Derby Day Track Bias

[Wamsutta]

Frank ….. Yes, I remember that day …. I was at the Big A …. good description you gave it. That is actually a great example â€" a lot of the talk on here about track/course biases relates to finding horses for future races, but recognizing a bias is at least as important (more so really IMO) on the day of (sometimes not so conducive to forum discussion though). It also emphasized that some jockeys recognize these things faster than others. What you, and mjellish, I and others imagined, Gryder also apparently imagined, as he was whipping and driving his horse straight out of the gate to get the lead at all costs …. not all the others did when they ought to have done.

Sekrah â€" I\'m not sure what kind of proof do you think can be provided. You said that you agreed that on a banked or pitched turf course, one area could be slower than another …. why would this not also be the case for a banked dirt track? If the track is banked toward the inside rail, and there is enough moisture about to make the inside path(s) slightly moister and better packing than the sandy, loose-on-top outer paths, why would that not favor the horses on the inside? Or vice versa. The roulette wheel is a static, mechanical thing …. the physical properties of the track are in a state of constant flux …. sun, precipitation, wind, track maintenance ….. just a matter of how much flux, and who is best suited to benefit.

In general, aren\'t we looking not for irrefutable statistical evidence, but for adequate statistical or other evidence relative to the odds?

[sekrah]

Boscar Obarra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Look, someone has to bet against the inside speed
> on a gold rail day, so if you\'d like to be that
> person, who am I to stand in the way?
>
>  You might even cash once in a while ;-)


Just inform me when you think you\'ve spotted a golden rail and I\'ll be there.

[sekrah]

Wamsutta Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Frank ….. Yes, I remember that day …. I was at
> the Big A …. good description you gave it. That
> is actually a great example â€" a lot of the talk
> on here about track/course biases relates to
> finding horses for future races, but recognizing a
> bias is at least as important (more so really IMO)
> on the day of (sometimes not so conducive to forum
> discussion though). It also emphasized that some
> jockeys recognize these things faster than others.
> What you, and mjellish, I and others imagined,
> Gryder also apparently imagined, as he was
> whipping and driving his horse straight out of the
> gate to get the lead at all costs …. not all the
> others did when they ought to have done.
>
> Sekrah â€" I\'m not sure what kind of proof do you
> think can be provided. You said that you agreed
> that on a banked or pitched turf course, one area
> could be slower than another …. why would this
> not also be the case for a banked dirt track? If
> the track is banked toward the inside rail, and
> there is enough moisture about to make the inside
> path(s) slightly moister and better packing than
> the sandy, loose-on-top outer paths, why would
> that not favor the horses on the inside? Or vice
> versa. The roulette wheel is a static, mechanical
> thing …. the physical properties of the track
> are in a state of constant flux …. sun,
> precipitation, wind, track maintenance ….. just
> a matter of how much flux, and who is best suited
> to benefit.
>
> In general, aren\'t we looking not for irrefutable
> statistical evidence, but for adequate statistical
> or other evidence relative to the odds?


I don\'t disagree that biases exist, but they are not detectable over a small sample of races, and they can change as soon as you think you picked up on something.

I\'ve seen muddy/sloppy tracks where the rail looks good and other muddy/sloppy tracks where nobody wins on the rail.  I\'ve seen muddy/sloppy tracks where winners are coming from all over the place.  

Tell me how many seconds faster the rail is vs the 3-path?  Is it 2/5 seconds per furlong faster? 1 second faster? Is it uniformly faster the whole way around the track, or just one-turn? Just the backstretch?  Both turns?  How is the current weather changing it?  How did the maintenance crew between races change it because they just watered/harrowed/sealed the track?  Can I borrow your crystal ball?

[TempletonPeck]

The fact that these things can\'t be measured to your satisfaction doesn\'t mean they don\'t exist, it just means you aren\'t satisfied.

[sekrah]

Monetary evidence would satisfy me. Winning money is the goal of this crazy game we play, so If track bias is so readily common and easy to identify, there should be experts in bias that are raking in the chips.

[FrankD.]

sekrah Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Monetary evidence would satisfy me. Winning money
> is the goal of this crazy game we play, so If
> track bias is so readily common and easy to
> identify, there should be experts in bias that are
> raking in the chips.


You mean like the guy that touted Always Dreamig for a month as the second coming of Secretariat? Or the guy that randomly shaves a few points off figures to make his \"what if\" points? Then doesn\'t bet him at all in the Derby?

That guy made a comparable amount of money as he has F\'in brain cells.....
What was his name? It ain\'t on the roll call of this week\'s Mensa meeting for sure.

[sekrah]

FrankD. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> sekrah Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Monetary evidence would satisfy me. Winning
> money
> > is the goal of this crazy game we play, so If
> > track bias is so readily common and easy to
> > identify, there should be experts in bias that
> are
> > raking in the chips.
>
>
> You mean like the guy that touted Always Dreamig
> for a month as the second coming of Secretariat?
> Or the guy that randomly shaves a few points off
> figures to make his \"what if\" points? Then doesn\'t
> bet him at all in the Derby?
>
> That guy made a comparable amount of money as he
> has F\'in brain cells.....
> What was his name? It ain\'t on the roll call of
> this week\'s Mensa meeting for sure.



So insults instead of discussion?  Got it.

[Furious Pete]

I think you make some excellent points.

When it comes to betting a day it could very well pay dividends to act quickly on a hunch of a bias, and I for one would not fault that approach at all. I\'m also fully confident in that you, Frank D., Jimbo66, Mjellish, Bias Bob and many others \"bias conscious\" long term followers of this game have eyes as good as anyones to spot those early - and I\'m sure it have paid you guys well in plenty of occasions.

Certainly a crucial skill, IMO, when making bets, and even if one is wrong one would in the process at least have focused ones bets on horses predicted to run in a path that at the very least is not bad! And that is worth something, in itself.  

Biases exists, and even a \"mild\" bias is worthy of attention. They are even possible to predict to a degree, if one have followed a track for a long enough time and know what different weather, track maintenance etc is producing the different biases (sometimes). At the track I\'m following the closest for instance, it\'s a well known phenomenon that when they use a scraper on the dirt track and specially with a bit of moisture in the air and even more so if the weather is cold, it could produce some crazy biases favoring those inside, and on the front end. The better you \"know\" what to expect from a track given different conditions and track maintenance, the less evidence should one demand from oneself before acting on those hunches of a bias.

There is a difference though, in identifying a bias early when there still are bets to be made that day, and to look back and try to confirm it with methodology after the facts (for later use). I find that using figures to try to establish those biases after the fact, is a pretty fruitful way to go about it. If there is a clear bias either way, most of those that ran against it will be compromised i.e not been given the opportunity to run to their true ability (figure wise). If there is a outside bias, those could also produce some ground loaded figures that give those horses more credit for their effort than they deserved; figures they will have trouble with reproducing in fair conditions.

[Furious Pete]

Frank,

Wouldn\'t AD have been the logical bias play in the race?

[hellersorr]

Frank D - I am closer to you than I am to Sekrah when it comes to bias but to say Sekrah or anybody on this list compared Always Dreaming to Secretariat is some kind of serious BS.

All Sekrah said was that he could make a better case for Always Dreaming than the sheets and Pletcher\'s Derby history would suggest, and that if - IF! -  the price was right Sekrah would bet him.  The price wasn\'t right so Sekrah didn\'t bet him.

Has there been a change in the world of betting whereby odds no longer matter?

[FrankD.]

Pete,

You could make that point. He had speed, many figured him to at least stalk if not be part of the pace. Most of the other speed horses were outside of him.

Watch the 4th race that day a maiden heat. Johnny V. Was on a Pletcher 3rd time starter That hadn\'t shown as a go to the lead type in his first 2 starts. He gunned him out of the gate, straight to the rail and coast to coast easily.

At the very least AD\'s jockey was imagining the rail was a good place to be....

Save your cute comments for those who just spout out to be heard.
Bring some evidence when you want to debate me or I\'ll send you home to get your
shine box Petey.

[sekrah]

FrankD. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Pete,
>
> You could make that point. He had speed, many
> figured him to at least stalk if not be part of
> the pace. Most of the other speed horses were
> outside of him.
>
> Watch the 4th race that day a maiden heat. Johnny
> V. Was on a Pletcher 3rd time starter That hadn\'t
> shown as a go to the lead type in his first 2
> starts. He gunned him out of the gate, straight to
> the rail and coast to coast easily.
>
> At the very least AD\'s jockey was imagining the
> rail was a good place to be....
>
> Save your cute comments for those who just spout
> out to be heard.
> Bring some evidence when you want to debate me or
> I\'ll send you home to get your
> shine box Petey.


A lone-speed horse getting to the front and winning is evidence that there\'s a rail bias?  A 3yo that was tied for the fastest figure in the race (by 4 points) and was 3-1 in the betting got to the front and ran 1 1/8 in 1:53.3 on this unbelievable gravy train of a rail!  

Holy shit batman!

[sekrah]

hellersorr Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Frank D - I am closer to you than I am to Sekrah
> when it comes to bias but to say Sekrah or anybody
> on this list compared Always Dreaming to
> Secretariat is some kind of serious BS.
>
> All Sekrah said was that he could make a better
> case for Always Dreaming than the sheets and
> Pletcher\'s Derby history would suggest, and that
> if - IF! -  the price was right Sekrah would bet
> him.  The price wasn\'t right so Sekrah didn\'t bet
> him.
>
> Has there been a change in the world of betting
> whereby odds no longer matter?


Thanks hellers.  I wasn\'t going to waste my breath saying it.  I am just a retard for betting the 30-1 shot that finished 5th and not the winner.  My bad.

[Furious Pete]

Well done, Hellersorr!

That is true, neither Sekrah or I touted AD as a 2nd coming of Secretariat. After the draw I gave the remark that it looked like \"AD would win this with a pairing up of his last now\", and that \"he didn\'t exactly need to be Big Brown to win this\", and Sekrah have stated his completely nuanced and fair opinion too many times already for us to even get into this again.

When that is said..

Horse looks like a legit triple crown contender. LOVES to run. But one have to wonder if they had him peak a week too early, great shot in Preakness IMO, but then what in the Belmont? Completely legit to bet against him there, though I think I\'ll pass.

[T Severini]

Boscar Obarra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Look, someone has to bet against the inside speed
> on a gold rail day, so if you\'d like to be that
> person, who am I to stand in the way?
>
>  You might even cash once in a while ;-)


You know its not blatant where \"anyone\" can see it and say, \"hey what\'s going on here\"! But the thing is when the track is dryer towards the outer rail than it is towards the inner rail there\'s a reason for that, (Dang I love these Chelada\'s!), one of course is banking. Another is where the drainage is located. But for a track to be like that two things have obviously occurred/occurring. One of them is that you\'ve had significant rain. In that regard the next occurrence is cessation of rain and even the effects of sun! I\'m telling you I learned All this from Jerry and just watched closely after that!  

Now this is where it gets really interesting, (at least to me), as the drying occurs the living and breathing track mutates from mild mannered Bill Bixby into the Incredible Hulk!!! Totally unpredictable! Well not really. You\'ll see the change in the final race times. When a track is sealed and very wet, man they skip to my lou over it like Dr Fager. But as it drys you\'ll see the times change and there is a point where the surface looks like goopy mud pie and when it gets like that theres a suction on the horses hooves! But what is most intriguing is that the track due to the banking and drainage does Not dry uniformly, (That is the reason I kept posting the Oaks and Derby replays but only a few like you Mr. Obamma understood what I was illustrating!). God I love these Cheladas!

So where were we? (Sips Chelada), the track speed changes during this wetting and drying process and if it dries in a non-uniform manner at times certain parts are indeed faster than others, especially as pertains to path. That stated, one side can, say the homestretch side, can be of a different nature than the backstretch side. (I hope that\'s not confusing.)

So in the end, it probably doesn\'t matter that others don\'t see it. But what I know for certain is that in the mid track post parade that goop was sucking hooves! (Sucks down another gulp of Chelada!)