Track Bias

[GeTydOn]

How often - in general - does everyone think a track surface has a bias? Every day? A couple times a week? A couple times a month? And I don't mean the understood biases that exist - like Keeneland is speed.

[kenwoodallpromos]

I would say that generally it depends on the track so you have to check daily.

A positive or negative rail bias that affects a horse's stamina in the stretch occurs about 20% of the time but can last 1-5 days. At non-major tracks it can last a whole meet, like at Tampa Bay last year. Bay Meadows one lasted a week. At Hollywood there was a slow turn that only lasted 1 workout day and no racecards.
A slow stretch can last 1 day to 1 week.
There can be slow turns or slow straightaways that last several days to 1 week. Track crews seem to do do more thorough grading on non-racing days.
A track that is uniform as to depth or speed occurs often at most tracks, is usually faster than a "normal" track, and can last part of a day on an off track or up to 1 week. I consider a normal speed track to be one where the 4f dirt work middle or average time is 49-50 seconds. SA, DM, Bel, and AQ are posting average workout summaries now for use by their track crews.
I find NYRA, LS, Hol, SA, Pimlico, Phila, GP can be faster at times. CRC is uniformly slow. Northern Ca is uniformly very fast in dry weather most of the time.
Always note the stretch as to how many are catching up to the leader and from what part of the track.
Check full results charts for speed of fractions and what path horses do best from in the stretch. Especially if a horse did well when it "angled out".
Beyers wrote well on bias and there are a few good articles on the web. Some information on off-track include good info on biases.
I rarely bet on Sundays I do not feel the tracks I like are predictable as well as to speed.

[Tom Barrister]

They exist, but which kind of bias are you referring to? Running style? Lane? Post position? Wind?

Lane biases exist from time to time. They usually change rapidly, and you have to stay on top of it. When there's a lane bias, you might prefer contenders with jockeys who are alert to any lane biases (Russel Baze is very good at this and so is John Velasquez).

Most dirt courses are biased to early speed. Wet-fast usually exaggerates that. As a track dries out, it generally goes the other way towards closers.

Wind biases in one turn dirt races usually favor front runners when there's a stretch headwind and closers when there's a stretch tailwind. The obvious reason is because the stretch headwind is behind the front runners on the backstretch, saving them some energy, while the wind impedes the momentum of the closers in the stretch (and can discourage them from making a move). A stretch tailwind is in the face of the front runners on the backstretch, which tires them out faster. The closers can usually draft behind others and stay out of the wind on the backstretch, while their late move is aided in the stretch by the wind being behind them (I know this is all elementary to most of you).

Post biases vary by track. The most common two are the rail in sprints run out of a chute (bad, since the horse has to use extra energy to avoid being trapped), and the outside posts in routes with a short run to the first turn.

Of course most of what I said is well known already.

[kenwoodallpromos]

http://www.jepra.net/handicapping.htm.
Baze does recognize a bias quicky, as does Chance Rollins and Dave Lopez, all at BM/GGF. Bailey is good at NY tracks.

[GeTydOn]

Hardly any responses when I asked about biases a few days ago. Glad to see all the action on the "other" track bias thread.

[hurrikane]

A positive or negative rail bias that affects a horse's stamina in the stretch occurs about 20% of the time but can last 1-5 days. At non-major tracks it can last a whole meet.

I'm sorry Ken but where do you get this information. I doubt it is anything more than speculation and IMO most of the things people think are biases are random or can be explained in some way other than the track favored speed this day and not on this day.
I just don't by the premise and to my knowledge there has been no study done that quanitfies this 'bias' thing.


A slow stretch can last 1 day to 1 week.
There can be slow turns or slow straightaways that last several days to 1 week. Track crews seem to do do more thorough grading on non-racing days.
A track that is uniform as to depth or speed occurs often at most tracks, is usually faster than a "normal" track, and can last part of a day on an off track or up to 1 week. I consider a normal speed track to be one where the 4f dirt work middle or average time is 49-50 seconds. SA, DM, Bel, and AQ are posting average workout summaries now for use by their track crews.
I find NYRA, LS, Hol, SA, Pimlico, Phila, GP can be faster at times. CRC is uniformly slow. Northern Ca is uniformly very fast in dry weather most of the time.

I have found nothing that validates this and in fact my own study seems to contradict some of what you state.


Check full results charts for speed of fractions and what path horses do best from in the stretch. Especially if a horse did well when it "angled out".
Beyers wrote well on bias and there are a few good articles on the web. Some information on off-track include good info on biases.
I rarely bet on Sundays I do not feel the tracks I like are predictable as well as to speed.

most result files do not list the path the horse was in down the stretch and I would not rely on them anyway. IMO much of this rail fast/rail slow is illusion. I do however think there may be total track profiles that lend themselves to certain characteristics of runstyles.

I think it really depends on how you do the study and even more important how you ask the question.

[hurrikane]

They exist, but which kind of bias are you referring to? Running style? Lane? Post position? Wind?

Lane biases exist from time to time. They usually change rapidly, and you have to stay on top of it. When there's a lane bias, you might prefer contenders with jockeys who are alert to any lane biases (Russel Baze is very good at this and so is John Velasquez).

Most dirt courses are biased to early speed. Wet-fast usually exaggerates that. As a track dries out, it generally goes the other way towards closers.

Wind biases in one turn dirt races usually favor front runners when there's a stretch headwind and closers when there's a stretch tailwind. The obvious reason is because the stretch headwind is behind the front runners on the backstretch, saving them some energy, while the wind impedes the momentum of the closers in the stretch (and can discourage them from making a move). A stretch tailwind is in the face of the front runners on the backstretch, which tires them out faster. The closers can usually draft behind others and stay out of the wind on the backstretch, while their late move is aided in the stretch by the wind being behind them (I know this is all elementary to most of you).

Post biases vary by track. The most common two are the rail in sprints run out of a chute (bad, since the horse has to use extra energy to avoid being trapped), and the outside posts in routes with a short run to the first turn.

Of course most of what I said is well known already.


Tom, I think most of what is believed is false.

[Valuist]

Hurrikane-

Watch Hawthorne or Arlington for a full meet. After that I guarantee you will find that the surface definitely has favorable lanes from time to time.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Unconfirmed speculation! :eek:

[hurrikane]

Yes Ken :eek:

don't misunderstand me. No question tracks have profiles that favor certain runstyles and pace types.

I'm not sure you could get a front runner across the finish line first at OP this meet. But I would consider that part of a profile of the track.

The bias I do not believe exists is this slow/fast/lane in today bet the rail bunch of bs. My fav is at the track last year I'm getting ready to pounce on a 18-1 shot on the outside post at SA. some clown goes off telling me about how the 1st 4 horses have been won by the 1 or 2 horse and there is a bias on the rail and I"m stupid to play the outside post. 3600.00 later he wasn't saying too much. (this is why I seldom go to the track..can't take the bs)

Most people believe what they precieve to be the truth. Whether it is some morning work track depth voodoo or some lane moving around during the the race. It's all bunk. I challenge anyone to prove different. Please. It could only make me money....it's not there, or I can't find it.

[kenwoodallpromos]

I think it is rare to find 100% absolutes in racing about anything, but you can check March 30 GP results charts and I will listen to why you think some horses did not falter in the stretch. I'm always willing to learn.
As far as workouts and depth, I'm just wondering for what purpose SA, DM,AQ, and BEL are listing average workout times if not for use by the crews. DM went back to the last meet to list theirs.
My qualification is "detectable bias".
What do you call the various variations in track surface/cushion due to rain if not a bias? Haven't you ever seen a track that has standing water on the rail?
Or do you just believe only rainy track can have biases?
By the way- Bay Meadows was sealed for today for rain that never came. Equibase has the results charts.

[LARRY GEORGE]

I DO NOT LOOK MUCH INTO TRACK BIAS I THINK THE BIAS IS BUILT INTO THE
RACE ITSELF. YOU TAKE 3 OR 4 EARLY TYPE HORSES I MIGHT LOOK INTO A PRESSER OR COME FROM BEHIND.
ALL CLOSERS IN A RACE MAYBE A LONE EARLY.
I GET SOME GOOD PAYOFFS BY GOING AGAINST WHAT THE PUBLIC SEES.
TURF RACES PEOPLE ALWAYS PLAY CLOSERS IF I FIND A LONE EARLY WATCH OUT. :confused:

[breakage]

The bias I do not believe exists is this slow/fast/lane in today bet the rail bunch of bs.
I guess that day two years ago at Mountaineer was a figment of my imagination. I'm talking about the day where I was salivating hoping the rail bias for sprints would continue for another day. I guess those 7 straight (I think) number ones that won was just dumb luck. Ask Mountainman Mark if he thinks there was a rail bias that day.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Like any other factor in racing, the degree to which anything including permanent or temporary biases affect the order of finish depends on degrees of the factor and how various horses handle them.
I just hold the opinion that temporary biases can have a major affect on the outcome of races on non-rainy days. Anyone with another opinion is certainly entitled to it.
Right or wrong, my opinion on a speed favoring bias just happened to win me 4 races at BM today. I do not really care why. I just knew the track crew thought it might rain and they seal the track for the slightest reason.
At least I saved money since I was able to bet without the PP's! :jump: :D

[hurrikane]

check March 30 GP results charts and I will listen to why you think some horses did not falter in the stretch. I'm always willing to learn.


Really, tell me where the bias is. I can't find it. 6 won up front, 4 won off the pace.

And the same number of speed balls won at BM as won three days ago. All of them. Where is the bias. explain please!

and come on...one day 2 years ago at MNR...what is this a fairy tale.

only twice can I find the 1 horse winning even 6 races the same day much less 7. Every single time the 1 horse was no where near the lead at the first call. That means someone else was on the rail and had the advantage. The 1s didn't win like that the day before or after either time. random bs is my guess. I do play early speed at mnr all the time..but not because of some mystical fairy tale bias.

It may be there but I can't find it and no one as yet has been able to prove that a daily bias is causing horses to win or lose.

A track profile yes, I"m all up for that. some tracks are just built to favor certains types of runners. But a daily bias. i dont' think so.

I would love someone to prove it exsists and show me how you can use it to make money. I'm more about making the money than being right.

[Houndog]

I would wonder if what could be called an early bias would have to do with the match-up of the horses involved in a particular race. Could it be possible that horses are the lone early types getting un-contested leads? What is causing the bias? The track or the match-up?

[breakage]

and come on...one day 2 years ago at MNR...what is this a fairy tale.


It happened sometime around Feb 03.....no fairy tale. I picked it because it was an exagerated case. The number ones were mostly wire to wire. I'm sure a few others remember it because Mark from their in house show kept remarking about the extreme rail bias the whole night (I kept wishing he'd shut up about it...lol).Any way I don't care to argue about it. You can believe what you want.

[hurrikane]

it's not a matter of what I believe or don't believe.

on jan 27 2002 the 1 horse won 6 times. not one had the lead at the first call

on feb 16 2004 the 1 horse won 6 times. not one had the lead at the first call

thats the problem with using a database. It doesn't allow you to believe in fairy tales.

and since when did the valium twins at MNR have anything valuable to add to a race evaluation.

[breakage]

and since when did the valium twins at MNR have anything valuable to add to a race evaluation.
Well actually Mark is a member of this forum and if he (or probably Budha) would chime in I'm sure he could clear up the date thing. And also, I think he gives out alot of good information on their races through the course of a night.

[betovernetcapper]

Of the last 20 races at MNR, 13 have been won by post positions 2 or 3. One horse won off the pace-one was a half length off at the first call and 11 were won wire to wire. The average odds were 9.30 to 1.
This condition will undoubtable change tommorow, but was interesting. :)

[kenwoodallpromos]

Actually, few dirt winners Wed or Sun list the path, except a few says rail. Some of the loser were 2, 3, and 4w. Speculation about the rail and overall track speed. Absolutely positive about the track being sealed.
I'm sure workers and official would love their tracks to never have a temporary bias along the width or length, but I have heard of races being cancelled due to jockeys refusing to ride until bad spots are fixed. Uniform tracks would mean no bad steps.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Thursday race 1- rail winner, place 2w, show boxed in, 4th horse 3w.
Temp or profile, the rail and early speed is money in the bank!

[betovernetcapper]

Just noticed that of the last 20 races 7 races finished 2/3 or 3/2. One race was DQ'd but that still left 6 2/3 exacta boxes paying an average of $74.50. :)

[Valuist]

All you have to do is take trips notes of some of the key players: the top finishers and the favorites. If you see race after race being won by horses in the 3-4-5 path and a few favorites getting beat with rail trips, you've likely got yourself a dead rail. Forget what posts are winning. We've all seen horses break from post 1, drop back and circle the field wide. Good jocks know when the track is biased because they're trying to take advantage of it. I think software players try to deny the existance of bias because computers can't decide if there's a bias or not.

[hurrikane]

like i said, I have been playing speed at MNR for a long long time.

I call that a track profile. You call it a bias. Now, if you can show me horses that in now way should win a race come from off the pace......

you can call it bias if you want. I call it a track profile. In Mnr case it's also cheap speed and last leg horses.

I mean no offense to the valium twins at MNR. The just talk in a way that does nothing but put me to sleep. What they do is good though...keeps the prices up.