|
|
HANDICAPPING INSIGHTS NOVEMBER 18, 2005 by Dick Powell Everyone in America seems to be weight conscious today. Fad diets reign as we all seem to become more obsessed with the latest ideal body type. Weight issues surrounding jockeys have been in the news recently. Whether it’s been a campaign to allow them to ride heavier by raising the scale of weights or the NYRA jockey scandal where the clerk of scales has been brought up on charges of illegally allowing them to ride heavier, much attention is being paid to the weight of jockeys. Amazingly, the weight of the horses has never been an issue in America. We have an information overload in American racing but, surprisingly, we don’t know the weight of the horses when they run. And if we did, would it help? I say yes. The Hong Kong Jockey Club provides weights of all the horses entered in the track program. Let’s not forget how much money Hong Kong players bet on their races. Weight information for them is critical since most of the horses competing in non-stakes races are older geldings and already "developed." Living, breathing animals whose weights usually exceed 1,000 pounds go through wide fluctuations of weight. If we knew the exact weights of horses each time they raced, what would it tell us? First and foremost, comparing one horse's weight with another's is pointless. How many times do you hear about the size of a two-year-old and his potential to develop into a classic horse? Yet, there doesn’t seem to be any correlation between physical size and the ability to go a distance of ground. Look at Birdstone, winner of the Champagne S. (G1) at two and the Belmont S. (G1) and Travers S. (G1) at three. He was able to stretch out as the races got longer yet he probably didn’t weigh more than 850 pounds. Go to a track meet or watch the Olympics on TV. What do the sprinters look like and what do the distance runners look like? There’s quite a physical difference with the sprinters being bulkier and more muscular. Yet, that size doesn’t enable them to run longer distances. If I knew that horse A weighs 1,000 pounds and horse B weighs 1,100 pounds, I would not make any value judgments either way because it's not relevant. What is relevant is knowing a horse's weight each time he races and having it listed in past performances so that we can track the horse's weight history. And some of the assumptions that one might draw fit very nicely into examining performance cycles. Horses tend to get faster as they get older. While this is happening, or perhaps because this is happening, horses are growing and will weigh more. But bigger does not necessarily mean faster. You cannot compare weights between horses, but you can expect an individual horse to weigh less at the beginning of his racing career and keep increasing until maturity, which is typically reached at the age of five but may be attained sooner with the influence of steroids. For example, a horse weighs in the range of 850-950 pounds as a two-year-old, then carries 1,000 pounds as a three-year-old. At four, the horse probably weighs more than 1,100 pounds. During the horse’s racing season, he will add weight - a three-year-old in November will weigh more than a three-year-old in February. While we would have a natural progression in size measured by weight, we would have individual fluctuations during that progression. Years ago, the late Louie "The Clocker" Marro and I would go to the Saratoga walking ring for virtually every juvenile race. We would examine the first-time starters up close and personal and make judgments on their conditioning. We didn’t have access to a scale, but standing a few feet away we could get a decent read on which horses look tight and fit and which horses are carrying a lot of flesh and might need a race. It was amazing how many first-time starters we could eliminate based on "fitness." There’s no way to know what first-time starters should weigh even if we could weigh them. But, if a horse shows up in his second start with less weight than in his debut, we might assume he needed the last race and should be much fitter today -- especially if the trainer historically doesn’t crank up his or her firsters. With horses accurately weighed, we could then globally look at new patterns of development. A horse that is racing consistently - three or four weeks between races - and is able to gain weight could be a strong sign of improvement. A horse that loses weight and then goes to the sidelines to recover might be a sign of a horse who can only run his best with time between races. Birdstone is another perfect example of this type. It would also be helpful to know what the weight of a horse was when he performed at his best. Using a horse's BRIS Speed figures, what was his weight when he ran his best figures? And, does the horse's current weight on race day compare favorably? Is this the type of horse that needs to be raced into shape off the layoff, or does the horse enter the race at his optimum weight where we can assume he is ready to go? If your favorite heavyweight boxer shows up in the ring looking like Aretha Franklin, you might want to take a pass on betting him. If a message came up on the scale "one person at a time" when he weighed in, the boxer probably missed a few days of training. Unless he is always overweight and has a proven history of doing well despite the blubber, you would bet against him every time. Unfortunately for horseplayers, at least 90 percent of us watch races on simulcast televisions and are at the mercy of cameras to view a horse's fitness. We get a glimpse of them in the post parade and at the very best we can determine if the horse is wearing front-leg bandages. But there is a way to help those who value current fitness. Horses could be weighed on the day entered, and the information would then be included in the past performances. Handicappers in other countries have had access to this information for years, and it could be of great value to us here.
 Send this article to a friend
|
|
