Quiet Time on the Board, Some Light Reading

[richiebee]

THERE WILL BE A QUIZ ON THIS AT THE T-GENERATE SEMINAR ON SATURDAY JULY 26

Dynamics of Turns in Horse Racing by Larry Wellman
 
This work was conducted in the mid to late 1990's.
 
Turn Dynamics:
 
A couple of weeks ago I posted an article relative to turns which had a mistake that I have now corrected.  The post was in response to a question I received from Dr. Steve Roman relative to his observation that some horses out in the 3 and 4 path on the turn appear not to be handicapped by the extra distance traveled and actual look like they are handling the turns better then the horse on the rail.  At that time I developed a spreadsheet to test his question.  In the spreadsheet I allowed horses in the outer paths to increase speed to match the turn dynamics (forces) that the rail horse was experiencing.  What the results showed was that the horses off the rail could run at a higher speed on the turn versus the rail horse.  This extra speed increase would compensate for the extra ground covered.  The net result was that the horse in the outer path actually only lost half what is the accepted standard.  The standard is lose one length or 10-11 ft for each path removed from the rail.
 
Using my Energy Program I went in and tested some additional factors to show that a horse in the four path actually can run 6 furlongs faster then the rail horse when track and conformation parameters are match properly.  The track I modeled is Laurel Park, which is a 9f track with 2.25f turns.  I modeled a track with no track bias (resistance) around or across the paths.  I did change two parameters that impact on turn dynamics.  I modeled the proper conditions for a horse further from the rail so the extra distance does not handicap a horse.  The two factors I adjusted are the bank angle of the turn and a factor called (beta) that represents the ankle pulley ratio as defined by Peter R. Greene (J. Biomech Vol 20, No7 pp667-680 1987).  The ankle pulley ratio is a conformation parameter and represents the distance from the sole of the foot or hoof up to the ankle or fetlock on the horse.  I used the number suggested by Greene since there is no publish info on horses.  If the foot is allowed to roll into the turn the beta value will be reduced.  So what I did was assume that the turn bank angle starts at zero in the one path and is 3.5 degrees in the 4th path.  I
made the following assumption that the ankle pulley ratio is the maximum at the rail and reduced to zero in the four path.  Below I will show the results of my program for both the path one and path four under the conditions I mention above.  Path zero is if a horse ran on top of the rail while path one is the path a horse runs when on the rail.  I modeled a 3.5 ft distance between paths.  Each path away from the rail results in an extra 11 ft (3.5 X pi) traveled.  I also show the time for a 6f race on a straight course having no turns.
 
          Bank                    |------turn------|
Path  Angle Beta 1/4     3/8      1/2        5/8       3/4
0       3.5   .27     24.55   36.15   48.35   60.85   73.50
1       3.5   .27     24.55   36.25   48.50   61.05   73.70
1       0.0   .27     24.55   36.25   48.60   61.20   73.90
4       3.5   .27     24.55   36.45   48.95   61.65   74.30
4       3.5   .00     24.55   36.35   48.75   61.25   73.85
Straight course     24.55   36.05   48.00   60.25   72.85
 
Simulation run with a .05 sec delta
   
Now when you compare the 1 path with 0.0 degrees bank against the 4 path with 3.5 degrees banking and zero ankle pulley ratio (beta=0) we see that the horse in the 4 path runs about same race time for 6f race although this horse runs 33 ft longer distance (on turn) then the one horse.
 
What this means is that correcting a horse speed figures using a standard of one length lost per each path away could actually over estimate the horse speed figures.  To do a proper adjustment we would need to know the bank angle distribution across the turn, conformation of each individual horse, (how this horse handles turns), a track bias if it exist across the track.  The beta term is also dependent on the type of shoes the horse is wearing, etc.
 
I think this address Dr. Roman\'s question along with some possible errors that could exist in some of the speed figure services that make adjustments for ground lost on the turn.
 
I did not limited the turn forces on a horse like I did in the spreadsheet I mention earlier.  Adding this factor in could lead to even better performance when running away from the rail.
 
For handicapping you need to assess each horses ability to run on the turns.
 
Follow up question.
 
Jetaway brought up a question relative to the bank angle I assumed for the horse in the one path.  I made the assumption to show the maximum based on the two conditions discussed.  If you go back and look at the table you will see that even if the bank angle is assumed to be 3.5 degrees for both horses the horse in the four path will only run slower by less then one length (.15 sec) if this horse can handle the turn better (beta=0).  Beta as I mention is a function of conformation.  The equation I used with this term also involves the following terms: the bank angle, the heel over angle, and Froude number.  Froude number is a non-dimensional speed parameter using the turn radius.  Heel over angle is the arctan of the Froude number.   The difference between bank angle and heel over angle is called the mismatch angle.  If we assume a horse can run with zero mismatch in the turn the bank angle matches the heel over angle then we have the condition I show as beta=0 for the horse in the four path.
 
From the table we see that if the conditions were the same for both horses then the horse in the four path runs an extra 33 ft and it takes him and .60 sec more time to cover 6f about one length per fifth of a second.  Now under conditions when the horse in the four path has the ideal conditions then he cover the extra distance in only .15 seconds (bank=3.5 deg) compared to the one path.  Resulting in a difference of two lengths.  This correction would be equal to about 5 Beyer speed points if they corrected for trip.  In the Sheets or Thorograph system this would equal a point or two.  I\'m not a Sheet
user so I\'m not sure on the exact number.  The point is that any service that corrects for trip on the turns is adding some additional noise in there product.  How do they know what the conformation (beta terms factor), the banking or track bias across the turn and around the turn.  The beta term is determined from observations and varies within a population.   Based on this new research I would look closely at figures that are adjusted for very wide trips.  Maybe some of the sheet users can offer some observations about figures that look out of line when the horses raced wide.  I personally never adjusted my speed figures in the 80\'s for trip.  Add factors like wind and bad weather and we are really shooting in the dark.
 
BTW, all races are for zero gate runup.
 
Turns and Breakdowns.
 
Because of all the discussion about the breakdowns in the Jim Beam I decided to present some information about turn dynamics and the relationship to potential breakdowns.  I did not see the Jim Beam so I do not know where on the track the horses breakdown, however the turn or the transition from the turn to the straight would be critical areas.  I will present a factor which is a combination of two other variable that I model in my Energy Program.  The first variable is related to bank angle and the lean angle of the horse in the turn.  Included in this term is the ankle pulley ratio which relates internal and external moment arms within the ankle.  Research conducted by Peter Greene (J. Biomechanics, Vol 20 No.7, 1987) estimated values in the .27 range for humans and the same value to be used for dogs and horses.  The ankle pulley ratio is a conformation variable of the distal end of the leg: i.e. length of the pastern and the distance between the sesamoids bones.  Shoe designs variables also play a part.
Since there is no research data on horses I will use Peter Greene number.  The second term is related to turn radius and speed on the turn.  Together the two terms can be treated
as an equivalent increase in weight carried on the turn.  The values shown in the following table is the combined term.  Any number greater then one results in higher weight carried.  I will show two different turn radius: 2f and 2.25f turns.  I have not
modeled tighter turns (1.5f) or larger turns (3f).
 
The data shown is for the horse a half-furlong into the turn around 2.5f to 3f into the race.
 
Turn Size: 2f or 420 ft radius.
           Bank Angle, degrees
Beta      0           3.5          7.0
0          1.027     1.027      1.027
.27       1.0855   1.0711    1.055
.54       1.1428   1.1120    1.080
 
Turn Size:2.25f or 472 ft radius
           Bank Angle, degrees
Beta      0           3.5          7.0
0         1.025      1.025      1.025
.27      1.0834    1.0670    1.051
.54      1.1390    1.1090    1.076
 
The bank angle of 3.5 degrees represents a grade of 6 percent across the track.
This would be a rise of 6 ft over a 100 ft.  I used this number based on some private communications about track designs.
 
**It would be very helpful to have this information
presented in the DRF.
 
If a track has no bank on the turn and we used Greens\'s number for beta (.27) the horse will be carry the equivalent of an additional 100 pounds on the turn.  Bank the turn to 3.5 degress and we get only additional 80 pound based on a horse and rider of 1200 pounds.  Based on gait analysis a individual fore legs will be subjected to almost three times the full body weight of the horse during a stride.  Now add the impact of the turns dynamics and the horse would see an a additional 300 pounds of load on one leg.  Increase speed or reduce turn radius will result in higher numbers.
 
This is only part of the answer about breakdowns.  Other variables such as shoeing, bandages, conformation, track, and the riders all come into play.

[Rich Curtis]

\"A couple of weeks ago I posted an article relative to turns which had a mistake\"

Quite a start.

Larry Wellman the Derby List poster? Pretty funny, Richie.

\"The standard is lose one length or 10-11 ft\"

Hmm.

[magicnight]

Well, if five beaten lengths = one second that would make horses about 11 feet long, right? I mean, how else would you know how long a horse is?

But let\'s don\'t get into a big back and forth on this, OK? I want to do well on Richiebee\'s quiz, but I\'ve got a policy of going down only one rabbit hole per day and I\'ve already reached my limit.

[Thedudeabides]

I really doubt horses are eleven feet long -- more like eight

[Edgorman]

Kittens Wilt?
Manutes Foal??

[Dick Powell]

Seeing that Manute is taken, how about TIZSHAWNBRADLEY

[richiebee]

Rich, I\'m glad you checked in. I can now confess that I used your classic Triple
Crown line (\"The only thing a Triple Crown winner will do for Racing is finally
prove that a Triple Crown winner will do nothing for Racing\") a couple of times
this Spring. BRILLIANT! and oh so true.

I do not know from Larry Wellman and am only marginally aware of the Derby List.
I found this article while doing an internet search totally unrelated to horses,
racing or gambling. As I began to read through the article I realized (a) this
article was not published or even edited in any conventional sense of the word,
(b) some of the author\'s observations are similar to opinions posted on the
Thorograph board, albeit with much more succinctitude (yeah I made that word up)
and (c) some of the author\'s underlying assumptions beg for further
investigation.

My main purposes in posting this article were (a) to see if we could draw our
host out of his Fortress of Solitude (or maybe he is on the golf course prepping
for the TG Open) and (b) any post at this time of year which does not rekindle
the tedious and interminable annual \"Del Mar or Saratoga\" debate is a good post.

[Edgorman]

Dick Powell Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Seeing that Manute is taken, how about
> TIZSHAWNBRADLEY

Excellent!!!  Best sire from that line was TIZRAYFELIXTHECAT
Kittens Joy can be traced back to him.

[TGJB]

Richie-- yes I was playing golf (don\'t ask), no you can\'t smoke me out.

[moosepalm]

richiebee Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> THERE WILL BE A QUIZ ON THIS AT THE T-GENERATE
> SEMINAR ON SATURDAY JULY 26
>
>

Sign me up.  Curtis will be my lifeline.

[TGJB]

If you get Curtis to Saratoga you get free sheets for any days you or he show up at the track.

[moosepalm]

TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If you get Curtis to Saratoga you get free sheets
> for any days you or he show up at the track.

No disrespect to the value of the sheets, but since it would cost me three nights of lodging at the Pavilion Grand, dinner at the Prime, Maestro\'s and Sperry\'s, and round trip flight from LA just to get him there, I\'m thinking you\'re going to need to hand out a cold 2K Pick 4 at the seminar to make it a wash.  I\'d have a better chance of getting Jennifer Aniston to come out for the weekend.  Basically, I was just thinking of having him on speed dial.

[richiebee]

moosepalm Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> I\'d have a better chance of getting Jennifer Aniston to come out for the
> weekend.  

Well, since JB doesn\'t want to come out of hiding, and since no one seems
interested in discussing the recent sea changes in Florida racing or the upcoming
five stake extravaganza at Belmont (complete with politically correct food
trucks), I\'ll offer a quick movie recommendation: If you are a fan of the well
conformed Ms. Aniston, check her out in the quirky 2002 flick \"The Good Girl\",
where she plays against type, meaning her hair is pulled back and she wears very
little makeup. She lives in a small town and is married to a stoner who is not
paying much attention to her. Please, no snarky Brad Pitt comments.

Take my recommendation with a grain of salt; my role models as film critics are
\"Men on Film\" from \"In Living Color\" and the Russian Film Professor who was once
featured in a cable television ad campaign, and briefly reviewed \"Titanic\" in a
thick accent saying \"Big ship hits iceberg. Happens all the time.\"

OK enough diversion. Back to serious business. Here is an abstract from the Peter
Greene article which Larry Wellman uses as one of the pillars of his theory that
ground loss is somehow marginalized as a negative factor due to the fact that
horses running near the rail are placed under more physical strain (on a banked
track) than horses running towards the center of the course. The abstract is
lifted from a forum contained in Track and Field News:

\"Track aspect ratio is defined as the percentage of lap length devoted to turns
on an oval running track. Equations based on experiments are developed to model a
composite runner with a specified top speed during an acceleration phase in the
straightaways and a centripetal phase in the turns. We calculate velocity
deficits for several common track sizes over the range of aspect ratios and
predict that, under our assumptions, a perfect circle is the optimal track
shape\".

To be well prepared for the quiz, now merely 24 days away, I recommended the
following:

1) Consider the statement Greene makes that \"a perfect circle is the optimal
track shape\". Is Greene talking speed or safety?

2) What is the \"roundest\" thoroughbred racetrack in North America? Would it be
possible, using TG #s of course, to validate\'s Greene\'s (and thereby Wellman\'s)
theory? What are the breakdown statistics on the various types (more round v more
oval in shape) of race courses in North America? What about severely banked v
less severely banked courses?

3) Absent studies of thoroughbreds running on banked turns, Wellman adopts
Greene\'s study to formulate his \"beta\" factor, basically postulating that the
human ankle is similar to a horse\'s fetlock. I am assuming Wellman is speaking
about the front fetlock. I seem to recall learning during study of equine
conformation that the front fetlock has more in common with the human wrist than
the human ankle. What effect would this have on Wellman\'s convenient embrace of
part of Greene\'s theory?

4) Be prepared to discuss centripetal forces.

5) Watch \"The Good Girl\".

Anybody ready for that Del Mar/Saratoga debate yet?

[miff]

Today\'s surface Guru chimed in.His work is almost totally dedicated to finding ways to reduce breakdowns in race horses by studying surfaces to make them more safe.

When asked about ground loss as it relates to making performance figs, Dr.Mick offered that no study on that was undertaken,tried. Interestingly,he did do a study to measure track speed and identify energy return from different paths to be substantially different, time to time, even race to race during changing weather(tracks change speed as do paths vs each other was concluded)

Regarding Bees original post, Dr. Mick replied:

\"This is a study we are currently working on.  It is turn radius versus risk.  Banking is not included in our current data set because the measurements are not reliable.  

We hope to have preliminary results in the next month using the full EID data set\".


Mick