Are You an Overthinker?
One week ago all of the conversation in the sports world was about Pete Carroll. Specifically it was about his decision to throw the ball on second down from the one yard line rather than hand it off to running back Marshawn Lynch, which was the obvious and logical choice. The resulting interception cost Seattle a second consecutive championship and made Carroll look like the dumbest man on the planet.
Many were shocked by the play call but I wasn't. It was just the latest example of trying to outsmart the opposing team by overthinking the situation. This seems to be happening more and more often in the NFL. In nearly every game I watched this season, which was far fewer than the fantasy football fanatics, at least one time a team with less than two yards to go for a first down or touchdown threw the ball instead of running it. More often than not the result was an incomplete pass.
The NFL is turning into a chess game between two grandmasters. The obvious play call seems too obvious so it is not called. It is creating a league of overthinkers. You might be thinking what does this have to do with horse racing? The parallel between NFL coaching decisions and horseplayer horse selections can be quite similar. This is especially true when looking at jockey/trainer combinations.
Jockey/Trainer Combinations
Many years ago you could make a tidy profit knowing which jockey/trainer combinations produced a positive return on investment. Now this information is readily available in past performances for everyone to see. You can see how many times the two have combined as well as how successful they have been. Combinations like Velazquez and Pletcher, Castellano and Brown and Garcia and Baffert are all well known.
Most big trainers have one or two go-to guys. When they pair up it is logical to assume the horse is well meant and when their go-to guy chooses to ride for someone else it is logical to assume the horse might need the race or is it?
Reading Too Much into Jockey Selection
This past weekend provided two perfect examples of reading too much into jockey selection. Chad Brown had a first time starter, Rare Art, in the 9th race at Gulfstream Park on Saturday. The horse was 9/2 on the morning line. As the field entered the starting gate Rare Art was 7/1. A Chad Brown first time starter at nearly double his morning line odds? Paco Lopez in the saddle instead of one of Brown's regular jockeys? This horse had no chance right?
Rare Art tracked the pace, took over in the stretch and won easily paying $16.40. It must have been a fluke right?
The very next day Brown had first time starter Delightful Joy entered in the 8th race at Gulfstream Park. She was 6/1 on the morning line. Lopez was aboard again. Delightful Joy was 14/1 as the field sprang from the gate. She sat just off the pace and drew off in the final furlong paying $30.60.
A $2 win bet on each horse netted a profit of $45. Why were the two horses ignored by the betting public? Brown is great with first time starters, both horses had good workout patterns and both were well suited to the conditions of their respective races. The only logical conclusion is the absensce of one of Brown's regular riders. The betting public felt that neither horse was well meant because Lopez rarely, if ever rides for Brown.
The Takeaway
While trainer intent may be signaled by calling upon their go-to jockey it shouldn't be the end-all, be-all factor in deciding whether or not to select a horse. If the horse has good works and is suited to the conditions of the race don't let the lack of the trainers regular rider disuade you from backing it. Being an overthinker probably won't cost you as much as it cost Pete Carroll but a lifetime of being one might get you close.