Track Bias Information?

[CincyHorseplayer]

I haven't taken the time to get charts files and design something I want in Excel but I remember once upon a time this information was available. Looking around the net last night I can't seem to locate any. I still look at charts every day and sometimes will go old school and do profile/models by hand but this is one last step I need to overcome. Interpreting information vs spending most of valuable time compiling it. So..

Where is the best place to get track bias/profile information? Not embedded into past performances either. Not buying 5 sources to have what I need. Any help would be welcome.

[ldiatone]

trackmaster...."free stuff" on the web site

[Tom]

http://www.handicappingwinners.com/track_bias.htm

By our own Pandy

[GMB@BP]

http://www.handicappingwinners.com/track_bias.htm

By our own Pandy

I just cant agree with that, I have inside tracks at many days of this saratoga meet. every handicapper sees it different but this page has no bias on almost the entire meet.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Thanks gang!

[classhandicapper]

Bias is something I think you have to do by yourself.

Your opinion of the horses going into the race should color you opinion of the results and bias at least to some degree. And since handicapping opinions vary so much going in, two people can watch the same set of races and come to different conclusions.

People also have different definitions for describing tracks.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Bias is something I think you have to do by yourself.

Your opinion of the horses going into the race should color you opinion of the results and bias at least to some degree. And since handicapping opinions vary so much going in, two people can watch the same set of races and come to different conclusions.

People also have different definitions for describing tracks.

Absolutely Class. I think general tendencies if repeated are correct. But the Trackmaster reports are a good baseline IMO. I already have a feel for Toga. There is a different level of turf horse I will bet over another at another track. Nothing replaces experience does it? Looking at this every day you know what you want. Best finish vs the fastest pace has worked on both turf surfaces. But the horses on my ratings that would be dirt competitors are winning big and at prices. This happens at Gulfstream at times too. Toga I think there is just an inside bias every summer. I love when I get those inside out trips!

Anyway long winded today! Just came home from my brand new twin grandbabies. Always appreciate your thoughts on the races and especially bias brother.

[Cice]

Agreed @GMB@BP

[deelo]

I just cant agree with that, I have inside tracks at many days of this saratoga meet. every handicapper sees it different but this page has no bias on almost the entire meet.

True bias is more rare than people want to make it out to be. If he's showing a lot of "no bias" days, it actually gives his days listed as biased more credibility in my eyes.

[Clocker]

Bias is something I think you have to do by yourself.


I agree. Two of the best sources for information on the subject are Steve Davidowitz's book (2nd edition) and Andy Beyer. Beyer's "Picking Winners" has a chapter on it (in which he says that a chance early meeting with Davidowitz got him interested in the subject). Beyer's "The Winning Horseplayer" expands on the subject and talks about bias in the context of trip handicapping.

I don't think that you can talk about either bias or trips without talking about the other, because both tell you how a horse ran a race the way that it did. And generally you don't know what goes into a report from an outside source or report about bias.

[classhandicapper]

If he's showing a lot of "no bias" days, it actually gives his days listed as biased more credibility in my eyes.

I agree with this. My thinking is still evolving after all these years.

There is no way to prove there was a bias. Even on days with 9 races to analyze it's possible that a series of seemingly biased results were just random fluctuations of form that happened to line up the same way. That can even be true when the horses come back.

On some level it's how you want to think about these things.

There's evidence of a bias.

There's evidence for how strong it was.

There's conflicting evidence (horses that ran well against the grain.

So where's the cutoff point for when you make a note and when you don't?

I don't know. :confused:

It depends on what you want your degree of confidence to be.

The tighter the standards the more often you will be right, but those are the ones everyone else sees and you might miss some.

The looser the standards, the less likely you miss any, but you might make some bad ones.

I usually put the sample size in my note and sometimes add in a degree of confidence. ex. (GR -
sample size only 5 dirt races, but clear cut good rail). Still, I'm sure I miss some and make some mistakes.

I don't think there are any perfectly correct answers to this. There are probabilities.

[ldiatone]

i asked steve via e-mail how can there b a track bias when they rack the track after every race or day?