PDA

View Full Version : Turn Impact question(s)


Robert Vaughan
01-28-2007, 01:31 PM
Hello All,

When I ask about the impact of the turns on the speed and endurance of the horse, I get virtually every response imaginable ... while understandable, that leaves me more confused than before I asked.

What I do know is that for symmetrical, one mile oval tracks at 5.5 furlongs ... those where the timed distance to the first turn is 1320 feet and the length of the stretch is 990 feet ... the average ratios of the second 2 furlong split (run entirely in the turn) to the first split (run entirely in the backstretch) are relatively consistent by track ... and, if memory serves, the ratios are genreally in the 1.06 - 1.08 range; slightly less for frontrunners (I assume because of running closer to the rail and with less congestion).

Looking at the ratios of the fourth split to the third in these races suggests that the rates of deceleration over the final 1.5 furlongs is in that same range. At least from my limited perspective, that indicates a rather significant turn impact.

I'd appreciate any and all insights into the impact of the turn and am especially interested in (a) the start of the turn, (b) the midpoint of turn, and (c) the impact, if any, on the point and rate of deceleration when the horse begins to slow down due to fatigue.

Thanks!

Greyfox
01-28-2007, 02:07 PM
Hello All,

I'd appreciate any and all insights into the impact of the turn and am especially interested in (a) the start of the turn, (b) the midpoint of turn, and (c) the impact, if any, on the point and rate of deceleration when the horse begins to slow down due to fatigue.

Thanks!

It seems to me that the easiest way to answer this question would be to look for sprint races that are run on straight tracks! This doesn't happen in North America at the distance you are talking about. Maybe you could check in on European or Australian tracks and watch for those races.

Also, an engineer by the name of Rubin Boxer has written a rather sophisticated paper that is available on line in a PDF file at:
http://www.revelationprofits.com/docs/Engineering%20Analysis.pdf

In that article Mr. Boxer gives the impact of being several horse widths wide going around a turn. For example, a horse running 5 wide around a turn
has 4.71 lengths more to travel (if Boxer's calculations are correct.) I'm sure some math whiz could work out that impact time wise.
Then of course some young horses haven't learned to change leads after coming off the turn. That's another impact.
If you find out any answers from straight line racing, l would hope that you might let this board know.

Robert Vaughan
01-28-2007, 02:52 PM
Last year, a large red fox came onto the green and stole my golfball, leaving only after we arrived and were within 30 feet of him ... the nerve of some foxes. :D

Thanks for the link to the "Boxer" paper.

I do know that at 8 furlongs, a few North American tracks have the first 4 furlongs run entirely in the chute/backstretch ... and I think those ratios are generally at or below 1.0, depending on the runup ... of course, I suspect that pace has a significant impact on the split ratios at that distance.

I don't know much about changing leads but I assume that it does impact things at the start, middle and end of the turns. The data suggests to me that the combined impact of the "anticipation of the turn" and the associated change in lead ... may be more significant than realized.

robert99
01-28-2007, 04:59 PM
Robert V,

The racing myth is that horses take a breather on the turns from the superficial observation that they run slower. In fact, turns are hard work for a horse - they are built to go fast in a straight line with their hind quarters locked, and turns are a quite inefficient use of their energy. Cambers help a horse but there are still problems with centripetal forces and the hind legs always thrusting the horse forward at slightly the wrong angle (as it turns and the body twists round the curve). A horse finds it very difficult to speed up and turn at the same time, so your mid turn condition will certainly not be faster than when the horse first entered the turn. With left hand tracks a horse will lead on their left foreleg and most are trained that way for the whole race as far as sprints go.

If a rider thinks that getting to the front on the inside of a turn is advantageous then he may stress the horse too much, even before going into a turn. In UK, the turns are much shorter and less tight so a turn adds about 0.3 seconds to race times for each 90 degrees turned. From your figures you could think of a 2f turn as an effective distance of 2 times 1.07 = 2.14 f so this is the distance (0.14f) that a horse might tire on average before it would tire on a straight only course. If the pace is on the slow side then the horse would have excess energy available on the turn and it should not cause it to tire earlier in the later stages.

Robert Fischer
01-28-2007, 08:30 PM
A more agile horse will by definition navitgate the turns faster with less wasted energy.

To your original question , it would be interesting to analyze a race like the sprint in Dubai , where i believe there is a 7f straight sprint with no turns!

I see more value value in analyzing a past performance while linking the "path" of a horse to the turn(s). The sheets attemp to to do this.

As far as the turn itself, most horses are labled a one or two turn horse by their ability to get the distance that is usually involved with greater number of turns, more so than there ability to navigate a turn.

Post Position(and position of starting gate) , Running Style , and probable race scenarios play the major role in evaluating an important relevance to the turns in the race. Add in the temp rail distance for turf races to this category.

Greyfox
01-28-2007, 10:17 PM
A more agile horse will by definition navitgate the turns faster with less wasted energy.

To your original question , it would be interesting to analyze a race like the sprint in Dubai , where i believe there is a 7f straight sprint with no turns!



On the money R.F.
"navitgate"? Yeah I know. I do it myself.
Your suggestion though shouldn't be missed. Comparing straight line times to curve times is the answer. Good post.

Hosshead
01-28-2007, 11:56 PM
...
Also, an engineer by the name of Rubin Boxer has written a rather sophisticated paper that is available on line in a PDF file at:
http://www.revelationprofits.com/docs/Engineering%20Analysis.pdf

In that article Mr. Boxer gives the impact of being several horse widths wide going around a turn. For example, a horse running 5 wide around a turn
has 4.71 lengths more to travel (if Boxer's calculations are correct.) I'm sure some math whiz could work out that impact time wise.
Then of course some young horses haven't learned to change leads after coming off the turn. That's another impact.
If you find out any answers from straight line racing, l would hope that you might let this board know.
IMO - They can calculate how much ground a horses loses on the turn by running wide, but there is a "missing calculation" here. And that is Energy expended.
It's easier for a horse to run wide than to hug the rail. The wide path is closer to a straight line than the rail path. So although he's losing ground, there needs to be a calculation for the extra energy he might have when turning for home.
And "changing leads after coming off the turn", is a BIG thing.

toetoe
01-29-2007, 02:36 PM
Just a quick complicator here, with apologies for saying it for the umpteenth time. If we timed from only the multiples of the 1/8 pole --- 1/4, 3/8, 1/2, et cetera, we'd be able to compare, at least to a satisfying degree, distinct distances. For example, rather than having to collect all the charts to see what the average second fraction is in a 5- and/or 5 1/2-furlong race, then trying to reconcile those splits with an extrapolation of the position, as the first two calls are at the 3/16 and the 3/8 ( :bang: :bang: ), we could see how someone ran his last half, middle quarter, etc., and maybe even figure out today's race at 7 furlongs ... MAYBE. :confused:

Valuist
01-29-2007, 03:08 PM
Robert V,

The racing myth is that horses take a breather on the turns from the superficial observation that they run slower. In fact, turns are hard work for a horse - they are built to go fast in a straight line with their hind quarters locked, and turns are a quite inefficient use of their energy. Cambers help a horse but there are still problems with centripetal forces and the hind legs always thrusting the horse forward at slightly the wrong angle (as it turns and the body twists round the curve). A horse finds it very difficult to speed up and turn at the same time, so your mid turn condition will certainly not be faster than when the horse first entered the turn. With left hand tracks a horse will lead on their left foreleg and most are trained that way for the whole race as far as sprints go.

If a rider thinks that getting to the front on the inside of a turn is advantageous then he may stress the horse too much, even before going into a turn. In UK, the turns are much shorter and less tight so a turn adds about 0.3 seconds to race times for each 90 degrees turned. From your figures you could think of a 2f turn as an effective distance of 2 times 1.07 = 2.14 f so this is the distance (0.14f) that a horse might tire on average before it would tire on a straight only course. If the pace is on the slow side then the horse would have excess energy available on the turn and it should not cause it to tire earlier in the later stages.

I would hesitate to call it a "myth" about getting a breather on the turns and it has nothing to do with running times. Its all about changing leads. And not all the horses are getting "breathers". The horse on the lead and saving ground is getting a bit of a breather, unless he/she is battling head to head. Those that are racing wide on the turn, especially the 1st turn in a 2 turn race, are most definitely NOT getting a breather.