Major Tracks vrs Minor Tracks

[Robert Goren]

I think most of us think minor tracks handicap different than major tracks. What do you think those differences are?

[Lt1]

I don't change my approach at all. A race is a race no matter where it's run.

[mountainman]

I think most of us think minor tracks handicap different than major tracks. What do you think those differences are?

numerous, extensive and profound .....you're talking book, not online post.....

[Tom]

Take away the stakes, and is the much of a difference anymore?
What is a minor track - GP, who can't time races and has no clue what distances they are running? Gets my vote.

Tell me the finales at Aqueduct are any better than Penn most days.

I adjust my method to the type of race not the track it is at. Races for slow horses are everywhere.

[cordep17]

I think better values can be found at minor tracks. Low level horses go in and out of form so much more often that top-tier runners do.

There are more horses you can catch on an upswing in races for less.

[Stillriledup]

numerous, extensive and profound .....you're talking book, not online post.....

really?

The only difference that i see is the quality of the races and the pool sizes. Otherwise, its all the same to me.

[thaskalos]

Shippers are a much bigger headache at the minor tracks. Seemingly off-form horses from "better" tracks often wake up against "minor league" competition.

Layoffs are also a bigger concern at the minors. A sharp horse who has been laid off at a minor track is much more suspect...IMO.

There is also a lot more "trainer maneuvering" at the minor tracks. I am much more forgiving of a horse's lackluster recent race (or two)...because I suspect that "form darkening" may be the cause.

These are the most obvious differences. There are some less obvious ones as well...and I might reveal those later...

[mountainman]

really?

The only difference that i see is the quality of the races and the pool sizes. Otherwise, its all the same to me.

If I start on this topic, I'll miss work and still be typing tomorrow. For me, as a smaller track specialist, it's like asking for my complete philosophy of life.

[maclr11]

If I start on this topic, I'll miss work and still be typing tomorrow. For me, as a smaller track specialist, it's like asking for my complete philosophy of life.

Nailed this on the head
It's a whole different world.

Can't approach races the same at all.

[Stillriledup]

If I start on this topic, I'll miss work and still be typing tomorrow. For me, as a smaller track specialist, it's like asking for my complete philosophy of life.

:D

If you promise to write a book on this subject, i promise to buy it! :ThmbUp:

[CincyHorseplayer]

Doing one a bunch makes me yearn for the other,so I love the contrast.Grew up on one of the smallest circuits in the country and took a long time to really grasp the big tracks and big races.Both are part of my fabric today!

[fmolf]

I have found paddock inspection to be easier at smaller tracks.I have been to T.B.... Del. pk and Parx recently and have found that the differences between in form runners and declining form runners easier to decipher at these smaller tracks.Also its been my experience that their is a bit more value to be had possibly because the syndicates or whales if they in fact exist find itdifficult to make larger value bets into the smallish pools.

[whodoyoulike]

I think most of us think minor tracks handicap different than major tracks. What do you think those differences are?

Based on the responses so far, I'm uncertain what exactly you're asking.

I think one of the biggest differences is the fractional paces between "A" and "B" tracks versus "C" and "D" tracks. The "A" and "B" tracks have similar paces for the first two fractions. The "B" and "C" track paces are a lot slower. So, I don't see how one can handicap and ignore that you're looking at a minor vs. major track. I agree with mountainman. I think there are a number of differences you have to consider.

[Speed Figure]

Their is a lot of promise betting the smaller tracks. Two of my favorite tracks are Delta Downs & Ellis Park. Their are many times where you just cannot get a hold of a horses form cycle because these lower level horses just don't run consistent races. I've hit with horses who have lost there last 5 races by over 100 lengths. I've found that you must a willing to go back deep into the horses past performance to see what the horse did before running so badly.

[fmolf]

Their is a lot of promise betting the smaller tracks. Two of my favorite tracks are Delta Downs & Ellis Park. Their are many times where you just cannot get a hold of a horses form cycle because these lower level horses just don't run consistent races. I've hit with horses who have lost there last 5 races by over 100 lengths. I've found that you must a willing to go back deep into the horses past performance to see what the horse did before running so badly.
Precisely why body language & paddock handicapping are more effective at the smaller tracks.

[appistappis]

for me the bigger tracks are all about speed and pace projections, everybody with a computer is on the same horse.

at the smaller tracks, you can learn what works and what doesn't, the trainer knowledge is much more important.

where i play, all the regulars (dummies) play santa anita, gulfstream and ny and laugh at me when i have the super at beulah 12 times.

they tell me the bigger tracks "pay better" but a 3-5 over a 2-1 exactor pays 7.60 at beulah as well at santa anita.


mountainman was right, i could go on for hours here.

[Edward DeVere]

For me, as a smaller track specialist, it's like asking for my complete philosophy of life.

Electrons are free, dude. You no longer have to buy ink by the barrel.

[Robert Fischer]

Mountainman is the expert on this subject. I still re-read the piece he wrote for Horseplayer magazine. He could definitely write the book on the subject.

Two of the the things that stand out in my memory are understanding the class levels and trainer intent.

[mountainman]

Electrons are free, dude. You no longer have to buy ink by the barrel.

Sorry if you expected some sarcastic response. Five years ago, I would have been glad to accommodate you. Now, though, I'd much rather play it straight and confide that 10-hour workdays have me a bit frazzled. And with Nance out, just no way I have time to tackle this subject. Haven't worked out in over a week..headed to gym now on time I don't have.

[mountainman]

Mountainman is the expert on this subject. I still re-read the piece he wrote for Horseplayer magazine. He could definitely write the book on the subject.

Two of the the things that stand out in my memory are understanding the class levels and trainer intent.

Tx, dude, but I thought the piece on small-track shippers was much better.

[pondman]

for me the bigger tracks are all about speed and pace projections, everybody with a computer is on the same horse.

at the smaller tracks, you can learn what works and what doesn't, the trainer knowledge is much more important.



I disagree with handicapping the higher end, allowance and above with speed and pace projections. It's much more profitable referencing the class.

And at the lower end, if someone where to put a gun to my head and forced me to play the Ohio Valley, I'd be on the ground finding out where the Jockey's wives were drinking. And be walking through the barns at Mountaineer looking for needles and listening to the chatter. There is considerably more larceny at Sunland, Portland, and Mountaineer, than there is in the big leagues.

[Clocker]

Tx, dude, but I thought the piece on small-track shippers was much better.

Do you have a link to that? Any other advice on sources for info on smaller tracks, or other writers that know their stuff? I'm getting really tired of big tracks with small fields. Two horses scratched out of a six horse field at Santa Anita isn't my idea of a place to look for value.

[mountainman]

Do you have a link to that? Any other advice on sources for info on smaller tracks, or other writers that know their stuff? I'm getting really tired of big tracks with small fields. Two horses scratched out of a six horse field at Santa Anita isn't my idea of a place to look for value.

No link, but shoot me your mailing address, and I'll send you copies of both the treatise on shippers and the more comprehensive piece on mnr. You might also find my interview with hana (this month's edition) informative.

Also, my current blog entry explores mnr's feeder-tracks at length. It's a mix of stats and analysis.

[Stillriledup]

No link, but shoot me your mailing address, and I'll send you copies of both the treatise on shippers and the more comprehensive piece on mnr. You might also find my interview with hana (this month's edition) informative.

Also, my current blog entry explores mnr's feeder-tracks at length. It's a mix of stats and analysis.

Where's Nanc, is she ok?

[mountainman]

Where's Nanc, is she ok?

Broken kneecap suffered while running (seriously) from an enraged bull. But it's some kind of flu or very, very bad cough that's caused her to miss work lately. She sounded real bad on the phone yesterday, but she's a super-tuff chick, and I suspect she'll be back tonight.

[DeltaLover]

Small tracks (especially those with long meets) are not good for the bettor and
should be avoided as they tend to deprive the betting capital, consuming a large
percent of it as wages for the horsemen and related expenses offering very poor
betting events. Some of the reasons why small tracks should be avoided are the
following:

- Increased rebate rating to large players, provides them with an unfair advantage.
Small tracks are so eager to increase their anaemic pools to the point of
offering huge rebates to bettors who can bet big converting the small and
average bettor to an easy pray to them.

- Jocks, trainers and owners are way more connected than in large circuits
converting betting to an insider's game. Having the same horsemen operating
next to each other for years and years creates a fraternity that works
together trying to take advantage of the poor outsiders who are naive enough
to believe that they can outplay them on their turf..

- The local handicappers and journalists are usually directly depended to the
tracks and the insiders converting them to very soft commentators when it
comes to criticizing racing fraud (something that is also amplified from the
low visibility of these type of circuits)

- Although this happens in larger tracks to a lesser extend, obviously in small ones
there are way more races written for a specific horse which will be the
prohibitive favorite decreasing the betting interest. A perfect example of this
tactic you can be seen in Rapid Redux, a mediocre runner who managed to win 22
races, converting most of them to non interesting events from a betting
perspective given the relative superiority of the favorite..

- The average crowd is reluctant to bet on them, keeping their pools small and
inefficient, limiting the chances of a big score. The size of some of these
pools is completely ridiculous, to the extend of allowing a single bet of two
or three hundred dollars to completely change the board.

[mountainman]

- The local handicappers and journalists are usually directly depended to the
tracks and the insiders converting them to very soft commentators when it
comes to criticizing racing fraud (something that is also amplified from the
low visibility of these type of circuits)



Dude, I can't remember the last time I wasn't in hot water over some comment or other.

[DeltaLover]

Dude, I can't remember the last time I wasn't in hot water over some comment or other.

I do not understand what you are saying here...

The point I am trying to make though, is very clear...

A public handicapper or journalist who happens to depend directly to a race
track is impossible to criticise fraud cases, bad rides or bad steward
decisions.

As a horseplayer I need handicappers like Andy Beyer, who do not hesitate to
raise their voice when they believe something is wrong with racing.. I certainly
do not need handicappers who are making their living as employees of a race
track, never having to make a negative comment against...

[mountainman]

I do not understand what you are saying here...

The point I am trying to make though, is very clear...

A public handicapper or journalist who happens to depend directly to a race
track is impossible to criticise fraud cases, bad rides or bad steward
decisions.

.

Dude, there aren't 3 riders in the room who will even SPEAK to me. And the stewards here go out of their way to avoid even walking past my desk in the morning. And horsemen? Don't get me started on the cold shoulders I get from most of them.

Candid racing analysis burns lots of bridges and is hardly unique to larger tracks.

[DeltaLover]

There is nothing personal in my comment.

I am making general and non personal statements and would like to keep the conversation in this level.

[Robert Fischer]

There is nothing personal in my comment.

I am making general and non personal statements and would like to keep the conversation in this level.

Mountainman is the public handicapper for Mountaineer race track, and he is saying that he has raised a number of issues.

[Speed Figure]

Precisely why body language & paddock handicapping are more effective at the smaller tracks.
I don't ever do body language & paddock handicapping. Most of my bets are made in advance.

[maclr11]

Dude, there aren't 3 riders in the room who will even SPEAK to me. And the stewards here go out of their way to avoid even walking past my desk in the morning. And horsemen? Don't get me started on the cold shoulders I get from most of them.

Candid racing analysis burns lots of bridges and is hardly unique to larger tracks.


I made the comment that I liked a trainer change into a high percentage barn and the former trainer chewed my ass, made complaints to management and hasn't talked to me since. And that was on like my second day doing the job.


Bridges get burned quite easily

[pandy]

There are a lot of things that were mentioned on this thread that I agree with, in regards to how to win betting the smaller tracks. I do think there is a lot of value. You have to know how each track plays. For instance, at Parx, I generally look for horses that I feel can stalk and rally wide or make a sustained wide move, so I'm not crazy about horses that have speed from the inside. It's a wide rally track.

[mountainman]

I made the comment that I liked a trainer change into a high percentage barn and the former trainer chewed my ass, made complaints to management and hasn't talked to me since. And that was on like my second day doing the job.


Bridges get burned quite easily

I feel you, brother. Horsemen and jocks alike are understandably sensitive about commentary directed their way. The thing that quietly incurs their wrath, though, is the praising of OTHER horsemen and riders. People generally resent any compliments not thrown THEIR way.

In the end, it doesn't much matter how gently you tread on the training factor, objective critique of an outfit's stock is more than enough to set them off. The horses are like their children. And who takes kindly to their child being criticized?

[JackS]

Its my feeling that the majors are a little more consistant than the minors. But this is offset by the average payouts which are slightly larger at minor tracks. To verify this though, you'd have to prove it to yourself with past performances and average payouts on favorites at both type venues.
Average win rate at the majors would probably range between 30-33%
and at the minors 27-30%.
Without regards to track take, $6.00 win payout on the favorite at a major track versus a $6.60 payout at a minor track.
The difference in this example is 10% which of course could be varied.

[Stillriledup]

I feel you, brother. Horsemen and jocks alike are understandably sensitive about commentary directed their way. The thing that quietly incurs their wrath, though, is the praising of OTHER horsemen and riders. People generally resent any compliments not thrown THEIR way.

In the end, it doesn't much matter how gently you tread on the training factor, objective critique of an outfit's stock is more than enough to set them off. The horses are like their children. And who takes kindly to their child being criticized?

Keep doing a great job, if anyone is petty and won't talk to you, that's their loss, not yours. You don't need them anyway as friends, doing a great job and being proud of the product that you are putting out on the air is the most important thing.

[maclr11]

Its my feeling that the majors are a little more consistant than the minors. But this is offset by the average payouts which are slightly larger at minor tracks. To verify this though, you'd have to prove it to yourself with past performances and average payouts on favorites at both type venues.
Average win rate at the majors would probably range between 30-33%
and at the minors 27-30%.
Without regards to track take, $6.00 win payout on the favorite at a major track versus a $6.60 payout at a minor track.
The difference in this example is 10% which of course could be varied.


I can only speak for winnipeg but 189 of 473 races were won by favs which is 39.9577%. And the favorite hit the board 358 races out of 473 or 75.687% of the time. Pretty consistent to me, those are well above national averages. Field size was 6.976 per race.


Win % of favorites has lots to do with field size in my opinion.


As for sru's point it's nice to ignore them till you need to be friendly to do the rest of your job like getting them to enter to make a race go or get a pre race interview before a stakes race or whatever .
It's such a small community and you always need friends.