The Inexact Science of Horseracing

I'm beginning to think the mental attitude of horses is equally as important as physical fitness in their performance.
But do horses really have mental ups, downs or roundabouts?
Some display more will to win than others, more determination it seems blatantly and perform better more regularly than more laczadaisical ones.
Look at well-bred horses. They aren't always superior in their races yet physically they look the best and are expected to achieve yet can, and do, flop, regardless of their class and blood-line.
The best horses, in any class I think, are those with fitness both physical and mental.
Just some thoughts.

I'd agree with that Charles. Horses are bound to have off days, like us humans. The same applies to those who save their best for certain tracks, or prefer a certain type of going, imo. Why does a horse run well at Nottingham but has the ability of a donkey at Donny or Ripon. Must be a mental thing surely.

Yes, good points Steve, they're seemingly very temperamental when you think about it!

They say the best horses go on any ground - can't think of one example right now - I'm sure there are some.
Even on the all-weather tracks there's certain horses can only perform well at one or two and poor on the others, and all-weather regulars who struggle on turf or vice-versa.
And why do horses generally go in and out of form in spells?
It's no wonder there's only a handful of successful professional punters making a living.
Which is what Patrick might be able to do!! 

If I had a grasp of the bloodlines from the best stallions that would be helpful............Nijinsky, Northern Dancer etc but I don't!!
We went to the Newmarket Museum of Horseracing a couple of weeks ago, learned a lot of good interesting stuff, but my memory's hopeless nowadays, and never was much cop anyway.
When I mentally note a particular horse for its next race it's more often I forget its name by the time it runs than remember it. (Must get a notebook!)
Haphazard selecting every day isn't working!
(I'm off to buy a notebook............see you!)

Same here. When i spot one that might be worth a look next time out, the memory let's me down when needed. And how often has that horse then gone and won too.

Yes, and there's the ones you follow for a few runs without winning, you lay off them and then they romp in!
It's more luck than anything this game.
I just thank the lord it's not financially crippling just emotional torture!

I find that sites like sportinglife.com have plenty of data on the horse, trainers and jockeys.. but it means taking about 20minutes PER RACE to 'calculate' (for want of a better word) the winner ..

You can get an idea if the horse likes the course, if the trainer has done well with horses at a course, if the jockey is good at a course, and then combine that with the distance and the horse, jockey and trainer experience and history and then come to some pretty good results.. it's deinitely possibleto hit alot of good win's by researching, but it's like a full time job .. just not feasible ...

Yes, HPK.
I'm a tad superstitious in my attitude to selections.
Say it's a Tuesday and I've had cornflakes for breakfast I'll follow Richard Fahey's horses in preference to Mark Johnston's, but, if it's a Thursday, say, and I slept in an hour late, I'd prefer 5yo plus distance winners to Marco Botti's maidens!!
It's a blooming lottery!

This may explain some of your results  

I use all information. I try not to use any websites cos then if i get a result right its more satisfying. I generally go for who i think will win the race on this site cos i try to get the bonuses. However i like trying to find an outsider as its so satisfying. I like dissecting all the televised saturday races and go for 8 outsiders at long odds i the hope that 1 or 2 will get placed.