Do you favor track or distance?

[HandiTrack]

If you've got one line where a horse ran (fairly recently) at the current track but not at the current race distance or race level, and another line where they ran (again reasonably recently) at the current race distance but not the same track or race level, which do you favor? Let's say they are both below the current race level to minimize variables.

Does that change if either or both are at the current race level? Both above the current race level?

I'm very inconsistent about which line I choose for my handicapping and I'd like some outside opinions.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I favor turf routes.

[PhantomOnTour]

As long as it's the same surface I prefer a race over the track/turf

[Tom]

I prefer the race closest to day's race, regardless of what track it was at, unless it was Gulfstream.

[HandiTrack]

Haha I feel the same way about Keeneland.

[PaceAdvantage]

I always look at surface/distance before I consider track.

[therussmeister]

Since choosing a running line is the very beginning of my handicapping process, with my opinion greatly modified by other factors, I'd like to think that whichever running line I choose I will in the end come to the same conclusion. So therefore I prefer the most recent one.

The most difficult situation for me is going from synthetic to dirt. I do not play any synthetic tracks so I never have to deal with dirt to synthetic.

[green80]

Distance is the same at every track. You must travel the same number of feet to go a mile at Belmont as you do at Delta Downs. Level is not the same, a 5000 claimer at Oaklawn is much better than a 5k claimer at Sam Houston.

The racing surface at every track is different with some horses liking one more than another. Also it takes a different effort for horses to go a mile around two turns vs one. Some prefer bullrings and some the bigger tracks.

So with your question you are trying to compare apples to oranges. There are too many factors to have a simple answer.

[098poi]

Good thread. No easy answer.

[Tom]

But the Belmont mile is a one turn affair.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Belmont is a 1 turn mile but Delta isn't that a 3 turn mile? There is a lot of money made between these distinctions. I got a 10-1 at Keeneland on a horse who had all routes in his last 10 PP's but his only 2 turns were the top and 2nd top figs in the field. Hidden in plain sight!

[jay68802]

At Delta Downs all races over 5f are two turns. I look at distance, surface, and if its at the same track i consider it a bonus.

[classhandicapper]

I look at the horse's entire record and try to use any information I can pick up from the past to inform me about what I should prefer to look at recently.

[CincyHorseplayer]

I look at the horse's entire record and try to use any information I can pick up from the past to inform me about what I should prefer to look at recently.

Class we know each other. Has what I laid out above happened to you? This is part and parcel basics IMO. But it pays on occasion.

[classhandicapper]

Class we know each other. Has what I laid out above happened to you? This is part and parcel basics IMO. But it pays on occasion.

To be honest, I don't think I've made many plays based on whether a race was 1 turn or 2 turns. It's probably a hole in my game. It would have really stand out for me to notice other than if the pace was a major issue or the horse was a turn back and I was trying to evaluate him off the 6F fraction.

[Delta Cone]

I always look at surface/distance before I consider track.

Agree. My play improved when I stopped lumping all sprints together and started looking for real differences in distance preference among 6f and 6.5f or 7f. Sometimes the crowd makes subtle mistakes in assuming they are equivalent.

But many horses have specific preferences and can wake up from a series of dull efforts with a small distance switch.

[shouldacoulda]

I prefer track over distance. I also look at jockey too. Assuming it was a shipper, If the there is a change to a higher % jockey then you know they will be trying to win. I remember reading about a workout within a race. Sometimes that's what the first race in a new track is. I have caught some nice price horses using this angle. It's also where I find computer based handicapping falls short. When I look at the races selected for evaluation by a program I can only wonder why.

[proximity]

If you've got one line where a horse ran (fairly recently) at the current track but not at the current race distance or race level, and another line where they ran (again reasonably recently) at the current race distance but not the same track or race level, which do you favor? Let's say they are both below the current race level to minimize variables.

Does that change if either or both are at the current race level? Both above the current race level?

I'm very inconsistent about which line I choose for my handicapping and I'd like some outside opinions.

i prefer a body of work approach to choosing a specific line but to give an answer to your question in most of the kinds of races i like to play i'd prefer track with evidence of being able to succeed at the distance. :)