Horse A or Horse B

[Charlie]

Let's suppose two horses ran versus one another. Horse A, from PP2 led by one length all the way to win by a head. Horse B, from PP6 went 1st over at the 1/2 and 3/4 and finished second. Now we know both expended extra energy while racing without cover, but for me, its always been difficult to determine which horse if any, should be credited with the better performance. I tend to lean towards Horse B. Just wondering how others would see this scenario.

[wilderness]

Charlie,
There are "other" factors to consider as well?
Where were A & B coming from (company)
Where are A & B going to (company)
Was there a driver or trainer change that influenced A or B previous performance?
Did either A & B ship in from another locale?
Was either horse peaking or decling in condition when they raced previously?
Was their race against each other on a different track condition than tonight (off or otherwise)?

I recall an old thing about younger horses and mares with too many "driving finsihes" from a T-Bred book that I carried over in principle to S-Breds.

I'm sure others may add more exceptions??

[Charlie]

Wilderness... This was supposed to be a race they just ran against each other, say last week. Now I'm looking at the past performances for tonight's race and there once again entered in the same race. Using last weeks running lines to base your selection on, who would be the stronger play, Horse A or Horse B. I hope I clarified my above post.

[wilderness]

As I "attempted" to explain Charlie?

There are other factors as raw numbers at not consistent, nor the only factor that determines performance.

Even if the horses raced on the same day in successive heats the outside factors are variable.

[melman]

I will assume that both horse A and horse B raced last week and raced against each other. Also that they both had been racing on a regular basis, if you had "gaps" in dates or one of the two horses was just coming back from a layoff that would affect my view. That being said using your description of the "trip" each horse received I would favor the horses in the following way.

On a 1/2 mile track would favor horse B --Extra credit for horse B for racing first over from outside post on a inside post favoring track where horses with early speed have the advantage.

On a 5/8 track would favor horse B --Same as above but with a little less credit for horse B as the post "bias" is not as severe.

On a 7/8 or 1 mile track would favor horse A --- Extra credit for horse A for racing on the front end the entire mile on the big track.

[sq764]

Let's suppose two horses ran versus one another. Horse A, from PP2 led by one length all the way to win by a head. Horse B, from PP6 went 1st over at the 1/2 and 3/4 and finished second. Now we know both expended extra energy while racing without cover, but for me, its always been difficult to determine which horse if any, should be credited with the better performance. I tend to lean towards Horse B. Just wondering how others would see this scenario.
That;s very tough to say.. I see what you are asking, but you have to consider the fractions of the race as well.

Let's say the race went 27/30/28/27 for a 57 and 55 half. Now let's say the B horse was sitting 5 lengths off the lead at the 1/2 and pulled first over. He would have gained 4 lengths in the last half 1st over.. That is a nice last half fraction. With a slow second quarter like that, both horses were able to take a breather, so the real race was in the last half. And going 1st over AND gaining 4 lengths, the B horse obviously went a tougher race.

But as Wilderness mentioned, there are a lot of other variables to consider.

[kenwoodallpromos]

Credit both horses the same- and how much depends on the final fraction.
IMO if they finished head and head in 26, they were just jogging in a 2 horse heard, working out in company. If the split was 24 or faster, credit them baoth for toughing it out.
Too often as close finish is assumed to be a competitive race- and you know what they say about assuming!
It really helps to see the horses finish up and see if they had their head down and extended stride, or both had short stride and long tongue.

[sq764]

Credit both horses the same- and how much depends on the final fraction.
IMO if they finished head and head in 26, they were just jogging in a 2 horse heard, working out in company. If the split was 24 or faster, credit them baoth for toughing it out.
Too often as close finish is assumed to be a competitive race- and you know what they say about assuming!
It really helps to see the horses finish up and see if they had their head down and extended stride, or both had short stride and long tongue.
Ken, 24???

I think you are speaking of t-breds, not harness horses

[kenwoodallpromos]

Ken, 24???

I think you are speaking of t-breds, not harness horses
___________
Yes, I goofed! Did not see the forum in the title; but I still say credit them the same if they are running together and neither takes the clear lead at the finish!

[melman]

Ken you have made many good posts on the t-bred subject, but this is the harness section. :jump: Track size and the effect of post position are MUCH more a part of s-breds than t-breds.

[wilderness]

"Track size and the effect of post position are MUCH more a part of s-breds than t-breds."

Not only that, when Standardbreds "run" it's very detrimental to their final finish position ;)