POST POSITION

[arkansasman]

Does anyone have a mathematical factor for post position they would be willing to share?

For example, in his book "Beating the Races with a Computer", Brecher used a factor for Inside post(INSID) by assigning 1 to post positions 1-6 and 0 for post positions 7-12. He had another factor for outside post(OUSID) by assigning 0 for post positions 1-6 and 1 for post positions 7-12.

It would look like this:

---------------- INSID-------------OUSID
PP1 ---------------1-----------------0
PP2 ---------------1-----------------0
PP3 ---------------1-----------------0
PP4 ---------------1-----------------0
PP5 ---------------1-----------------0
PP6 ---------------1-----------------0
PP7 ---------------0-----------------1
PP8 ---------------0-----------------1
PP9 ---------------0-----------------1
PP10 --------------0-----------------1
PP11 --------------0-----------------1
PP12 --------------0-----------------1

I am looking into modifying this, but would like to hear from some of you that have better ideas.

[banacek]

Well first this is obviously very track specific. But what I like to do is look at relative posts. A front runner out of the 10 hole with no other early speed in the race might as well be in post 3. It won't hurt him any. Then another frontrunner in post 2 with a speedball in post 1 might get burned. So, for me I look at how the post would affect this particular race. That can be done by comparing 1st quarter times or roughly by using Quirin speed points.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Posts 1-3 is a -2-; posts 3-7 is a -1-; posts 8 and up is a -0-. I use it as variable points based on last racing day speed (fast) or off track condition (sloppy or wet fast).

[sjk]

I would think you would need to differentiate individual posts. Around two turns I find that each post outward is notably worse than the one inside of it. Around one turn there is not much difference among the inside group of posts but as you get further outside there is a dropoff in expected win percent.

[GlenninOhio]

I would think you would need to differentiate individual posts. Around two turns I find that each post outward is notably worse than the one inside of it. Around one turn there is not much difference among the inside group of posts but as you get further outside there is a dropoff in expected win percent.

Outside disadvantage especially true in the case of the "mad dash to the clubhouse turn" distances such as 1 mile at TP and Mnr and 1-1/8 miles at Aqueduct outer track.

I saw some stats late last year from Mnr that indicated posts 9 and 10 (their maximum field size is 10) basically had no chance in routes, and these stats included distances beyond 1 mile where these outside posts are not as hazardous.

[kenwoodallpromos]

I would like to know if anyone finds a difference due to post position in 1 vs. 2 turns except for early speed influencing pace and outcome, which I assume is supposed to be considered anyway. Thanks.

[Valuist]

I did a recent post position study on Turfway's meet (since late Nov; not the Sept. meet) and found that in sprints 3 posts (7 thru 9) were showing solid profits while all other posts were underperforming the track takeout. My theory is that the high amount of kickback makes the inner posts less desirable but the far outside posts are likely to lose too much ground on the turn.

[kitts]

I agree with the relative post position approach as mentioned earlier by banacek. However, I give tham no point value and seldom throw out a good horse due to a bad post position.

[banacek]

A good example of the relative post position concept is Lost in the Fog in the Breeders Cup. A clear front runner who had a lot of early speed inside of him. It certainly looked like it might be trouble for him. And he was caught pushing the pace very wide and that cost him. Now if LITF was in post 2 or 3, I would have have given him a much better shot of winning.

[twindouble]

A good example of the relative post position concept is Lost in the Fog in the Breeders Cup. A clear front runner who had a lot of early speed inside of him. It certainly looked like it might be trouble for him. And he was caught pushing the pace very wide and that cost him. Now if LITF was in post 2 or 3, I would have have given him a much better shot of winning.

Inside or outside posts in the enitial prossess of handicapping should be in your mind but only to the extent of the horses ability to break from the gate. Horses that can get clear take advantage of position so the number becomes void with the exception of your ticket. Evaluating where the horses will be at the calls baced on potential position, pace, distance, running style along with the conditions is call handicapping the race.


T.D.

[kenwoodallpromos]

I did a recent post position study on Turfway's meet (since late Nov; not the Sept. meet) and found that in sprints 3 posts (7 thru 9) were showing solid profits while all other posts were underperforming the track takeout. My theory is that the high amount of kickback makes the inner posts less desirable but the far outside posts are likely to lose too much ground on the turn.
I did not do a study so you may be correct; but how many races were there winners from those 3 posts?
How much weight do you put on profits vs. win% according to post position?

[Foolish Pleasure]

Valuist did you really have to run a query to see that the rail sux at TP?

My dream is for a 1/9 small animal to go postward from the rail at TP sometime this meet. I agree with the guy's post above-think the outside creates a wake when cutting over that makes the inside a unusual burden for anything not leaving.

Small horses particularly.