- This topic has 81 replies, 25 voices, and was last updated 18 years ago by
.
- Posts
I just wondered what everyones opinion was on the bounce factor. It’s a question that seems to split people in racing, so I thought I would make a poll to see what the forum thinks on the subject.
Ah, yes, that bounce factor…What does that mean?
Sorry, am I alone in the dark? Let me know and I’ll have a vote……Surely there is enough data available to test this theory (tho I haven’t got the time nor the inclination)
Really need to define first and agree what the bounce factor is thought to be by those discussing it. So often the arguments for and against are at cross purposes because they are arguing different aspects and with hindsight of specific cases rather than any generality. If it exists, it is reliably predictable before the event.
It exists alright, in some horses more markedly than others. Luckily, I lot of people do not believe it does exist, which presents a number of good betting opportunities to those that do
Thanks TC for answering. Don’t really have an opinion but thanks. You learn something new every day. Cheers, Crizzy
I don’t think Well Chief got much chance to bounce at Chelt last March since he fell at the second. Having said that, he probably bounced at Aintree instead.
I’d agree it exists. Seems to occur when run 1 and 2 back from injury are close together. Would love to see some stats though.
Wondered what that meant
Here and down under we call it ‘second up syndrome’ but it applies to all horses returning from a spell and not necessarily injury.
A more than acceptable reason for defeat in many circles and one that is factored into form when it has been seen before in the same horse.It’s commonly thought that even when a horse runs first time out it’s fresh and feels good and loose and runs well, then second up the horse is stiff, sore and just doesn’t stretch out the same way. I get it when I go for my second jog after a few weeks off. Seems perfectly rational really.
I think it is very hard for any track athlete, equine or human, to produce two outstanding performances in quick succession. By outstanding performances, I mean very fast times compared to the standards for the course and the conditions. There are physiological reasons for this and the ‘bounce’ usually occurs when it is attempted. This putting together of two outstanding performances is even harder when the athlete returns from any sort of lay off.
I have read about this in various sources, particularly the articles written by James Willoughby. The theory seems to be that athletes have to dig very deeply into their physical and psychological resources to post very fast times, and they cannot usually do this without a break between races.
Many horses can follow up a fast time win with a victory but it is usually in a race where the pace is not so punishing. Athletes are often forced to compete in heats leading up to the finals but they are usually careful to save themselves for the main event.
There are exceptions, but they are invariably ‘super athletes’ like Jesse Owens or Flo-Jo(suspicion of artificial help?). In the equine sphere, a horse would have to win the Gold Cup and the Grand National in the same season to be regarded as ‘super’ in this sense. In Flat racing, horses are rarely asked to win two highly competitive top class races(particularly handicaps) in quick succession. If they do, the times for both are unlikely to be very fast.
Ah the myths of racing.
Any number of anecdotes, never any hard statistical evidence.
Mainly because it is almost impossible to define, as it will vary from horse to horse but nevertheless likely to be a valid reason/excuse for an underperformance.
Colin
- Total Posts 17716
Mainly because it is almost impossible to define, as it will vary from horse to horse but nevertheless likely to be a valid reason/excuse for an underperformance.
ColinColin
Maybe it’s only impossible to define because it doesn’t exist?
And as a result is used by the Mordins of this world to ‘explain’ away disappointing runs when there is a more solid reason in the formbook – as there was with Well Chief, for instance?Mainly because it is almost impossible to define, as it will vary from horse to horse but nevertheless likely to be a valid reason/excuse for an underperformance.
ColinColin
Maybe it’s only impossible to define because it doesn’t exist?
And as a result is used by the Mordins of this world to ‘explain’ away disappointing runs when there is a more solid reason in the formbook – as there was with Well Chief, for instance?My opinion would be that the bounce factor is a medical fact and is proven. I believe if you asked any doctor, physio etc then they would ensure you that the bounce factor exists in any living being (man or animal) that has muscles.
Seabird
It may be easier for top class sprinters to run two very fast races within a few weeks. Choisir is a recent example I can recall, but I honestly don’t think there will be that many who are in that category.
Further down the ratings, it is true that many horses(particularly sprinters) can race quite frequently and maintain their form. I’m no expert on this, but it seems to me that the majority of them are racing within their comfort zone and are not(or cannot be) stretched to race to the point where it hurts them to run any faster. In order to bounce, a horse has to have been pushed to the limit, produce a fast time, and then be unable to do this again until it recovers from the physiological and (maybe) psychological effects of the exertions.
Blackheath
You may have a point in being sceptical. A lot of this is anecdotal but James Willoughby has decent credentials and is well read and well versed in how horses expend energy in the course of racing and how they recover from it. It seems logical enough to me that they should take time to get over a very hard race. Most trainers would say the same, even though they might not call it the bounce factor.
There was a chap on here a while back who had studied the training of athletes and made some interesting comparisons between that and training horses. Perhaps he (or she) might read this and join the discussion.
Reet, I would agree that at times it is used as a convenient way to write off a poor performance, or, in Mordin’s case to support the latest of his wonderfully batty theories.
But I feel there are times where a horse does put in a performance that takes so much out of it that he does need a LOT of time to recover.
Colin
Sorry, am I alone in the dark? Let me know and I’ll have a vote……
Here and down under we call it ‘second up syndrome’ but it applies to all horses returning from a spell and not necessarily injury.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.