Wide

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

What it is about jockeys that look to go five wide when all they have to do is slide into the rail and then get lucky to find a hole? You can\'t give away those kind of lengths unless your horse is vastly superior to the others. I don\'t understand some of these guys. Its a shame Shane Sellers retired, he was one of the few with the guts to go inside. Still can\'t believe Haskin ripped him on the Florida Derby ride. Always go the short route.

[kev]

You are so right, about this. I try to tell people how much it hurts their horse\'s odds of winning by going wide, and alot people just don\'t get it. That\'s why speed holds up so much, they get first crack and save all the ground.

Some horses supposedly do their best running when they are outside other horses. They are shy about going between or inside.

Some trainers don\'t want their big long striding horses to get stopped by traffic problems on the inside because they can\'t regain their momentum quickly.

Some jocks are dumb. Others are scared.
 
Of course if you are losing tons of ground during the fast part of a race you are often in a suicidal position.



Post Edited (02-13-05 10:32)

[MO]

Let\'s not forget the obvious - smart jocks with larceny on their minds go wide all the time.

[NoCarolinaTony]

I agree with you. Aqueduct inner is a prime example. If your not winning wire to wire, your staying close to the rail and pop out down the strech or down the rail if its open. You never see the sweeping move win, unless---- it was the feature race this past Saturday.

[NoCarolinaTony]

Speaking of Wide, look at how Sort it Out vs NNyer ran before they closed to go 1-2 in the race. Sort it out was inside early while NNyer was allways off the rail as I remember this. I have to look at the replay again to confirm this but chrts have it this way.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Naughty and Scrappy both were wide. Grocer faced a pretty serious pace challenge for his first back. I thought the top four all ran great.

[richiebee]

 Dont take too much from Naughty New
Yorker\'s last 2 races-- he has shown much
camera shyness. He should have gone by
Scrappy T two back and looked like he
was going by Sort it Out Saturday.

 Scrappy may have run the best race Sat
while never really having a chance to win.
He was digging in very gamely at the end
despite having been deprived of the lead he
likes to have. He can be a good 3YO if
kept off the Triple Crown trail.

 Who is W. Robert Bailes, Scrappy\'s
trainer? I dont think he has been off the
board in 15 or so Inner Tube starts. Any
relation to Mert Bailes, the old Maryland
trainer?

 Speaking of trainers, Dominic Schettino
thinks GG will move forward off his
Whirlaway effort. As i have stated, this
was an awful selection for a first
back; he could have gone in an open N1X
at 6f. Whirlaway is not graded, so the
earnings are not important. To me GG
another one not going to impact the
Triple Crown races

 At spring Belmont/ Saratoga, Schettino
was training winners at a 25- 30% clip.
Since about October, he has been ice cold,
including a 1/ 30 or so slate on the
inner. Right now, if Schettino had trained
Lassie, Timmy wouldn\'t have survived the
first episode.

I\'m probably going to get several lashes for this, but I think being wide is actually overrated even though from a purely speed figure point of view its importance is irrefutable.

From my perspective speed figures are partly a function of the pace and not just the ability of the horses.

I see race results and final times as a combination of how much pre stretch energy a horse uses, his position at the top of the stretch (or thereabouts) and the total amount of energy he had available to begin with.

If a horse is wide into very fast fractions, that's much worse than the ground loss indicates because he\'s either using himself extremely hard to keep/improve position or he\'s losing position.

If a horse is wide into slow fractions, if he's holding his position without strain, the ground loss is probably not hurting his ability to finish as well as he would have anyway.

Here's an extreme example.

Suppose I race 1 mile against someone I am slightly faster than.  Let's say he walks 3/4 of a mile and I walk 7/8 of a mile (I'm wide but keeping up with him due to a slightly faster walk) and then we sprint home. I'm going to beat him even though I raced for an extra 1/8 of a mile.

Do I deserve a speed figure that incorporates 1/8 mile of ground loss?  

Of course this is an extreme example that is not comparable to the typical horse race.
However, I think there are real life racing examples of what I am saying.

Dueling wide on the first turn in a route is massively more negative than just the ground loss. I see that all the time.    

Looping the field at Belmont after a bunch of speedsters kill each other off in a duel is a routine trip for a closer if the  middle of the race is slow.

Trying to make up ground on the turn after the pace was very slow early and the action is picking up is almost an impossible task.



Post Edited (02-15-05 10:19)

[NoCarolinaTony]

I may also get killed for this but all you need to understand about how much ground loss affects a race outcome is by watching any typical Harness Race. Usually the one first over on the outside is suicide, cutting the wind in effect drafting for the horses behind them, unless, as you say the pace is slow enough you can rate and last for the sprint down the lane. Most winners stay on the rail and either find room outside later.

I agree that pace as well as final time must be considered. That\'s why when folks originally look at 5 horse field races and say the final time (FIG) was slow, its because the Jockey decided to make it a tactical race instead of an honest pace (ie last race of Sweet Catomine).But ground loss is always critical no matter what the pace is, in that the further outside from the rail you are the more distance of ground you have to cover. That science is indisputable. (Geometry). What makes the TG product so good at least at the tracks I bet at is that their chart callers seem to get the distance of ground loss pretty accurate.

Do you want to talk about Track variant to further Exacerbate this discussion? I do wish TG also had a product for both a Pace Fig and Final FIG, I think that product would greatly help the hadicapper read into the race better among the given participants.

>unless, as you say the pace is slow enough you can rate and last for the sprint down the lane. <

This was my point.

It\'s a 100% mathematical certainty that all else being equal the horse that was wide ran further and therefore ran faster for the specified distance.

However, what I am saying is that race development also impacts time.

Depending on your style and the pace you may not get the position or run at a pace that maximizes your speed figure.

Under certain pace scenarios you may get perfect position without much effort even though you were wide and thus record a faster final time than if you were on the rail in a bad pace scenario that left you out of position.  

Horses are usually not 100% exhausted at the end of the race. So just because a horse ran an extra length or two by being wide, it does not automatically mean he won\'t finish just as fast during that last quarter of a mile. If this is even partially true, then position and how hard you use yourself to get it is sometimes more important than losing a few lengths because you were wide.



Post Edited (02-15-05 10:20)

[miff]

Tony,

The Geometry you cite is correct, however in the real world of racing you will often find at Belmont Park that there is a distinct advantage to being wide.Wide runners are sometimes awarded better figs than say a rail runner who actually performed MUCH better.Wider isn\'t necessarily faster despite the math.

[beyerguy]

Do you know what gets me more than jockeys going wide for no reason?  Jockeys leaving the rail open for no reason!

Side note:  the outside on GP\'s new turf course seems to be absolute death.  I hit a $48 winner today using this fact, you can completely ignore those races when the horse drew the 10 hole or out, and probably even a little more inside than that.



Post Edited (02-14-05 16:30)

[Michael D.]

think scipion would have won on saturday if he was buried down inside? tough call. i watched the replay three times today. stevens was brilliant. unfettered, full momentum run the entire way. he only lost a bit of ground on the first turn, and managed to stay about 3w on average around the second turn (i think) before swinging out in the stretch, thus avoiding too much ground loss.

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

richiebee wrote:

Right now, if Schettino had trained
> Lassie, Timmy wouldn\'t have survived the
> first episode.

lmao

CtC