Identifying track bias

[Valuist]

If you are a non-believer in biases or have trouble identifying them, take a look at these race replays from Hawthorne last Saturday (they're free). I would classify this main track as a good rail track:

http://www.hawthorneracecourse.com/racing/live/replays.php?day=050430

[cj]

I'll play:

1st-The winner was 7-5, but didn't look that strong to me on paper.
3rd-The winner was 2-1 and looked much the best to me, no surprise.
4th-Would never have picked this wire to wire winner, went somewhat wide in the lane though.
5th-Legit contender, pressed pace, but off the rail according to the chart, no vid for this one.
6th-My two fastest horses ran 1-2 around the track, though one was DQed for bad break.
7th-Fave wires them from inside, nothing special here.
8th-Again, the favorite, slips through on the inside.
10th-The winner was fast, just the long layoff made the price bigger.

I'd say possible, but I'm not really convinced there was a bias. Those Statebred days are always tough for me to judge though.

[Valuist]

Here's how I saw it:
1st- top 2 betting choices looked very even, IMO. Bet on Joe gets lead on rail while Papa Fuse is in the 2 and 3 path all race and gets beat 4 lengths.

4th-A 2 to 5 shot gets beat after not being able to get the lead on the rail, which Top Kick did. When they face off again at AP on Illinois day, I would expect the tables to turn.

7th- IMO, Meadow Bride looked much the best on paper but a 4-5 wide trip cost her the race. Same comment as the 4th: on Illinois day, she'll revenge that loss to Pretty Jenny.

8th-Wiggins had no chance racing 3 wide. I don't know if he's sharp enough to turn the tables at AP, but he definitely was the most accomplished going into that race last Saturday.

10th- Mr. Big Time is a definite betback for me after a great effort to run 4th despite a wide trip.

[46zilzal]

[QUOTE=Valuist]If you are a non-believer in biases or have trouble identifying them, take a look at these race replays from Hawthorne last Saturday [QUOTE]

Isn't the absolute SHORTEST distance (circumference wise) on the rail and speed (a la Dr. William Qurin's studies prove) is a universal bias?.

I see a bias when a WEAK front runner (on the calcuation early/late balance) hangs on when it really should not have ....akin to MANY on the day Bellamy Road won big time, or the year at Gulfstream when Cat Thief won the B.C. Classic (only the Juvenille's pace collpased that day and ALL the others were front enders).. Personally I have NEVER seen a closer's bias, NEVER ....but I am told it happens.

PATH BIAS happens: '88 Breeder's Cup when only ONE horse (Gulch) moved up all day down near the rail, or at the old Fort Erie when NOTHING moved up on the rail until the track was re-surfaced over the past Summer.

ALSO the visual is not the same as the energy distribution which really tells you how the horse is running....... NOT the visual.

[Valuist]

First off, I want to recheck the charts from Wood day because I'm not 100% convinced that was a biased track. I clearly remember Forest Danger breaking dead last and had no problem motoring past horses. Lost in the Fog won but he was probably 1-10? I can't remember the other races off the top of my head but there's one guy on the T-Graph board who keeps screaming that BR took advantage of a speed bias, justifying his dislike for Bellamy Road.

I've also always believed this re: bias: Sprints are a far better indicator of a bias than routes. Horses are running harder and hitting the ground harder so running on the deeper part of the track makes a bigger differnce than in routes, where the pace isn't nearly as fast. Also, it makes sense that saving ground on two turns makes a bigger difference than saving ground on one turn.

[46zilzal]

First off, I want to recheck the charts from Wood day because I'm not 100% convinced that was a biased track. \

Therein lies the big differencein our relative understanding of biases ..just because a horse does not go immediately to the front, does not mean a speed bias is not there....as strange as that sounds. You evaluate that BEFORE, NOT after the contest. Earliest psotion has a lot to do with the break

[hurrikane]

I suppose you could call it a bias if you like. I;m not convinced...not even close.

[karlskorner]

They just didn't come about. The tractors created the bias, does anybody know what the tractors did prior to the racing day or between each race ? Well a few might. Did the bias come about during the racing day ? Where did it come from ? Why, it was the tractors that changed the surface. Watch the water truck and tractors go "clockwise" around the track and you got a new bias.

According to Jim Quinn most track biases are mild, extending only slightly favorable to horse having certain running styles or exiting certain posts, and the casual handicapper relentless preoccupation with the effects of track surface is usually unwarranted. But when the track biases are severe, they become dominant. Severe biases take advantage over all other handicapping factors and can be recognized when: 1. Horses that do not figure on the fundamentals but having specific running styles are winning easily and frequently 2.
Inside and outside posts are dominating, or failing, at irrational rates. 3. Contenders and favorites running against a speed or post bias have been failing persistently and badly.

Biases are man made.

[Valuist]

The thing about Quinn is he's from Southern California and those tracks are relatively unbiased most of the time. They don't get the temperature shifts, and (except for this winter) the amount of rain the Midwest and Northeast get. Its not just about tractors; its about precipitation, wind, temperature and drainage.

We've had several people debate me on this and I doubt anybody has looked at the replays from last Saturday.

[cj]

I looked, I watched the races except the one that was missing and the turf races. I'm not saying no, I'm saying it is iffy. No real solid cases of the track carrying the runner. Even the long priced winner had only run one time previously.

[karlskorner]

Percipitation, wind, tempreature and drainage, all to be recognized "before" the race is run, not on replays. Wind and tempreature are a "given" to all the horses running, percipitation and drainage are controlled by the tractors. Let the rail become heavy and the tractors go to work, let the 4/5/6 path become highways and the tractors correct that. Those John Deere's are not there for the advertising

[cj]

...percipitation and drainage are controlled by the tractors.

What, the tractors come with rainmakers now? I can here the superintendent now: "It hasn't rained in days, get the rain tractor out!" :lol::lol::lol:

[kenwoodallpromos]

Video, charts, workouts all show bias; wider is slower at Hawthorne and the jockeys all know it.
Is it possible they blade the track uphill?
Same this week so far. May be a meet thing. May be a bad crew.

[sjk]

What, the tractors come with rainmakers now? I can here the superintendent now: "It hasn't rained in days, get the rain tractor out!" :lol::lol::lol:


I used to spend many days and evenings at a track that gets very biased and I spent lots of time between races watching the water truck.

I show a strong speed bias for the day in question.

[Jeff P]

HAW
04-25-2005, 04-26-2005, and 04-29-2005
(Three days prior to Sat Card)

Data Window Settings:
999 Divisor
Filters Applied: DATE: 04-25-2005 to 04-29-2005
Dirt (All*) Distance: (All*) (From Index File: F:\2005\Q2_2005\pl_Track_HAW.txt)


All starters on the dirt:

Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 154.00 212.20 238.10
Bet -310.00 -310.00 -310.00
Gain -156.00 -97.80 -71.90

Wins 21 42 64
Plays 155 155 155
PCT .1355 .2710 .4129

ROI 0.4968 0.6845 0.7681
Avg Mut 7.33 5.05 3.72


By: pctE Rank

Rank Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct
1 3.40 42.00 1.0810 5 21 .2381
2 -25.60 42.00 0.3905 3 21 .1429
3 -24.20 42.00 0.4238 3 21 .1429
4 -9.00 42.00 0.7857 4 21 .1905
5 -24.40 40.00 0.3900 4 20 .2000
6 -23.80 40.00 0.4050 1 20 .0500
7 -20.40 30.00 0.3200 1 15 .0667
8 -20.00 20.00 0.0000 0 10 .0000
9 -6.00 6.00 0.0000 0 3 .0000
10 -4.00 4.00 0.0000 0 2 .0000
11 -2.00 2.00 0.0000 0 1 .0000


By: CPace Rank

Rank Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct
1 2.60 44.00 1.0591 6 22 .2727
2 -16.40 40.00 0.5900 4 20 .2000
3 -19.60 42.00 0.5333 3 21 .1429
4 -20.40 42.00 0.5143 4 21 .1905
5 -10.00 40.00 0.7500 3 20 .1500
6 -28.20 38.00 0.2579 1 19 .0526
7 -32.00 32.00 0.0000 0 16 .0000
8 -18.00 18.00 0.0000 0 9 .0000
9 -8.00 8.00 0.0000 0 4 .0000
10 -4.00 4.00 0.0000 0 2 .0000
11 -2.00 2.00 0.0000 0 1 .0000




For the 3 days leading up to the Sat HAW card, the number of winners in the top positions for both PctE rank and CPace rank are roughly double that of random chance alone. IMHO, this represents a speed bias.

.

[Valuist]

Karl-

In the perfect world we'd all catch on to the bias after the first race it changes. That's not realistic. And yes, its ok to determine a bias AFTER THE FACT. This is what opens up good wagers for the future. I don't bet every single race, nor do I see every race live. Sometimes all we have is the charts and replays.

And maintenance does not always work. What about periods of prolonged biases?

[kenwoodallpromos]

Getting worse today.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Note the large gap between the 6/22's and the 9/22's horses on the 4f dirt works today:

Horse Name Time Notes Rank Add to

CALL ME DORIE (IL) 51.40 b 13/22
COURTING TIME (IL) 48.80 b 4/22
CRIMSON ROYALE (IL) 54.40 b 18/22
DAVEY'S CUTLASS (IL) 48.80 b 4/22
DIAMOND ACCOUNT (FL) 49.00 b 6/22
EL MERLOT (ARG) 48.60 b 3/22
EXPEDITE IT (IL) 54.80 b 19/22
FLAGGER (IL) 52.40 b 15/22
HUG ME HUG ME (IL) 53.60 b 17/22
JUDGE PERKINS (FL) 48.00 b 1/22
LOUISIANA JOE (IL) 51.00 b 9/22
MICK'S REAL THRILL (IL) 48.00 b 1/22
MY FRIEND KENNY (IL) 51.60 b 14/22
NOTORIOUS BANDITO (KY) 54.80 b 19/22
OUT OF DAYLIGHT (FL) 54.80 b 19/22
REAL EASY (IL) 49.60 b 8/22
SINGING STAR (KY) 51.00 b 9/22
SISTER BABE (IL) 54.80 b 19/22
STEALTH FLIER (MD) 52.80 b 16/22
STORMY'SBACK (FL) 49.00 b 6/22
TWINE FLIES (KY) 51.20 b 12/22
YOUCANHEARMENOW (FL) 51.00 b 9/22

[Valuist]

Ken-

How do you determine bias based on works?

[hurrikane]

Absolutely correct,

empty your savings, mortgage the house, run to HAW and play this bias...

I need the money.

[kenwoodallpromos]

From an article from Victoryplates.com on breakdown causes-

"Baffert's precaution
Baffert said he likes to work his horses a bit later in the morning ***to allow himself some time to assess the condition of that track on that particular day*** and then to alter his horses' workouts accordingly."
____________
Me and Baffert, the voodoo priests of racing!

[karlskorner]

From Jim Quinn:

Once Handicappers have identified the contenders and evaluated them variously utilizing rating methods, the task at hand is slightly more than half complete.

Which factors take precedence today ? In this race ? Should handicappers emphasize speed over class, class over speed, track bias over all else ? How does the Trainer fit in ? And so forth.

It's all this advanced stage, too, where method players carelessely stumble into trouble. Method players are those who belong to an amazingly large nationwide club of handicappers almost blindly submissive to the procedures and outpus of pet methods.

1.Speed handicappers entranced by the magical power of their figures.

2.Class handicappers dedictated to the preposition they have discovered the best horse.

3.PACE ANAYSTS unable to imagine the race might be run in any other way

4,Trip handicappers persuaded that horses running into trouble last out will convert the mishaps into clear sailing to victory today.

5. Trainer specialists clinging stubbornly to personal convictions that what a trainer intends to happen today amounts to direct access to reality.

[kenwoodallpromos]

I think the best horses are versatile, and the best handicappers are versaitle also.
Sometimes I can use certain methods but sometimes the individual horse probability outweighs the methods.
In the SA Breeder's Cup, Krone and half-bridled outran any possible bias from an outer post because the horse was that good.
There are horses I may not bet on but I would never bet against either.
I got the impression Seabiscuit's owner and/or trainer avoided off track biases.
I would not bet a horse with suspect physical condition regardless of other considerations.
But I do take a long look at older horses when changing to races that are easier on the legs even if the normal method I use to handicap say, turf sprints, do not point to that horse.
I may stay off a jockey coming back from an injury or whip suspension in certain situations for awhile regardless of biases or methods I may normally employ.
The more I tailor my handicapping to a specific race ths more confidence I have.

[46zilzal]

Ken-
How do you determine bias based on works?

Simple...you can't

[kenwoodallpromos]

"You can't".
I agree that you cannot determine the exact nature of a bias based on workouts alone, and never claimed that. But is it very easy to determine if an obvious bias does exist during the morning workouts, and those biases rarely disappear prior to daytime racing time.
You have to watch the horses run a race or two to determine the exact nature of lane bias; sectional bias takes a few races. The good news is most track biases last more than just the 1 day.
Hawthorne already show the nature of the bias last week and the workouts just showed a continuation of that bias that already existed, not a new one yet to be identified.
Not to worry though- I emailed Hawthorne to let them know to correct it!LOL!

[hurrikane]

Ok
Karl is quoting an author that doesn't make his living playing the horses.

anybody see a news flash about hell freezing over?

[karlskorner]

How do you know he doesn't make a living at the track. I know he holds a Phd, but to the best of my knowledge he doesn't teach or work anywhere. When I was with him the winter of 86/87 along with Quirin, Joe T. and others he was a fairly heavy hitter. It was Bill Quirin that didn 't wager the entire time I spent with them and held a position as math teacher at Adelphi U., his students created the work everyone give him credit for.

[Valuist]

Just some more evidence that there definitely was a strong rail bias at Hawthorne. Here's what Marcus Hersh had to say in the DRF Weekly Charts Handicapper's Diary re: April 30

"Illinois Day, with six state bred restricted stakes, and we had one of the most obvious biases of the meet. The inside speed horse won six of the eight dirt races on the card. In another race, the horse who pressed from the two path won, with the inside-speed horse finishing a close fourth at 27-1. And in the other dirt race, the winner tracked from 4th, squeezed thru on the rail and won going away. The rail was absolutely golden."

[kenwoodallpromos]

I'm biased in favor of company on the issue!