As I begin this series on chart reading, I am going to try to keep focused
on recent charts, and not go back to irrelevant prior charts unless necessary.
I am going to try to work in "real time", using principally Saturday
night charts. In addition, in between issues, you will find some supplements
or additional notes as the racing nights unfold. We will be using the Meadowlands,
although the principles can be applied to any track you are looking at.
Hopefully, by doing it this way, we will be able to learn and glean something
that is directly useful for the upcoming cards. I am also going to avoid
trying to go over EVERYTHING at once. We are going to take this slowly,
piece by piece.
So, let's get started by taking a look at the charts for this past Saturday,
April 17th from the Meadowlands.
I approach charts from "whole to part" rather than from "part
to whole". That means I try to take a broader look at the charts for
the whole evening, before I get overly into the details of any particular
race. My first 2 steps in reviewing charts are:
1) Taking a broad look at what was happening and how the races were going.
What the pattern of fractions were. What was winning and what was not.
2) Understanding the nature of the early speed and clarifying the goings
on at or near the front end.
THE BROAD VIEW - Saturday April 17
RACE 1 - winner left, was on a sustained move
from the start, got the top on the backstretch and never looked back. Winner
was at least in medium shape.
RACE 2 - win, place and show horses were all on the rim, 2nd, 3rd and 4th
over respectively. Winner was in sharp form.
RACE 3 - win, place and show horses were all on the rim, 2nd, 3rd and 1st
over respectively. Winner was in sharp form
RACE 4 - was won wire to wire, with
the winner making one sustained move to the top. Winner
was in sharp form.
RACE 5 - was won wire to wire by a
sharp horse
RACE 6 - was won from the pocket by a horse who was not
in shape.
RACE 7 - winner came from 2nd over by a sharp horse.
RACE 8 - winner quarter moved to command
before the quarter and won on the engine, a razor
sharp horse
RACE 9 - was won from the pocket by a horse who was in "can't tell"
kind of condition.
RACE 10-was won wire to wire by a reasonably
sharp animal
RACE 11-was won wire to wire by a sharp horse
RACE 12-winner was second over in medium shape
RACE 13-was one by a sharp
horse who left and made a 2nd move to the top and was a front end
winner.
In summary,
-7 of the 13 races were won on the front end -
that is, by a horse who had made either a sustained opening move for the
lead and who maintained that lead, or who moved well before the half to
secure command. Furthermore, in one of the 13 races, the front end did not
win, but finished within a length of the winner. (FINE CUISINE)
-4 of 13 races were won by the horse 2nd over with live cover
-2 of the 13 races were won by a pocket sitter
=================================
-8 of the 13 races were won by horses who were clearly
sharp
-4 of the 13 races were won by horses who seemed to be in "average"
form, or were in a state where their form was not ascertainable. (Included
here were PARTYWITHTHEBIGDOG(race 1) who was a tough call, and was in good
enough shape for me to play on top in the exactas with my key horse based
on the odds; and LUV'M 'N LEAVE'M who was a "can't tell", but
who most handicappers considered sharp)
-only 1 of the races was won by a horse who, according
to my methods of shape determination, was clearly not in shape (I
MARRIED A WITCH).
Now, it is just coincidental that the percentages that we saw this past
Saturday are EXACTLY equal to the percentages that I have noted over the
long term; specifically, that IN-SHAPE horses win twice as many races as
MEDIUM/AVERAGE/SUSTAINED SHAPE horses who, in turn, win about 3-4 times
as often as OUT-OF-SHAPE horses. This is the primary driver behind my assertion
that SHAPE DETERMINATION is the most important factor.
A basic observation then, is that the track was a pretty well balanced
bias - more than user-friendly on the front end for sharp animals. Well
positioned closers had legitimate shots here as well.
Now, let's zoom in a little closer as follows:
-The only out-of-shape horse to win left and was parked to get position
at the quarter but yielded and sat the pocket behind a viscous speed duel
during the middle half of the race. That middle half was, far and away,
the fasted middle half of the evening on a relative basis. He then was able
to collar the leaders in the stretch, during the slowest portion of the
race. This is a typical summer pattern at the Meadowlands for out-of-shape
winners. One rule of shape determination that I hold stubbornly too, which
my father taught me over 30 years ago still holds true today - any horse
that manages to win a race must now be considered to be in at least average
or medium shape. Why? Because regardless of how easy things were, he did
what was expected given the circumstances. Going forward to this week, we
will upgrade I MARRIED A WITCH from (****) poor form, to (***) average shape.
-Taking a look at the overall pattern of the fractions - we see that
the first halves were, by far and away, the fastest portions of most of
the races. The middle halves, as usual, were the slowest, and the final
halves were in the middle, but a little on the slow side, relatively speaking.
Also noteworthy is that the fractions were not even. What I mean by this
is that there was quite a bit of variance in the patterns. Most of the races
did have a very definable fast portion and a very definable slow portion.
This is good. It is like a very volatile stock is for a trader. Someone
who trades stocks short term likes stocks that have volatility, since this
is what accounts for large, quick moves in one direction of another, which
are opportunities to enter and exit positions over the short term, taking
advantage of temporary swings of sentiment and still have a "tradable"
move in between. Likewise with studying charts.
Those who have followed me over the long haul will remember that the
most profitable thing that I think can happen is to have a track with a
strong bias one way or the other one week with a reversal the following
week. This gives us the volatility in the performances that we need to take
advantage of wild swings of bettor sentiment. The same holds true for a
given night. Sometimes, you will find nights where the fractions of the
races all seem to line up together. They all look kind of alike. While this
might indeed create a bias, it is too obvious and is less likely to screw
up the perceptions of bettors who look primarily at the programs. But this
past Saturday seems like a good one from which to use the BROAD VIEW of
the charts from this perspective.
The next step is to get a little better understanding of the trips of
the front runners. In attempting to understand their performances more fully
and understand how the race set up as it did, the program lines can be very
deceptive, as you will see. The charts add a wealth of information to the
puzzle. As such, I'll just make the following notes, all gleaned from the
charts. Notice that as of this point, I HAVE NOT supplemented anything with
additional information that I might have from having watched the races:
| In Race 1, PARTYWITHTHEBIGDOG worked hard to get the lead, being parked
from an outside post, and faced a challenger by the half and through the
whole third quarter. Note particularly here that #7 U DEMAND, just inside
of him, also left and, in fact, was still fighting his way to the front
at the 1/4. |
| In Race 2, CAM'S ICON also left hard from an outside post and was
parked. In this case, only the #2 horse left in side of him. Furthermore,
he did not face a challenge at the half and, in fact, faced a later and
less significant challenge than did the pacesetter in Race 1. |
In Race 3, the chart raises some questions and puts out a red flag.
#2 ATLANTIC YANKEE has the lead and the rail at the 1/4. In fact, his program
line is likely to appear as follows:
2 1 3 3 2/1¼ 4/5¾
From this, it would appear that he left. You can tell from the lengths
behind whether or not he was parking another horse at that juncture. Either
way, he probably yielded not long after the ¼ and sat the 3 hole
all the way around. Further examination of the chart, however, shows that
this is in fact far from the truth. Apparently, there was nobody parked
at the quarter. In addition, at the ½ #5 SET THE AGENDA is indicated
as being 2nd, parked 2-wide. #6 MOONLIGHT RAKER is shown as being in the
lead, parked 3-wide! Apparently, while ATLANTIC YANKEE was sitting on the
rail, he was involved in some kind of duel for the lead, parking not one,
but two horses through the 2nd quarter. (Those who saw the race, saw that
#5 left from the 3 hole shortly after the quarter with #6 right behind him
and was apparently clearing to the lead when #2 stepped on the gas big time.
Further, #5 appeared to take some kind of bad step at that juncture, backing
off, sending #6 3-wide, but then continued on with it, yielding to the #6
in the far turn. Further, #5 then pulled the pocket after the ¾ before
turning for home). |
| Race 4 has another configuration where the charts are helpful. PHOTO
RADAR left and was parked at the quarter before taking command and winning
easily, and totally unchallenged from that point on. However, he was not
parked by a leaver from inside. It was #10 who was on the inside parking
him at the ¼! From the chart, this means one of two things. Either
he left, secured the lead quickly and was on a retake at that point, or,
he left along with someone from the inside and was looped by the #10, never
got to the wood during the first ¼ of the race, and was still on
a prolonged leave at that marker. |
| Race 5 looks like a no-brainer … MAJOR BLUR left, got the top
easily, faced some kind of challenge, which was late and not all that strong,
and won. |
| Race 6 is an interesting one … if you just see the lines on the
program, you might wonder. The chart shows #7 I MARRIED A WITCH on the outside
dueling for the lead at the ¼. #2 ARTISTIC is the first horse on
the rail, but he is not 2nd! He is 3rd! #1 FINE CUISINE is 2nd, parked on
the outside. Ordinarily, someone like Willie Mitchell or Ken Iulo would
be the only ones likely to get parked from the rail.. But #1 was on the
retake, moving on the outside right behind #7 at that point. But the program
line on #2 will not indicate that he left, when in fact, the chart tells
us that he left hard and ran out that whole 1st quarter. #1 gets the lead
after the ¼ and at some point before the ¾ is challenged.
The chart also suggests that this was a stronger challenge. How? Because
the horse who was on the outside challenging at the ¾, #2 is not
only 2nd at the ¾, but is still hanging around just a ¼ length
behind at the "top of the stretch". Again, if you watched this
race, you will note that a fierce speed duel ensued very shortly after the
half, with those 2 horses going at each other on the lead until the very
deep stretch before being overhauled finally by fresh horses. |
And speaking of the top of the stretch, for those of you who
haven't seen the Meadowlands, and for those who have - please make the following
note. The place where they measure the top of the stretch for the program,
is NOT at the top of the stretch as you see it. This point is, in fact,
about a full 1/3 of the way down the lane. Please keep that in mind when
interpreting charts. Know your track. Whatever track you go to, go out and
look where the headstretch pole is. If you are not sure, then ask
| Race 7 requires less intense analysis in this regard. CORY'S BIG GUY
blasted out of there … 2 horses left inside of him, #1 TAKE A CAMCHANCE,
who took back pretty quickly, and #5 VANCE THE VICTOR who made a legitimate
move, but did not run out the entire quarter. From that point, there was
no challenge at the half, but, AT POINT BLANK was on the move their and
went by. This new leader did face a challenge from just behind him, but
that one expired soon after they turned home. |
| Race 8 is more of a classical leave … rail horse CLASS GUY protects
position, #3 leaves hard with #4 just outside of him. The interesting horse
to look at here is #7 CONNOR SEELSTER who made a full leave, but was then
pushed wide and forced to abort that move as #4 left inside of him. #7 then
had to wait until #1 retook before he was forced to go on with it. The chart
reveals #1 parked again at the half, indicating another retake. A light
challenge is apparent from #5 in the far turn. |
| Race 9 is not much of a story .. CHOSEN FAME left hard from post 7,
nobody left from inside of him so he got the lead rather easily. He did
face a challenge though, and we know it was relatively early as C'MON BIG
GUY is dueling at both the ½ and the ¾ poles and in fact,
is still within ½ length of the leader well into the stretch. |
| Race 10 featured a hard leave by #5 ALMAHURST FRONTIER, unopposed
from the left. The only challenge materialized approaching the half, but
which did not have the staying power to keep the pressure on through the
turn. |
| Race 11 is a bore for the purposes of this discussion. From the rail,
AUSTIN just blasted out of there and forced everyone in behind him, and
bottomed out the field without any significant challenge. |
| Race 12 is one you will want to take note of in terms of early speed.
Again, #3 COMMANDING MOMENT obviously left, but the chart reveals #1 FREEHOLD
HANOVER at 30-1 parking him throughout that 1st quarter. Further, COMMANDING
MOMENT offered little or no resistance to the next challenge from NOBLE
FAIR, who in turn face the 3rd quarter challenge from FREDERIC CHOPAN. All
the while here, you can see from the chart that the initial leaver - FREEHOLD
HANOVER, the long shot was clearly next in line on the rail behind COMMANDING
MOMENT when that one hit a brick wall. This raises questions as to whether
or not that one could have had more to offer had he not been behind the
quitter. |
| Race 13 chart yields little information on the front end.. MEDOLAND
SAM left for position, let BEACH OF FAITH go on with it, retook after the
¼. The challenge by HONEY FITZ was apparently a weak and brief one. |
So, my first step is to step back and look at the global view of what
was happening, as we did at the start today. Then, I seek to understand
what was happening with the pace setters. After that, I seek to understand
what the chart is trying to tell me about the horses who attempted to come
from off the pace.
I will not get into this now, but I will just throw it out as a tidbit
- as food for thought. And before I leave you this week let me say that
you can pay attention to them all or not. I choose not. I try to combine
my global view with the detail, to see just which of these pieces seem really
important and which don't. And I also want to look for races where the program
lines might be deceiving in the key areas. From this Saturday night, races
3, 8 and 12 definitely fit the bill. There are some definite things to look
at in terms of the horses involved in the early speed in these races which
might be overlooked going forward.
As far as winning closers go on this Saturday night, they were BANTING
(2nd over, sharp), SUCH A HOOT (2nd over, sharp), USHER HANOVER (2nd over,
sharp) and YANKEE FINESSE (2nd over, average shape). Is the picture coming
through? Further, if you look at the fractions on this evening, you will
see that NONE of these races contained very fast last halves, relatively
speaking. Each of these horses was set up in good position and had a soft
pace to close into. In fact, on these performances alone, none of these
horses needed to be sharp in order to win. None of these moves happened
at important parts of these races. But, 3 of these horses were already clearly
in sharp form coming into Saturday night's action, and we cannot hold it
against them, as they did everything they needed to do - they won - get
it? If either of these horses happened to NOT win, unless there was a clear
excuse, their shape would, in my mind, no longer be considered sharp as
they were expected to win these races at those junctures. So, what if any
implication can I make about the OVERALL (remember, broad view?) nature
of the goings on this night based on our understanding of this, and our
pacesetting discussion?
Apparently, the front end was a bit stronger than it looked. The opening
fractions were a bit fast and there were many multiple leaves, exchanges
and duels which should have made things even tougher on the front. However,
the only closers who were able to get there were sharp horses who had it
soft coming for home. Just food for thought.
Next week, we will turn our eyes to the closers in particular, and try
to better understand their efforts.
Good Luck!
Copyright ©1999 Kimstarr Communications.
All rights reserved. This material may not be
published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in any form. Use of this
site signifies your
agreement to the terms of use. |
