As we head into the heart of the fall season, there's an important difference between the races for two-year-olds in the spring and now: the increase in distance from the "short" short races-4,  41/2, and 5 furlongs-to the "longer" short races-5 1/2 to 6 furlongs. 

Think that extra half a furlong doens't make much difference? Think again, if it's a field of twos. 

Just like some of their older sprinting counterparts, some two-year-olds that seem to be world-beaters in five furlong races will finish up the track when they try six furlongs, frustratingly so when they get clobbered by horses which they beat with authority at five furlongs earlier in the year! 

Which are likely to make a better transition to six furlongs? It's almost too obvious: the ones that were gaining on and passing others in the stretch of those shorter short races. Like older one-dimensional speedballs, the twos who burst out of the gate, run their brains out and win sometimes by what seem to be many impressive lengths, are not necessarily the best candidates to stretch out. 

Why is this? No one says it better than Henry Kuck in Winner's File: "An extra furlong can seem like an extra mile to a two-year-old. Some of these fast young horses do manage to carry their speed the extra distance, but they are rarely good bets."

I'm writing this the first week of October, 2000, and I'm remembering last weekend's races, where I've already seen a two-turn route for twos. The public made the horse with the best sprint form the favorite, since all there was to go on in the Form were sprint races for all the horses in the race. One of the finest maxims in all of racing applies to races like this: breeding notwithstanding, never bet a horse that is being asked to do something for the first time it has never done before. Pass the race, watch, and make notes. 

Remember what I said last week was the most important handicapping factor in two-year-old races? These races are races in which the trainer experiments, to determine what type of horse he has. If a trainer follows up a two-year-old's first try around two turns with another relatively soon (and even better with a longer workout or two between the two), it's a pretty good sign that the trainer is expecting improvement in that second start at the distance. If that horse is entered against a field of two who have never gone the distance, watch the tote board--you may have a wonderful spot play that doesn't turn up very often. 

I can almost hear someone saying "Yeah, but I  remember a horse that DID go all the way in its first start around two turns." 

Sure. It happens. That's racing. The two-year-old horse that does this is a superior runner that bears watching and following closely in its next few starts. 

What about the Beyer figures (which I think are terribly overrated at many tracks, anyway)? Simple: always give preference to the horse with experience around two turns over one who may have a big number who is trying two turns for the first time. 

A key play to look for in short races for two-year olds is to look for horses which were able to stay close to the pace of the race (within two fifths) and then gained some ground in the stretch. This is pretty much one of the basics that can apply to any sprint race, but may help you to spot a decent priced-horse or fashion an exotic wager at decent odds when the tote board and the Form-based information  the public relies on so heavily create a race in which there is no definite favorite. 

I subscribe to the theory that every horse race has its own set of primary and secondary handicapping factors, which are determined by the conditions and type of race, age of horses, and so on. 

Keeping in mind that many, if not most two-year-races see so much experimentation, what factors are primary handicapping factors for doping out the baby races? The one I would put at the top of the list is speed. (I'll defer any discussion on speed figs and track variants to Charlie Carroll.)  After that, experience at the distance. Rounding out my list of primary factors is body language. 

I'm certainly no expert on body language, but I've had better luck using it to throw out horses in two-year-old races than in any other. Maybe it's easier (for me, anyway) to spot nervousness, discomfort, or a downright unwillingness to be on the racetrack with this group of horses rather than older, more experienced ones. 

My secondary list of handicapping factors consists of  all the rest that apply-trainer records, breeding, etc., with none having more importance than another. Whether you regard wagering on thoroughbreds as an investment or as simply gambling, to me,  two-year-olds seem to be the shakiest type of risk. 

But no risk, no reward, and an occasional  well-founded venture into this area of racing can spin off a few bucks and afford an opportunity to be reminded of how varied the game really is.