- This topic has 8 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 10 months ago by Anonymous.
November 11, 2006 at 13:42 #426
Well, I’m beginning to feel a wee bit better about my atrocious choices in the Breeders, now, having just read Newsboy’s comments on the draw there.
Apparently, 4 of the 5 championship races on dirt were won by the horse in stall one! As he says, it’s worse than Chester, wher at least you know about it.
Apparently, when questioned by him, Americans wouldn’t be drawn on the subject. "Pure coincidence", he was told.
Well, mebbe aye, mebbe no, or mebber och the noo. It’s possible, of course, but seems a mite improbable it should have happened at this of all meetings. As he said, tens of thousands must have been spent preparing a horse for this putative "World Thoroughbred Championship".
I can understand American punters keeping it to themselves, but the foreign horses’ connections kept in the dark by the American officials?
(Edited by Grimes at 1:43 pm on Nov. 11, 2006)November 11, 2006 at 14:00 #30532SwallowCottageMember
- Total Posts 1008
I read somewhere ( maybe RP ) Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â that heavy rain before the meeting had gathered on the inside of the track which meant that the surface was faster there – also that more and more US racecourses are now switching to polytrack.
<br>November 11, 2006 at 14:14 #30533
Thanks. that’s interesting. I’d heard about the polytrack.November 11, 2006 at 15:55 #30534griff11Participant
- Total Posts 114
The dirt tracks are designed to drain to the rail and that in turn forms a bias, one that is generally understood and accepted by the handicapping public.
What amuses me is their vocal reluctance to accept Polytrack, quoting unacceptable bias towards closers, or depending on the track conditions (tweaking) speed horses. It’s almost as though they believe that bias didn’t exist before the advent of synthetic surfaces. The problem is, they have to now learn a new concept and are reluctant to do so.
Polytrack for instance, is designed to drain vertically, therefore eliminating the drainage towards the rail.
The handicappers appear to be the ‘only’ people negative to Polytrack, from a trainer/owner aspect, it’s been very well received for obvious reasons.
On the subject of Churchill and the Breeders Cup. I was talking to a friend of mine who was at the meeting and he said that the dirt track was very hard, so much so that the harrows were making very little indentation. It makes Invasor’s performance all the more commendable.
Adrian, in your view, was that description of the track accurate?
<br>Grimes, you should have remembered my post from Sept 19th, (One for the shortlist), then you wouldn’t have had a problem finding at least one winner,LOL!!
(Edited by griff11 at 6:06 pm on Nov. 11, 2006)November 11, 2006 at 20:23 #30535robert99Participant
- Total Posts 897
The "official" explanation was that on the Friday the inner rail was relatively slow (it had been raining days before) so to make it fair, the track scraped dirt 2 horse widths away from the inner rail and deposited it across the centre of the track. The track was then hard rolled for the BC races. As in UK, they told no one. Some trainers chose 15 where there is more room to spring fast from the join in the gates.
The horses drawn low did not all stay low however and came out 2- 3 wide by final turn.
Biases that come and go each day, if not due to the weather, are more likely due to the different horses running and track speed, than anything else and no statistician would accept proof of bias on so few races.
So far, USA has two polytracks and one cushiontrack.November 11, 2006 at 21:36 #30536
Wish I could LOL about missing your insight there, Griff!
But I kid you not, I had Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£2 win at 550/1 and Ãƒâ€šÃ‚Â£3 place at 28/1 on Exotic Dancer, with Betfair, a week or so ago. My best win ever, multiples included. Unfortunately, I forgot to put it as one of my tipping competition horses, as I record my AP bets at the back of my booklet.
So, really, it does sound like a coincidence, robert. I hope it’ll be polytrack next year, assuming God spares me, as they say. Maybe you’ve heard what someone said, "If you really want to make God laugh, tell him what you’re going to do tomorrow!"
(Edited by Grimes at 9:37 pm on Nov. 11, 2006)<br>
(Edited by Grimes at 9:38 pm on Nov. 11, 2006)November 12, 2006 at 17:36 #30537AdrianParticipant
- Total Posts 1041
Griff, although I crossed the dirt course many times in th week I didn’t walk it (except on the outside rail) on raceday. The track officials were aware of what was happening and I’ve read that they made alterations before the Distaff.
Churchill are well known for creating a fast surface for their big days on the main track.
Remember that we had received a lot of rain mid week and then on Thursday night we had a hard frost. When I walked on the dirt track on Friday morning it was frozen into clumps although this had returned to normal by the racing in the afternoon. The turf course was white over for morning exercise on Friday.
I’ve not heard about Monmouth switching to an artificial surface yet. Naturally, because of Keeneland and Turfway being on Polytrack, there will be some pressure from Kentucky horsemen to switch Churchill Downs to Polytrack but, as the home of the Kentucky Derby – and therefore a huge legacy – they may be the last to change.November 12, 2006 at 17:58 #30538deltamanMember
- Total Posts 190
Cold weather and rain will alter the going/draw bias anywhere on any surface, I read Mordin’s article in the Weekender and the talk that Beyer gave, and ditched their ideas. Looking forward to seeing ‘Invisor’ at Nad Al Sheba.November 12, 2006 at 19:08 #30539AnonymousInactive
- Total Posts 17722
Quote: from deltaman on 5:58 pm on Nov. 12, 2006[br]Cold weather and rain will alter the going/draw bias anywhere on any surface.
A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep.
Possibly the most aposite post and subscription ever seen on TRF?:biggrin: <br>
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.