Bet This, Not That: Route-to-sprint on Santa Anita downhill course
If you’ve been a horseplayer for any length of time, you probably have a few favorite angles. Blinkers off a speed horse, third start following a layoff, and second career start after a well-bet debut have been popular angles for years with horseplayers.
Turf sprints at Santa Anita, over the downhill turf course, are like no other horse races in the world - horses turn right out of the gate, then begin a steep descent before crossing over the dirt of the main track while simultaneously turning left for the stretch run.
Commonly referred to by horseplayers simply as “The Hill,” it’s a course that some horses relish and others reject. Due to the uniqueness of the hill, horseplayers seem to rely on angles in these races more than in any other races at Santa Anita. Horses coming into a downhill race from a route has been a popular angle, and it’s one that was validated when Bobby’s Kitten took the 2014 Breeders’ Cup Turf Sprint.
Until DRF releases Angle Finder later in 2015, we won’t be able to look at the stats for that angle in aggregate, but we can use DRF Formulator to analyze the results of some of the most prominent trainers on the Southern California circuit from the past five years. Based on the data below, there seems to be little empirical evidence to support the belief that cutbacks on the hill are anything more than a neutral play at best.
First let’s look at some trainers with all starters over the past five years down the hill.
| Trainer | Starts | Win | 2nd | 3rd | Total ROI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barry Abrams | 162 | 18 | 18 | 16 | $2.11 |
| Bob Baffert | 39 | 1 | 5 | 6 | $0.09 |
| Jack Carava | 68 | 8 | 9 | 11 | $2.59 |
| Phil D'Amato | 38 | 6 | 7 | 5 | $2.46 |
| Neil Drysdale | 38 | 2 | 4 | 4 | $0.84 |
| Peter Eurton | 94 | 17 | 13 | 14 | $1.72 |
| Carla Gaines | 77 | 11 | 12 | 11 | $0.97 |
| Jorge Gutierrez | 43 | 6 | 1 | 3 | $2.55 |
| Dan Hendricks | 30 | 3 | 0 | 2 | $0.92 |
| David Hofmans | 40 | 3 | 4 | 4 | $1.01 |
| Jerry Hollendorfer | 119 | 15 | 20 | 13 | $0.93 |
| Gary Mandella | 41 | 3 | 8 | 2 | $1.88 |
| Richard Mandella | 106 | 13 | 16 | 12 | $1.82 |
| Peter Miller | 141 | 14 | 20 | 15 | $1.46 |
| Jeff Mullins | 76 | 17 | 8 | 8 | $2.71 |
| Doug O'Neill | 265 | 32 | 30 | 34 | $1.39 |
| Tom Proctor | 79 | 23 | 12 | 5 | $2.91 |
| Mike Puype | 186 | 26 | 26 | 25 | $1.61 |
| John Sadler | 255 | 42 | 30 | 31 | $1.63 |
| John Shireffs | 53 | 9 | 6 | 8 | $2.50 |
| Bill Spawr | 42 | 9 | 7 | 6 | $1.78 |
| Kathy Walsh | 25 | 2 | 1 | 4 | $0.92 |
Now let’s look at the same trainers with horses down the hill coming out of a route race in the previous start.
| Trainer | Starts | Win | 2nd | 3rd | Total ROI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barry Abrams | 72 | 6 | 8 | 6 | $1.91 |
| Bob Baffert | 16 | 1 | 1 | 3 | $0.23 |
| Jack Carava | 17 | 2 | 3 | 2 | $3.07 |
| Phil D'Amato | 12 | 3 | 4 | 2 | $4.11 |
| Neil Drysdale | 18 | 0 | 2 | 2 | $0.00 |
| Peter Eurton | 23 | 4 | 4 | 8 | $2.90 |
| Carla Gaines | 26 | 6 | 4 | 4 | $1.76 |
| Jorge Gutierrez | 14 | 0 | 0 | 1 | $0.00 |
| Dan Hendricks | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | $0.00 |
| David Hofmans | 8 | 2 | 2 | 0 | $3.67 |
| Jerry Hollendorfer | 47 | 5 | 7 | 9 | $0.66 |
| Gary Mandella | 12 | 0 | 3 | 0 | $0.00 |
| Richard Mandella | 33 | 3 | 7 | 3 | $1.02 |
| Peter Miller | 29 | 2 | 4 | 3 | $0.22 |
| Jeff Mullins | 32 | 7 | 5 | 1 | $3.28 |
| Doug O'Neill | 80 | 10 | 9 | 9 | $1.34 |
| Tom Proctor | 24 | 7 | 1 | 1 | $2.45 |
| Mike Puype | 41 | 3 | 7 | 6 | $0.48 |
| John Sadler | 60 | 6 | 9 | 4 | $1.05 |
| John Shireffs | 17 | 1 | 1 | 2 | $0.43 |
| Bill Spawr | 10 | 2 | 1 | 1 | $2.46 |
| Kathy Walsh | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 | $0.00 |
So, what can we glean from this data? First, it seems clear that some high-quality trainers, most notably Bob Baffert, Neil Drysdale, and Jerry Hollendorfer, have not been good bets down the hill, regardless of whether the horse is cutting back or not. Trainers like Barry Abrams and Doug O’Neill show similar win percentages and returns on investment on cutbacks as with all runners, and Tom Proctor and Jeff Mullins have proven to be solid bets down the hill, regardless of where the horse raced most recently. Others, though, show markedly stronger or weaker numbers; let’s look at them.
Cutting back from a route on the hill – Bet This:
• Phil D’Amato: Since taking over training duties from Mike Mitchell a few years ago, D’Amato has not missed a beat, returning a positive ROI with his starters down the hill. Cutting back, he’s even better, returning more than a 100 percent profit and hitting the board with 9 of 12 starters.
• Peter Eurton: With a 23-4-4-8 record and a $2.90 ROI over the past five years with cutbacks on the hill, Eurton has more than double the return and nearly twice as many hit the board compared to his horses not cutting back: 71-13-9-6, $1.34 ROI.
• Carla Gaines: Known for her success with turf runners, her tepid 14 percent win rate and anemic $0.97 ROI with all horses on the hill over the past five years come as minor revelations. However, that win rate jumps to 23 percent and the ROI to a respectable $1.76 with horses cutting back from routes, more than double the win rate and triple the ROI of the others (10 percent, $0.57 ROI).
• David Hofmans: Like Gaines, he’s known more for turf routers, and like her, his success on the hill has come when he has cut horses back from routes. Small sample, sure, but 8-2-2-0, $3.67 ROI with cutbacks is clear improvement vs. 32-1-2-4, $0.35 ROI with those not cutting back.
Cutting back from a route on the hill – Not That:
• Jorge Gutierrez: His $2.55 ROI from a 14 percent win rate with all runners down the hill over the past five years shows that he can score at times with a longshot. However, the 14-0-0-1 record there with cutbacks shows that success came with horses not cutting back (where his ROI jumps to $3.78).
• Richard and Gary Mandella: Like father, like son. Richard and Gary have posted similarly respectable ROIs with all runners down the hill over the past five years, and both have fared markedly worse with ones cutting back from routes. The number of place finishers hints at some bad luck with those runners, and the sample isn’t large enough to scare you off a horse who may be live at a price, but it is enough to make you pause at low odds.
• Peter Miller: Despite the small sample, the low ROI ($0.22) and the low percentage of in-the-money finishes (31) is enough to hint that Miller’s cutback horses on the hill usually don’t outrun their odds. A closer examination shows that to be the case, as only one runner at double-digit odds hit the board, while three favorites finished out of the money.
• Mike Puype: 3 for 41 and a $0.48 ROI over the past five years with horses cutting back on the hill should be evidence enough, and two of those three wins were by Mizdirection. So, ask yourself: Is this horse as good as Mizdirection? If so, bet; if not, pass.
• John Shirreffs: Granted, 17 starts isn’t the biggest sample, but 13 of the 17 did not hit the board when tackling the hill off a route. By contrast, Shirreffs is fantastic (36-8-5-6, $3.48 ROI) with horses on the hill not cutting back.
These are just a few examples of potential bets to target or avoid. Every day, at every track, you will find many examples of these kinds of great (or awful) opportunities. DRF Formulator gives you the keys to find these angles, and it could very well lead you to a winner that is overlooked by much of the betting public. Check out the different Formulator plans available, priced for every budget. Better yet, try it for yourself; get two Formulator cards for a penny by using code BETTHIS at checkout.