The Art of the Game - Early Allowance and Preps

(You may need to click Aiden's video a couple times for it to play)

Early Allowance races and Early (Low Points) Derby preps can be handicapped in the same manner.

Later Allowance races (refreshers for Graded Stakes races with more seasoned colts) and Late Derby Preps (higher Points for the Winner) are a separate handicapping method altogether. That will come in a separate article later.

EARLY ALLOWANCE RACES AND EARLY DERBY PREPS

For the sake of space, we'll use an example from this past weekend's early Derby prep, The Withers Stakes. Again, every point that should be conquered when handicapping would go hand in hand with an early Allowance race as well.

With both types, your PP sheet will have a very minimal amount of races and figures to study. Quite possibly, only one or two previous races, maybe even three or four - but certainly a nominal amount at best.

The reason why I will use the Withers Stakes as an example for this demonstration is because of its simplicity on how to attack it. I had watched a Youtube video of a highly respected "handicapper" who posted his analysis on the race. To be quite frank in this discussion, I couldn't believe that this guy was actually getting paid for such garbage.

It was obvious to me that the most important aspects of handicapping this type of race were completely disregarded while he was utilizing a handicapping method that he most likely used on every race he worked on.

He was quite adamant in his pick for the winner, talking with such an unbridled confidence, and I am sure there were many who watched and followed his lead. Unfortunately, they lost - badly.

His top pick was Global Steve. Proper handicapping should have told him that Global Steve was the easiest of the field to toss based on the parameters of the race. Global Steve was in gate 1, the first to handicap, and within a quick 3 minutes, he was the first to be tossed to the wind.

Now, lets dive into the handicapping process with this type of early race (which would also coincide with an Early Allowance as well.)

THE PARAMETERS - Aqueduct Race Track. Winter. 9f.

Global Steve missed the mark with every single point located within just the parameters alone. The red flags were raised way high on that flag pole without even moving on to the rest of the major points to look at with this type of early race.

1. Both of his winning races were held at Parx race track. Parx is a fast speedway - Aqueduct is not. There lies the very first clue that Global Steve would never run the same race on these separate tracks.

2. Last race he ran was on a sloppy track. The Withers day was clear. Again, another clue that he would not run the same. Two different surfaces will not produce the same results.

   
   

THE DISTANCE - 9f vs. Past Performance Projection

With these early races, most likely there will be an upgrade in distance. You must project only a few past performances to the new distance of the day. In Global Steve's case, we have two 7f performances. Now he moves up to 9f. Regardless of the track surface and regardless of the posted wins, look at the LP figures from both. His energy disintegrated.

Early calls produced hefty and speedy 92 and 106. Beautiful. But then, he dropped all the way down to 73. Even though he took home the win, these nose dives tells you two things: Either he was up against a group of duds or the sloppy surface was not kind to rear runners. Either way, those specifics will NOT be present in the Withers.

In addition, he won the race by only 1.5 lengths. This means that the jockey used his horse to full capacity all the way to the wire. His late energy did not disintegrate because he was so far ahead that he simply coasted the horse to the wire. His energy distribution was clear cut and on full display. Fast very early and then POOF! Nose dive in the sun and nose dive in the rain...

Now he moves to the 9f Withers - he has to tack on another 2f - on a much more yielding bias to boot. Common sense would tell you within 3 minutes to put a slash through this contender and move on. But, we'll keep going!

THE WORKOUTS: Does the training track coincide?

Global Steve's entire horse racing life had, up until this point, revolved around the Parx track. Accustom to that speedy surface with both races and every single solitary workout was at Parx. There is no need to even consult the times or if he even produced bullets. Aqueduct and Parx do not coincide at all. He will be shocked at the difference in surface as he has never been introduced to it at all.

This horse was trained diligently on an extreme speed bias and no amount of works or races at that track could have prepared him for the huge difference in bias. His Prime Power of 133.2, being placed at 2nd on the field, was a joke and unfortunately for some, they take that number to heart. That Prime Power number is usually meaningless.

THE BREEDING: Does it align with Past performances vs. today's race?

It is so important to at least consult Dr. Roman's Dosage Index and make the comparison to how it coincided in the past to how it would work for the race at hand. With Global Steve, he should have been tossed even before we got to this step, however, for demonstration purposes, we'll continue.

This step is imperative when you have a horse who hits the mark with the first two steps and now you need to separate him from one or two other compatible players.

Global Steve:

DP = 3-7-4-0-0 (14) DI = 6.00   CD = 0.93 ANZ = 7.00

Mare Profile = 6-9-3-6-6   Speed = 15   Stamina = 12   Index = 1.14   Triads = 18-18-15

This should drive the point home. Look at that index! He was bred with 6X the amount of speed over stamina. High .93 CD. In addition, the mares are dumping even more speed into the mix. Note the lopsided scale, it is tilting 3 points over on the speed side. The mares contribution is backwards for 9f at Aqueduct, so the 6.00/7.00 chefs input stays fully charged.

Is there any wonder now why he posted 92 and 106 early speed figures? Is there any wonder why he excelled on the Parx bias? Is there any doubt in your mind why he excelled on a slick wet track? Can you now see why he disintegrated with his late energy at only 7f? Can you use common sense to understand that he will exert even more energy on the Aqueduct bias as opposed to gliding at Parx even if it was only another 7f race? Now, project the possibility at 9f. There wouldn't be a chance in hell that this guy would find success within these parameters.

He had already given us the evidence that he is a speed demon early with the inability to sustain it at 7f- even on a conducive track.

It is so easy to have 100% confidence in completely and totally dismissing this competitor traveling 9f on a clear track at Aqueduct! This horse had zero chance, as every single point within the parameters of this race were completely against him.

Now we'll look at Captain Cook, the eventual Winner. We could say that this is after the fact, however, within the context of handicapping skills within the parameters of a certain type of race, we'll continue with him.

(Full disclosure, I was in Omaha Omaha's corner for the win in this race. I used Captain Cook in the 3rd and 4th spots in my super. Obviously, I lost! But, by the aspects of the parameters of the race, he was at least a player.)

THE PARAMETERS - Aqueduct Race Track. Winter. 9f.

As is the case with Global Steve, Captain Cook also had a 7f sloppy win in his previous race.

1. The main difference is that his race was at Aqueduct, not Parx. At the very least, he had a spoonful of experience at the same track.

2. He also won on a sloppy track, but his was by 9.25 lengths, not 1.5 lengths. Additionally, his maiden produced fairly even running across on a nice clear track. Two different surfaces producing two different energy variants.

THE DISTANCE - 9f vs. Past Performance Projection

The fact that Captain Cook's late energy also took a nose dive travelling 7f on a sloppy track is not as clear cut as it was with Global Steve. Captain Cook's race was at Aqueduct, but the more telling part is that he won the race by 9-1/4 lengths. In this case, it could be reasonable to assume that the jockey did not need to overuse his horse down the stretch while trying to compete against another.

Going from very impressive early calls of 95 and 103 to a huge downgrade late to 82 does not necessarily mean the horse was giving in. With over 9 lengths ahead, most likely the horse was eased to the wire.

In this case, the Prime Power of 135.7 (1st) was right on target, however, it is not something you should really rely on heavily. Again, they put Global Steve in second and he was an obvious toss.

THE WORKOUTS: Does the training track coincide?

Captain Cook did have some experience at the same track. He also had workouts at Belmont and Churchill Downs. This is early experience at 3 different tracks as opposed to one. He was subjected to 3 different surfaces.

But here is the important part concerning his works and why he stood out as a player in this race. You may be surprised with this but for a winter Aqueduct race, you certainly do not want a speed demon. This is not Parx or Santa Anita. The bias at Aqueduct is against speed.

Captain Cooks workouts down the list were nothing sensational. They were quite average and not speedy at all. When you handicap for a specific race, every little detail goes hand in hand. His 50+ second workouts, while not flashy at all, coincide with the type of running that works on the Aqueduct bias. If he was posting 47 and 48 second works, he would be in the same boat with Global Steve. Too fast on that surface to withstand the 9f. Too fast to sustain the same energy on a fast clear track at Aqueduct.

You must always match the workouts with the race and where it is held. You must discern the type that would lose advantage on that surface. Since these early races do not give us a nice long list of past performances, it is the workouts, the times and the place as to which holds advantage.

THE BREEDING: Does it align with Past performances vs. today's race?

Captain Cook

DP = 0-1-1-0-0 (2) DI = 3.00   CD = 0.50 ANZ = 3.00

Mare Profile = 8-4-5-10-6   Speed = 12   Stamina = 16   Index = 0.93   Triads = 17-19-21

Unlike Global Steve who had numbers that coincided with advantage on a 7f sloppy Parx track, Captain Cook showed SERIOUS speed capability against the stamina leaning configurations that he holds on the same at Aqueduct. The CD at .50 and heftier triads leaning his scale in the correct direction for 9f at Aqueduct.

The fact that he would be more inclined to lean with his mares (only 2 total points in his chefs profile) and they are offering him 8 brilliant speedy points does at least give evidence that he had accepted that and verifies the 95/103 early speed in that sloppy track performance. But he does lean much more towards the stamina side, as depicted in the mare's scale and as depicted in his "sub-par" workout times.

This horse actually gave us both sides, enough speed to compete and enough stamina to sustain on that Aqueduct bias. He actually ran against the grain of his breeding on a sloppy surface, which, in turn, points him out as a higher quality player with these configurations. In actuality, Captain Cook was built much better for the clear 9f track than he was for the 7f sloppy track. Much stronger chance of a heightened performance over his last win. Hindsight truly is 20/20.

For the Aqueduct race, his .50 low CD with the hefty 21 in the last slot of the triads does align with the 9f at Aqueduct. He was a player and he did an excellent job showing off his capability with the race parameters, even with minimal information to consult.

Those 3 main points - distance, workouts and breeding - are imperative to consult when handicapping an EARLY ALLOWANCE or an EARLY DERBY PREP.

Previous Article - Maidens and Debuts

Next up... Late Derby Preps and Refresher Allowance Races