 SBR Top-Rated Sportsbooks |
Best Sportsbooks List
|
|
| |||||
| #1 FanDuel | SBR rating 4.8/5 | Review | #6 BetRivers | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review | #2 Caesars | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #7 Fanatics | SBR rating 4.1/5 | Review |
| #3 DraftKings | SBR rating 4.7/5 | Review | #8 Betway | SBR rating 3.8/5 | Review | ||
| #4 BetMGM | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #9 Borgata | SBR rating 3.5/5 | Review | ||
| #5 bet365 | SBR rating 4.6/5 | Review | #10 ClutchBet | SBR rating 2.9/5 | Review | ||
Good stuff, as always. So the rail favors any horse in the 1-2 path. Wouldn't that favor speed horses more often, since they'll have that path most of the way?
Funny. Just as I posted this a race went off at Santa Anita with the #1 Warren's Sugarbuzz winning at 55-1 and the #2 in second at 13-1.
Last edited by Dark Horse; 10-05-12 at 05:41 PM.
Yes, it would favor the speed more often because they will have that path . That is what a lot of writers see is the speed going on but they interpret the rail bias as a speed bias. The key is watching those other horses along the rail in the middle and in the back and see if they outrun their ability because of an edge. Or , see if the outside horses do not run to their ability because of their inferior position.Originally Posted by Dark Horse
Goldencents is entered to run on October 6, 2012, at BELMONT PARK HEY THERE STR ,ITS HARTHEBAR ...DOUBLE BOUNCTIOUS ...LO L NANCY'S NEPHEW. THERE IS THID 2 YEAR OLD IVE BEEN FOLLOWING ....I WANTED TO KNOW YOUR THOUGHTS.I THOUGHT HE WAS SUPER LAST TIME,..JUST THOUGHT YOU COULD LOOK AT A REPLAY AND TELL ME IF YOU THINK HE IS A SPECIAL COLT,NOT FOR BETTING PURPOSES JUST FOR THE FUTURE...HOW ARE YOUR TOOLS DOING .....
Str, the drf and pps are listed in my thread 2k on a horse to
win on Oct 7th, all help will be appreciated.
For stalkers and closers who take advantage of a rial bias, wouldn't that be on the jockey, at least to a large extent? I've never thought about Borel (Bo-rail) in this way, but I wonder now if he has better results in the mud, if the mud set up a rial bias.
Goldencents basically " ran off " the entire trip, meaning , that he NEVER relaxed and took a breather at any stage. He had ample opportunity to do so. If he is to run any further as time goes on , he will have to learn how to relax. He obviously has a lot of talent but as of now he runs like his tail is on fire and will need to learn to settle down early.
Happy to take a look .Str, the drf and pps are listed in my thread 2k on a horse to
win on Oct 7th, all help will be appreciated.
Q. For stalkers and closers who take advantage of a rial bias, wouldn't that be on the jockey, at least to a large extent?
A. Yes, it would be on the jockey, however, with short runs to the 1st turn , like Laurel 1 1/16th or Saratoga 1 1/16th for instance, there is so little run into the first turn that with a clean break the riders almost have to take that route. If the trip is left solely up to the rider, some will stay and some won't and that can be very frustrating to say the least. That's why if given the chance to play at an inside bias that has a race with a short run to the turn , it is more clear cut than a race where position is all left up to the rider. Believe it or not, not many of them really get it when it comes to biases. I mean, if most of the writers can't differentiate between a speed and a rail bias, would you really expect a rider too?
Q. I've never thought about Borel (Bo-rail) in this way, but I wonder now if he has better results in the mud, if the mud set up a rial bias.
A. Absolutely !
Finding a rider that likes a rail trip to begin with from any post and having a rail bias is the closest thing to cheating that a bettor can have.
Goldencents basically " ran off " the entire trip,...also you mentioned ran off,is that a classic example of it,and is that common with 2 year olds,im thinking it is ,and its up to the trainers to brake that of the colt,...i enjoy watching two year olds,i like thinking ...and handicapping them for when there 3 -4....and this colt caught my eye....do you like any two year olds now that we are seeing more,i notice a lot of eastern horses are going toto santa anita ,im assumiong to get used to the grounds,is that a big difference and who will have advantage,sending you a private mail.....
Love it. Rail bias here we come! lol
Q. lso you mentioned ran off,is that a classic example of it,and is that common with 2 year olds,im thinking it is ,and its up to the trainers to brake that of the colt,.
A. I don't know about a classic example but indeed that is what he was doing. No, it is not all that common because they are 2 year olds. It has more to do with training style, what was taught from day one and most importantly, the horses wants in terms of it's mindset.
It is up to trainers to try and adjust that but it is easier said than done. Once it is instilled, it is tough to fix.
Q. o you like any two year olds now that we are seeing more,i notice a lot of eastern horses are going toto santa anita ,im assumiong to get used to the grounds,is that a big difference and who will have advantage
A. None in particular but always rooting for my friends horses. Going to Santa Anita early might help some but it is not essential to being able to win. Getting used to the track and the acclimation of time difference is important but that does not take a month. As to who will have an advantage, speed seems to rule that place , no matter the pace. I never liked the racing out there for that reason and little if any has changed over the years.
Hope that helps.
Last edited by str; 10-12-12 at 02:42 PM.
You're funny unusial. Good answer!
The Breeder's Cup is approaching fast. There will be five races for 2-year olds, and they will all be Lasix free. The plan is to have a completely Lasix free BC in 2013.
I welcome the development, but from a betting perspective I wonder if those races aren't better skipped until there is more clarity about the effect of no-Lasix on horses that so far have ran with Lasix. What are your thoughts on this? Handicap as usual, or be more cautious? Anything special to look for?
no lasix for European 2 year olds... maybe some U.S horses can win a 2 year turf turf race then ... does that mean Frankie's not coming?
It will be impossible for a handicapper to know if any of the horses that ran on Lasix, actually bled trace amounts through lasix. This bleeding trace amounts through lasix happens all the time . Not so much with lightly raced young horses, whose bodies have not yet had to recuperate from bleeding however. So the question is, will we see 2 year olds bleeding all over the place this year? Probably not, but, just because we don't see blood does not mean that they did not bleed. The horse will need to be scoped to see exactly what happened win OR lose.
Will we see a 2 year old be eased up? I would say yes, but more so than that, we will probably see several favorites run poorly with no visible excuse.
What type of horse has the best chance of bleeding? The easy answer is speed horses because they are pushed at an early stage of the race and bleeding will show more dramatic results than the stalker or closer that just runs evenly, but as a bettor you just can not worry about it. There will be no way of you knowing who is more or less prone to bleeding other than the horses breeding. And while some may have some edge with that info, the vast majority of players will not.
What they should provide for the player is the amount of CC's that were given for each race it was used. That would level the playing field but that will never happen.
As for 2013 being lasix free, it is a disaster waiting to happen and would be a HUGE MISTAKE IMO. It's one thing when some horse bleeds and it's the "oh well" moment but let's see what happens when the Phipps classic black colors comes back full of red and they interview the rider with blood sprayed all over his goggles and helmet. The clueless politicians and stuff shirts that are trying to make this into something it's not better be careful what they wish for because they just might get it.
There are better ways to fix the game than this. There are better ways to get rid of lasix than this. I would hate to see those that think they know better and are trying to do something right take misguided measures that end up being all wrong.
So, my answers are, yes handicap as usual, and yes, be more cautious with betting amounts in races where you are betting on a horse that ran well on lasix but is now running without it.
No lasix for any 2 year olds is my understanding . Maybe a 2 year old US horse can win a turf race but lasix is not the reason they lost before IMO when and if they did.
If you mean Frankel, I did not think he was coming either way.
It does seem strange to make the big races of the year the test case. All-or-nothing without doing the research first. If gamblers took that approach... (it could also affect the KY Derby odds). And if it's for all horses for the 2013 Breeder's Cup I might skip the whole event. But why do you think there could be that much bleeding? European horses do fine without Lasix, don't they?
Q. But why do you think there could be that much bleeding? European horses do fine without Lasix, don't they?[/QUOTE]
A. I do not know if ALL bleeding medications will be banned or not. That is important to know.
Before I go on and on about lasix I might suggest reviewing posts 130, 355 and 357. I spoke about lasix quite a bit in those posts and I think that they get to a major portion of what needs to be said about this. Happy to answer any followups but let's start with those. I did not re read them so maybe I will disagree with myself now. Lol.
I'll reread those. This thread could use an index. lol
Edit:
All read up. No further questions about Lasix. We'll see how it plays out.
What do you think about the upcoming BC? I think we have three of the top four finishers from the 2011 KY Derby in three different races, with Mucho Macho Man in the Classic. The others are Animal Kingdom and Shackleford. As to the promising 3 year olds we were talking about earlier in the year. Just about every single one retired already. How weird is that? Off the top of my head, no I'll Have Another, no Bodemeister, no Paynter (in recovery, but may not return to racing), no Hansen, no Union Rags... Coincidence, or something off with the bigger picture?
Haven't kept up on Drosselmeyer, but looks like he won't be defending his BC Classic championship.
Last edited by Dark Horse; 10-20-12 at 07:00 PM.
Horse racing is a tough game. With the Breeders' Cup next month I enjoy both days but don't have much luck at the windows.
Q. As to the promising 3 year olds we were talking about earlier in the year. Just about every single one retired already. How weird is that? Off the top of my head, no I'll Have Another, no Bodemeister, no Paynter (in recovery, but may not return to racing), no Hansen, no Union Rags... Coincidence, or something off with the bigger picture?
A. I think it is more of a coincidence. While it certainly speaks to the bigger issue of breeding stamina in the USA in general, the triple crown trail is brutal and is a far cry from normalcy when it comes to typical training habits. As for Paynter, I would be shocked if he ever makes it back to the races. Maybe a 5%-10% chance if any IMO. I am not sure what the point of that would be.
I think that the most important word you used is "enjoy". That is what this should be all about. If you are not a person that sinks a lot of time into handicapping, then so be it. Make sure to bet with your head and not over it, and enjoy the day/days.
Yes, it is a tough game, but not at all impossible. I do not know your level of interest but whether it is a daily high level or a lower level that wants to take in the big days of racing, if you have any questions, I will try my best to help answer them.
May I suggest trying hard to stay away from favorites if you already don't. Work instead on horses that will pay more. There are 15 races for this years Breeders Cup , so for a two dollar bet each race, you need 31 dollars returned to break even. Playing favorites you will probably need to win 5-6 races to do so. Playing horses that pay at least 10.00 , you need to win only 3 races. So look for horses that will pay 10-30 dollars per two dollar bet and play those. I hope that works out because if this would be new and if it does, it will change the way you view things. And, if not you, then maybe someone else so either way, hope you have fun watching it. Sorry for the delayed responses.
Best of Luck.
Some Friday Breeders Cup observations :
Lasix :
After watching three of the five two year old , non lasix races, not much showed up as far as what the casual fan would see. Merit Man lost and some might think that lasix might have made the difference but from what I saw, he was coming again at the finish and that would be the last thing I would conclude. He along with the winner bumped at the 1/8th pole and while that could have had something to do with the result, I felt as though that was more on Merit Man than on the winner. The stewards did the right thing with a " no change" IMO and the result stood.
Rail Bias:
The rail , as is almost always the case at Santa Anita, is never a bad place to be, but from the charts of the early races on the card as well as the B.C. races, it was not imperative to be there.
Speed Bias:
Again, as is almost always the case at Santa Anita, speed is deadly when given ANY opportunity to relax on the lead. Royal Delta broke in full stride and the race was essentially over as far as who was going to win, by the 5/8ths pole. But because of her brilliance, it is hard to call a track a speed bias just because Royal Delta won.
Beholder in the Juvenile Fillies, mirrored the Royal Delta trip, breaking in full gear and gaining a clear early lead. When given a chance to cut the 2nd 1/4 mile in 23 4/5ths seconds, this race was also essentially over as they went down the backside.
Earlier in the card , in a 7/8ths allowance race, the three speeds went 22-44-109-122 3/5ths and dueled between themselves from the gate to the wire. No other horse could get involved. It looked as though they were on a treadmill. That was a big clue.
Too say that yesterday carried a speed bias would be a logical statement at any other venue, but remember, this is Santa Anita, and any quality horse that gets a breather on the front end going long is probably going to win. Making up ground out there has never been easy to do, and yesterday was no exception.
If a very quick duel develops in a longer race, I would expect someone to close, but without a duel, there chances are greatly compromised almost to nil if the track plays the same way today.
Questing:
I do not know what happened yesterday for sure but there was more to it than "she just did not feel like running".
I would suspect that she twisted oddly or aggravated something while warming up that made her very uncomfortable just prior to the race. Discomfort does not always result in limping or favoring one leg. When she broke, her ears were pinned back and she was sulking. She broke on the wrong lead and wanted no part of racing. She would not even engage. She was in obvious discomfort.
Had she been like that in the paddock while being saddled it would have been blatantly obvious. When the rider was given a leg up , she in all probability would have frozen or flipped in the paddock, which would have been her way of saying, "it is no good right now". Many of you have probably witnessed this before at the races and while that reaction is not always a clear indication that there is discomfort, it sometimes is what a horse will try and do every time they get saddled( that is rare though), for a horse that never does that, to do that, it is a huge red flag.
There is NO WAY that Kiaran McLaughlin would have interviewed the way that he did in the paddock just after Questing headed for the track and 10 minutes before the race if he had ANY suspicion that anything was wrong. NO WAY ! Of course, IMO.
As the Saturday card unfolds, I will check back a few times to see if anyone has a quick question about the bias, or whatever. Hopefully, I will be of some assistance.
Good luck everyone.
Breeder's Cup Bias. Dirt track was extremely speed favoring. It was all about the start. A bad start, such as experienced by Shackleford and Game On Dude meant that you were out. There was no second chance.
A look at the position of the race winner at the 1/4 mile for Friday's dirt races (not counting the Marathon of 1 3/4 miles, where early position is less important): out of the five dirt races three winners were in the lead at the 1/4 mile, the others were 2nd (by a head) and 4th (by 1 1/2 length). No winner was behind by more than 1 1/2 lengths at the 1/4 mile...
On Saturday, out of seven dirt races, five out of seven winners were in the lead or within a length of the lead at the 1/4 mile! The two horses that defied the trend were in races 3 and 5, ran at 11:10 AM and 12:36 PM; that is, two successive dirt races earlier in the day, so this could be related to track maintenance for which I have no data. In race 5 Groupie Doll came all the way back from an almost insurmountable 2 1/4 lengths at the 1/4 mile, and in race 3 Politically Correct absolutely shocked the world by overcoming a 5 length deficit at the 1/4 mile.
While such a bias is disturbing, especially for a racing event of this magnitude, the fact is that I was poorly prepared for this speed bias and need to develop a much improved identification system for it. Can the problem be turned into an advantage? What would you look for on a horse by horse basis?
It's possible that the picture was distorted. I didn't look at every single horse, but I did notice a much higher than usual number of speed horses, compared to stalkers and closers in the races I analyzed. I don't think the Dirt Mile even had a stalker in it. Which brings up the question: if indeed horses were selected for the track's bias, why was that broader strategy not extended to being in front early? Or did you notice a greater than usual sprint for the early lead?
Last edited by Dark Horse; 11-04-12 at 06:32 AM.
Yes, Santa Anita was very speed favoring . It always has been. IMO , that is the problem with having it out there. The weather is great, the turf is firm, I get all of that, but it has always bothered me that a day that crowns so many champions, and is so important to the history of the game, chooses to run at a place that ALWAYS favors speed.
As for the time of day and the track maintenance, I do not think that had anything to do with the outcome of those two races.
Q. the fact is that I was poorly prepared for this speed bias and need to develop a much improved identification system for it. Can the problem be turned into an advantage? What would you look for on a horse by horse basis?
A. It will be there again next year so having this one under your belt should help. In the future, simply know that it will be that way every time they run it at S.A. and when it is run at Churchill, those Calif. horses with all the flashy fractions will falter more often than not, closers will have a much fairer shot at winning,( I wonder if Drosselmeyer would have won at S.A. last year?) and the turf will be softer and the temperature much cooler (advantage Euros), although at least the turf course was seemingly fair this year .
Speed Bias tracks are soooo dependent on the break that too much is left to luck to be really prepared. Gate quick is about the only thing that you have to try and read between the lines with , but that only helps so much. The best thing that you can do is to note those that really benefited as well as those that were really hurt by it, and use that info when assessing the horses when they run again.
The bottom line on a speed bias at any track is that it is a crap shoot and if you could bet after an 1/8th of a mile , you could make a fortune. There was a time when you could bet after the break at most tracks, but that ship has sailed.
Q. Which brings up the question: if indeed horses were selected for the track's bias, why was that broader strategy not extended to being in front early? Or did you notice a greater than usual sprint for the early lead?
A. I don't think that they were selected because it was going to be run at S.A. It is the super bowl of horse racing, and anyone that had a chance to belong there, came. You just have to know that when there is a bias, it is one of those things that you can't control and you hope for the best . If you show up with a closer, you hope for a nice set up. You know in the back of your mind that it is stacked against you but it is a chance to become a champion, and as such, you give it a swing.
Q. Or did you notice a greater than usual sprint for the early lead?
A. Yes. The riders and trainers all know the importance of speed out there. It showed in the running of those races both Friday and Saturday IMO.
Game On Dude did not break great and as a result he was behind horses early. Baffert, interviewed after the race was disgusted but the way I read it, he was not disgusted with the break , it was the fact that Bejarano took a solid hold of him as they went by the grandstand the 1st time. If you remember, last year it was talked about by Baffert and Sutherland that Dude needs to run on a long hold and on his own. A free running type horse. They said that you can not grab him or he drops the bit. Well... Bejarano grabbed him and guess what? He dropped the bit. Didn't pick it up until down the backside and only then, halfheartedly. Baffert was really steamed in that post race interview at the rider, not the break or anything else, as well he should have been.
I looked quite a bit for info on Questing being reported prior to the race and did see something about her not looking as good as she did in August, body and coat wise, but could not find anything about the way she was traveling. From what I saw coming out of the gate, she was terribly crabby (very short strides). I can't believe that she traveled that way coming up to the race but maybe she did. If so, I would have thought that someone would have said it, and maybe they did, but I could not find it.
With the short term frustration now gone, I can only blame myself. The question of a fast start, apart from the rest of the race, is fair enough. I was looking for actual full-fledged 'horse racing', not 'best starts'. You're right about 2013. Post-race analysis is already showing me things I had overlooked.
A crap shoot, unless good and bad starts can be handicapped. If that is possible, then these races would suddenly become very easy. A big if. But worth exploring. Back in the saddle for that one.
Baffert had a lot thrown at him this year. Near-death, three near TC wins, father's death, son's emergency operation. He seemed more philosophical, perhaps leaning towards exasperation, than angry with Bejarano to me. After all, how could he whole-heartedly blame the jockey when it was his decision to replace Sutherland after she dropped a reign? The irony of Bejarano making this error wouldn't have been lost on him. On a sidenote, life on planet earth seems to have a way of beating the arrogance out of people, and it looks to me like Baffert is getting a portion of that. It will make him kinder and softer in his old age. (Sutherland has since retired from racing; I wonder if that had anything to do with losing her ride on Game On Dude. She loved that horse. You had mentioned that some horses run faster for female riders, and I thought Game On Dude gave her something extra. ).
I love Questing, but that race took the 2012 championship crown for p*ssing me off. Don't know what else to say or think about it. When all else fails, there's the 'sh*t happens' drawer, which is where this race is already filed.
Thanks as always, str.
Questing. Eye injury:
ARCADIA, Calif. - Questing, who was eased in the early stages of Friday's $2 million Breeders' Cup Ladies' Classic at Santa Anita, was found later that night to have suffered a contusion that caused her left eye to close.
She was treated with medication and the filly seemed to be improving Saturday morning, as her eye was open.
"Not sure why, how or when it happened," trainer Kiaran McLaughlin said. "Other than that she's okay."
Neal McLaughlin, assistant to his brother, said he received a call Friday around 8 p.m. that something was amiss with Questing.
"She was not a happy camper," Neal McLaughlin said.
Questing, who had scored front-running victories in the Coaching Club American Oaks and Alabama during the summer at Saratoga, was expected to set the pace in the Ladies' Classic. She was flat from the moment the gates opened, and was pulled up about a half-mile into the race by jockey Irad Ortiz Jr. She was the 8-1 fourth choice in the field of eight.
McLaughlin said that Questing would be sent to Kentucky on Monday for a break and to be examined further. McLaughlin said no decision had been made on whether Questing would remain in training or be retired.
"We'll give her a break. She's been running consistently for a year, since last year's Breeders' Cup," McLaughlin said. "She didn't miss any days - except yesterday."
That is typically very painful, when touched or irritated. The dirt flying back would have really hurt her if sustained before the start. It typically happens while racing BECAUSE of the dirt or very small stones flying back at you. It would be very odd for it to happen in warmups but possible. I just don't know and don't want to come off as trying to "make excuses" for her performance. I do think though, that the Life At Ten comparisons that I read are totally unfair but sense when is public opinion fair, or right.
ARCADIA, Calif. - At least three juveniles who participated in Breeders’ Cup races this weekend at Santa Anita bled, according to their connections, contradicting information put out by the equine director of the California Horse Racing Board.
Trainer John Sadler said both Capo Bastone and Monument, third and last, respectively, in Saturday’s Breeders’ Cup Juvenile, bled. Trainer Mark Casse said that Spring in the Air, who finished fifth in Friday’s Juvenile Fillies, also bled.
This year was the first year that the Breeders’ Cup banned Lasix for all races restricted to 2-year-olds. Next year, the Breeders’ Cup wants to ban Lasix in all of its 15 races.
On Sunday morning, Sadler carried in his pocket a copy of an article in the Los Angeles Times that quoted Rick Arthur, the equine director of the California Horse Racing Board, as saying no 2-year-olds bled visibly on the track or at the receiving barns following their Breeders’ Cup races. Endoscopic examinations later showed that at least three horses bled from the lungs.
Sadler said an endoscopic examination revealed that Capo Bastone, who made a huge move from last to be third in the Juvenile, bled a 3 on a scale of 1 to 5. He said Monument, who finished last in the Juvenile, bled a 1 on that same scale.
Sadler was quite frustrated as he read from the Los Angeles Times story.
“So we’re just eyeballing then now?” Sadler said. “What’s that all about? The problem is, some fan is going to read this and say, ‘What were all those people screaming about? No horse bled.’ Anybody that knows anything knows this is just not true.
“I guess we don’t have to X-ray ‘em anymore or take a blood,” Sadler added. “ ’Looked okay to me.’ It’s like we’re going back in time.”
Sadler said that the Breeders’ Cup should have performed an endoscopic examination on every 2-year-old who raced on Friday and Saturday.
“They wouldn’t do that on a dare because it wouldn’t match up their pre-determined conclusions,” Sadler said.
Sadler said that Capo Bastone would be shipped to the Alamo Pintado Equine Clinic in Santa Ynez for an evaluation before determining how to treat him.
“Once we get all the science done then we’ll figure out what we’re going to do, unless of course you don’t believe in science and you’ll just eyeball them,” Sadler said.
Aron Wellman, who heads the partnership that owns Capo Bastone, said the decision to eliminate Lasix could be costly for both his horse and himself.
“From my perspective, it’s frustrating not only to have to consider what it could have cost us today in terms of money and the prestige of a championship Grade 1, but there’s so many unknown factors now moving forward,” Wellman said. “From a physical standpoint we will do everything possible and take the most proactive approach to make sure his lungs heal in a proper fashion.
“When you have a young horse like this, there’s no telling what the long-term psychological effect on this horse will be next time,” Wellman added.
Wellman said he supports Breeders’ Cup’s efforts on medication reform, but he doesn’t support a ban on Lasix.
Casse said Spring in the Air, who finished fifth, “bled significantly” in the Juvenile Fillies. Casse said she was coughing at the barn afterward and then bled her through her nostrils.
“My filly bled pretty significantly. She’s still coughing this morning,” Casse said Saturday. “Some horses never come back from it. The shame of it is they don’t give you an indication then ‘boom.’ “
Casse said that Dynamic Sky, who ran sixth in the Juvenile, did not bleed.
Todd Pletcher, who won the Juvenile with Shanghai Bobby, had all of his horses scoped and said none of his 2-year-olds bled.
“It doesn’t change my position on being pro-Lasix,” Pletcher said.
Bob Baffert said none of the 2-year-olds he ran in the Breeders’ Cup bled, but he remains against a ban of the medication. He believes by banning Lasix in all Breeders’ Cup races next year, “you’ll see field sizes shrink.”
“There are a lot of owners that are going to get out of the business,” Baffert said. “I have some clients that think it’s inhumane to allow a horse to bleed.”
Fortify, who ran fourth in the Juvenile, did not bleed, according to trainer Kiaran McLaughlin. Fortify was the only horse in the Juvenile field to have never raced on Lasix.
The list of reasons that I left the game grow seemingly by the season. The stuff shirt politics is enough to gag a maggot. Yeah, Mr. Arther, nobody bled, it's just fine. Make the ban happen for all horses next year and reread my post from last week about what will happen if... this time next year.
A wise old man said something too me when I was 17 years old, very new to the game and just a hotwalker.
I never forgot it.
He said, " The game is on the level, it's some of the people in it that are not".
So true Mr. Berry, so true.
I want to make sure I'm not over-simplifying the elements involved in speed bias. Is it fair to consider it a race-within-a-race to the 1/4 mile, and use a cut-off point in lengths behind (either standard or different depending on the bias) at the 1/4 mile?
Also, with speed bias, is the reason that early speed has the advantage that they're not tiring at the same rate as on a more fair surface, or is there a better, more precise way to put that?
Before answering and for clarity, you are asking about the 1st quarter mile of the race wherever it starts and NOT the 1/4 pole located at the head of the stretch right?
I was using the 1/4 mile distance, that shows on the race form with lengths behind, based on the Santa Anita speed bias. But I suppose the race-within-the-race for the early lead, when there is such a strong bias, would also depend on the distance to the first turn. So I may have to use different markers for different tracks, or different races. Any ideas for the best measuring points to determine a (as good as) decisive lengths behind figure -in case of speed bias- would be helpful. At Santa Anita that distance was a quarter mile and 1 1/2 lengths on the dirt during the BC.
The bigger project is to break down all races from my database into 'start' (1/4 mile or other distance) and 'finish' (the stretch), for different tracks and biases and with the running style of each horse. This seems to be a rather big project, so I want to make sure I'm basing it on a foundation of clearly defined elements. The underlying hypothesis, to be proven or discarded, is that it is possible to project the quality of the start and stretch run. So I'd break it down into: quality of start and importance of early positioning depending on the bias, quality of energy distribution (depending on the running style), and quality of stretch run.
Last edited by Dark Horse; 11-06-12 at 07:26 AM.
First things first. A speed bias is by far the trickiest bias to understand in terms of "why does it exist". We understand a rail bias. Simply put, less dirt than other areas of the track. Or , outside bias, the reverse of a rail bias. But when we see a speed bias from anywhere on the track, it tells us that the speed is not being impeded as much as typically OR the closers are being impeded more than they might normally be. So which one is it?
In the case of Santa Anita it is speed favoring largely due to the harder surface that does not fatigue horses at the rate of other tracks and, the tighter turns that typically work against horses that have to lose ground to go around. This scenario is, and when I was training was, similar to when we would go to Pimlico each spring. Simply put, that surface was much harder than the other Md. surfaces were AND the turns were tighter. As a result, it favored speed. Evidence of the harder surface was clear. Quarter cracks were typically coming in at a rate 3-4 times what you would see at the other tracks. Horses with chronically sore feet would almost always have their form tail off during the Pimlico meet only to come back strong afterwards. This was a pattern I learned as an asst. trainer for the leading trainer in the country in the mid 70s and once I went out on my own, it was a tool that I used to identify horses that could not run as well there as they could at the other tracks.
Speed biases are not always due to the track condition but in most cases they are. As stated previously, if there is very high wind on a particular day, excess of 30 mph, if it blows down the backstretch it will favor speed because it impedes the closers from running through the stretch and into a very strong head wind. If it blows up the stretch from the 1/4 pole to the wire, it will favor closers because they will be with the wind and not against it when they are running at their peak. I really did not want to poke the bear with this, but it is an absolute fact and needs to be understood as fact and not some wild assumption that I am dreaming up.
The distance to the turn is a HUGE factor . We know that a horse must be at least a length and a half minimum in front to be able to cross over on another horse without risking clipping heels. So with a short run to the 1st turn, you should have a decent chance to figure out who will have the inside as they go around the turn and we also know that if the inside horse is a 1/2 a length off the lead going into the first turn of a race, they are usually a 1/2 a length in front as they come out of the turn. The only way this does not happen in the vast majority of races is if the outside horse fully commits early or the inside jock takes back.
As to a measuring point, I would suggest a turn. That might be 3/16s or it could be a 1/2 a mile or more away, but that is where the position advantage will start to play out in most cases.
The bigger project seems to be a ton of work for not that common of a problem, unless of course you are going to play the Cal. circuit. Yes, we do see speed biases at other places, but there may be too many intangibles to make it a workable cause unless they can be factored in. One thing that would come to mind would be the "run up" or amount of distance before the timer starts. Without knowing that distance for each track or at least being aware of the differences, comparing numbers from different tracks would lead you in the wrong direction wouldn't it? Maybe I am stuck in the 90's with all of today's info, and probably am, but I do not handicap avidly anymore so I would not know. Another is the immediate 1st call when going long. The true way a horse broke can not always be determined by that call. It is too far away from the actual break. Even the 6F races are sometimes a crap shoot as to who really broke where. I often times saw horses of mine that I knew without a doubt broke in a certain position only to see in the form later that it said that they did something else. IMO , I don't trust the gate calls well enough on any given call to sink that much faith in them. The first 1/4 mile fractions and call are much more accurate. I would recommend to stay with that and figure out post position and proximity to the turn. That approach worked well for me at many different tracks over the years.
Hope that helps.
re: wind
I look at a weather report and I try to see flags during post parade, running of the race etc.
It's surprising how few people factor in wind . At Hawthorne, especially during the spring meeting, it can have a huge effect.
Reply With Quote
