiliar with the trainers and riders, you can quickly see if there is a match of trainer and rider, if the rider does well on the turf or with a runner of the style of today's horse. These statistical aids can be particularly helpful when facing unfamiliar circumstances. Smaller stables have more difficulty getting these top-tier riders. The appearance of one of the above on a horse that you like, or any other for that matter, is a fact of which you should take particular note! The presence of a top rider that fits one of these requirements should cause you to carefully re-evaluate any horse's chances. And if the prices paid are of concern, a quick scan of the Saratoga charts will indicate multiple payoffs between $20 and $80 with the meet leaders in the irons. Whether saddled by high- or low-profile trainers, these opportunities are frequently available for those patient players who pick their spots. Not even the best rider can carry a horse to the finish line, but by not making tactical mistakes, by saving ground, by being aware of the pace, by staying out of trouble and by understanding the track and its biases, they can get the best horse to the finish line first more often than not. Along with a competitive nature, these characteristics are what make them win races and place them in demand. A new rider on the circuit who shows these characteristics will not go unnoticed for very long. Very quickly he will get chances on live horses. Success builds on success. Hot riders at any given time are aware of how the racing surface is currently playing. They are themselves confident and that sense of confidence is conveyed to and picked up by the horse he is sitting upon. And there is every likelihood that the horse will likely run better for him. On most circuits, there are several riders who are competent but are not currently fashionable -- perhaps for personality reasons or their work ethic or their reliability. The player must use his judgment when one of these is named on the horse that he likes. These types win races at good prices. A switch to a top five rider, a go-to rider or a rider who has won on the horse before should be seen as an important positive in the handicapping process. A jockey who remains on a horse for a second consecutive race following a less-than-impressive race is another potential positive (the meaning can be somewhat less for a stable go-to jockey.) The significance of the latter grows when it is for a small or low-profile stable. Depending upon the track you play, you might be able to build a method of play using the top jockey factor as a starting point. Various jockey angle plays can be profitable: jockey on surface or distance, first-time on a horse, with a certain trainer and so on. The BRIS statistics in the Ultimate PPs can point many of these out in the raw, and by extrapolation and with a little digging, you can create others. * * * Looking ahead to the Breeders' Cup, one might ask if the trips in the Woodbine Mile (Can-G1) tell the whole picture. One had to be impressed with the stretch run of the winner SHAKESPEARE (Theatrical [Ire]) as he closed from eighth to first in the long stretch run -- unless of course you bet on KIP DEVILLE (Kipling). The last quarter was run in 23.60 seconds and Shakespeare gained 7 1/2 lengths, according to the chart, to win by a length. That suggests he came the last quarter in a swift 22 seconds! Cornelio Velasquez was aboard Kip Deville for the first time; had he been more familiar with the E.P. Taylor Turf Course, he might have waited instead of angling out to go around two horses coming off the turn. Had he waited until they straightened into the stretch, Coa would have found the inside path wide open when the leaders drifted out. As it was he was carried wide and lost considerable momentum. Had he taken the inside path would Shakespeare have had that clear and unobstructed run? What path would Gomez have opted for? And considering that he lost by a length, would Kip Deville have been far enough in front where he would not have been catchable? No one knows for sure, but considering that Monmouth is kind to early movers and that there will be a full field, which horse and which style will have the edge? Something to think about later on!
 Send this article to a friend
|
|
