Most biased meet ever?

[cj]

Aqueduct, this year's inner meet.

I have developed an early speed rating that is calculated in my program. Blindly betting the top horses in all dirt races loses about 8%, or half the takeout, so it seems to be a pretty effective rating.

Now, to the inner meet this year. Simply betting every horse that had the top speed point rating would have returned 99% of your money with absolutely no other handicapping. This includes betting all horses that were tied.

If you eliminated ties, you won 5%. If you insisted on a two point advantage, you earned 7%. 3 points got you 9%, 4 points 16%, 5 points 21%, and so on. This was no small sample either, as 5 points gave a sample of 268 horses winning at about a 33% clip.

The point is, I haven't seen a meet so consistently lean towards early speed in a long time, if ever. NYRA had been pretty bias free the last few years, but something has definitely changed this meeting.

[BillW]

How did the pre-poly KEE meet look last year? I seem to remember that the game was to bet who tripped the timer out of the gate (maybe a little hyperbole :) )

[john del riccio]

thats amazing...i knew it was bad but geez.........

john

[samyn on the green]

If you are a handicapper this is great news if you are shrewd enough to capitalize. The blisteringly cold weather of the last month may have something to do with the mega-bias. As the weather warms the bias will sooth itself. I still have the old dirt track at KEE down as the ultimate early speed mega-bias.


Is your data sortable sprint/route? Is the early bias stronger in 6F sprints or are route races infected with the bigger bias much like KEE of the past?

[Valuist]

I don't play the Inner Dirt so I can't argue that its the most biased ever......but its hard to imagine a track more biased to inside speed than the pre-Poly Keeneland. If you were in the 2 path there, you had little chance of winning. If you were 3 wide, you had virtually no chance at being in the super.

Most dead-rail closer friendly? The Hawthorne track of the mid 80s after it would freeze. They'd add sand and a ton of chemicals. Six or seven different horses would have the lead in the stretch with the horse closest to the outside fence usually getting up. The jockeys were aware of it; they'd usually come into the stretch at a minimum of 4-5 wide. And that usually wasn't enough.

[cj]

Is your data sortable sprint/route? Is the early bias stronger in 6F sprints or are route races infected with the bigger bias much like KEE of the past?

They are close. Sprints are a little better when the contention is tighter, ie the spread between the top two is smaller. Routes are better ROI wise once the spread is 5 points are more. There were 119 horses winning at a 31% clip and returning a profit of 25%.

[cj]

I don't play the Inner Dirt so I can't argue that its the most biased ever......but its hard to imagine a track more biased to inside speed than the pre-Poly Keeneland. If you were in the 2 path there, you had little chance of winning. If you were 3 wide, you had virtually no chance at being in the super.


I didn't start storing this stuff until May last year, so I can't say about Keeneland. The inside was certainly a huge edge. However, I think the difference is it was very difficult to determine who would lead at Kee, where that is not proving to be the case at Aqueduct.

[aaron]

The Aqueduct bias is the strongest I've seen in many years.Besides being a speed bias,it is an inside bias.Horses cannot sit outside and win from off the pace. While on a particular day,the bias can be favorable to a handicapper,overall I think you are better off with the occasional bias and an honest track,especially if you watch the races and want to bet horses back.
Another problem, with the bias is the jockey colony at the track.They don't realize they have to ride the rail as long as possiable.

[the little guy]

I pay very close attention the NY racing, and have done so particularly this year, and for the most part the inner dirt has been as rail biased as a surface could possibly be. As was previously pointed out, it isn't necessarily speed, but during the bias a rail trip was a virtual necessity for success. This has been especially prevalent in two turn races. Contrary to a widely held belief, this has rarely been the case over past inner track meets, and while ground loss obviously more acutely affects performances due to the tighter track, for the most part the surface has been even.

For a horseplayer this is not really as simple as it might seem on the surface of things. Trying to determine who will get the lead, while relatively simple in some races, is confusing in others. And, as the jockeys get more aware of the situation ( think about how severe it must be for even them to know ) the races get run in much more haphazard fashions. The most startling example of this was the seventh race on January 7th. However, the real profit center occurs when the bias leaves ( as it did January 11th before resurfacing late last week ). At that time, betting on horses who suffered through impossible journeys, while avoiding those with false performaces due to the bias, produced fairly easy and substantial windfalls for anyone who paid careful attention. Thus, I suppose if nothing is done about the current surface, we can look forward to more betting opportunities at least somewhere down the road.

To me it is clearly a track superintendant issue, and the relatively new one at NYRA certainly should be under scrutiny, as during his relatively new tenure we have seen a number of surface problems that simply never existed before. Last Fall, upon returning to Belmont from Saratoga, the turf course couldn't be used for a number of days. The Aqueduct turf course has also suffered similar problems. Perhaps these problems arose from neglect by previous maintenance crews but it does seem at least curious that they came up under this person's supposed watch. The Aqueduct main track, long considered on of the best in the business, suffered serious problems this fall, so much so that one week in the beginning of November the races were switched to the inner so that repairs could be made. And now we have this ridiculous, and extended, inner bias.

I find it curious that more horsemen aren't complaining ( perhaps they are ) as these races are being run in such an unfair manner that many horses simply have no chance before they leave the gate. On the other hand, there are always beneficiaries of these situations as well, so perhaps there is some evening out factor. Regardless of how one looks at it, there are upsides and downsides, but this is one bias that supercedes all others.

[aaron]

Little Guy-
Great post,I have also wondered why the trainers and owners are not complaining. I think your post should be published in the Racing Form.
It seems to me no one is paying attention to what is going on this winter.
The track superintendent has not even addressed any of the problems you mentioned in your above post.
Again, great post.

[SMOO]

Crookedness is sometimes disguised as ignorance. What are the odds of the track superintendent placing bets based on the bias that he himself controls?

[rrbauer]

I'm not a regular NY player. This winter I've been playing in the P4 contest on weekends and I can attest to the huge rail/speed bias that I've seen on the inner track.

A year or so ago, I stumbled on to a strong rail bias (it was $$ from home) at Turf Paradise. It lasted a couple weeks ... all you had to do was figure which horse(s) were going to get the rail trip, they didn't need to be on the lead, but if they figured to get the lead then you looked to the other rail trippers to complete the exacta. Of course, there were a few jocks who apparently hadn't figured it out and would take their horses outside at the 3/8 pole and give up their rail position....just another handicapping factor to deal with!

[46zilzal]

Old Keeneland, inner winter Aqueuduct, Fort Erie

[bigmack]

Crookedness is sometimes disguised as ignorance. What are the odds of the track superintendent placing bets based on the bias that he himself controls?
Oh Brother! http://www.wilsoninfo.com/ar_a_red4sm.gif


I took note from a number of posts here that the bias was so prevalent from the word GO on the inner of AQU that it was like taking candy from a kid. I thought it was common knowledge around these parts.

I don't know about it being the most biased of all time but it was a doozie.

[cj]

If I were going to investigate any crookedness, I would start with Eibar Coa and his rides in the last two races on Monday. The trail might turn up empty, but I doubt it. I say this having benefited from his (non) effort in the 8th.

[aaron]

Coa has been asleep at the wheel for the last 2-3 days,but yesterday's performance is a new low.

[Robert Fischer]

summer doldrums

[andicap]

So are people complaining about the bias or happy about it because of the potential profits? I can't be certain from the posts here.

[alysheba88]

Always be aware of the wind when betting Aqueduct. Much of the bias talk really comes back to the wind. On especially windy days speed is almost unbeatable.

Aqueduct is by far the easiest track to make money at (that I have found).

[ranchwest]

If I were going to investigate any crookedness, I would start with Eibar Coa and his rides in the last two races on Monday. The trail might turn up empty, but I doubt it. I say this having benefited from his (non) effort in the 8th.

I can't remember the race now, but a few weeks ago Coa was on a horse that I thought was as much of a lock as I'd seen at AQU. He let the horse get boxed in about 5 or 6 times in the race and wasn't close to the win. :confused:

[ranchwest]

Crookedness is sometimes disguised as ignorance. What are the odds of the track superintendent placing bets based on the bias that he himself controls?

When I frequented DeD years ago, all sorts of things would happen. They'd often pile up dirt on the inside where the chute met the oval. The inside horses would look like they were on a treadmill, staying in one place.

[speedking]

I can't remember the race now, but a few weeks ago Coa was on a horse that I thought was as much of a lock as I'd seen at AQU. He let the horse get boxed in about 5 or 6 times in the race and wasn't close to the win. :confused:

Was he on the favorite, RW? I have seen a number of races this Winter where I swore that Coa or Dominguez were riding for place money only:ThmbDown: .

I should add that I consider them the most talented among the current NY colony and their efforts this season have often left me puzzled and po'ed. Dominguez much more so than Coa, who for all I know may have been ill this weekend. Wouldn't be the first time a rider tried to persevere through the flu or something and simply went thru the motions.

speedking

[Robert Fischer]

coa jumped off a horse monday that won at about 6-1.

[ranchwest]

Was he on the favorite, RW? I have seen a number of races this Winter where I swore that Coa or Dominguez were riding for place money only:ThmbDown: .

I should add that I consider them the most talented among the current NY colony and their efforts this season have often left me puzzled and po'ed. Dominguez much more so than Coa, who for all I know may have been ill this weekend. Wouldn't be the first time a rider tried to persevere through the flu or something and simply went thru the motions.

speedking

Yeah, Coa was on the favorite. One of the few races I singled in the P4 contest. Just when I think Refridgerator Perry could ride that one in....

Reminds me... I once saw a jockey who had never won in over 600 mounts bring a horse in by staying completely away from trouble. Horse should have been 1/5 and went off at about 5/1. I bet it because of the outside post. Twice she almost screwed it up by trying to whip the horse and got it going sideways. Then she grabbed the mane and the horse took off like shot out of a cannon. :D

[classhandicapper]

So are people complaining about the bias or happy about it because of the potential profits? I can't be certain from the posts here.

Put me in the happy camp, while recogizing some of the difficulties of exploiting it.

[Stevie Belmont]

I don't think there is any doubt that the brutally cold weather has contributed to this inside bias that we have seen over the past few weeks. As the temps get warmer we will see if it continues. I happen to really enjoy this inside bias, but valid points are made about horses coming back that fell victim to it. Prices should be infalted on those in the future.



I pay very close attention the NY racing, and have done so particularly this year, and for the most part the inner dirt has been as rail biased as a surface could possibly be. As was previously pointed out, it isn't necessarily speed, but during the bias a rail trip was a virtual necessity for success. This has been especially prevalent in two turn races. Contrary to a widely held belief, this has rarely been the case over past inner track meets, and while ground loss obviously more acutely affects performances due to the tighter track, for the most part the surface has been even.

For a horseplayer this is not really as simple as it might seem on the surface of things. Trying to determine who will get the lead, while relatively simple in some races, is confusing in others. And, as the jockeys get more aware of the situation ( think about how severe it must be for even them to know ) the races get run in much more haphazard fashions. The most startling example of this was the seventh race on January 7th. However, the real profit center occurs when the bias leaves ( as it did January 11th before resurfacing late last week ). At that time, betting on horses who suffered through impossible journeys, while avoiding those with false performaces due to the bias, produced fairly easy and substantial windfalls for anyone who paid careful attention. Thus, I suppose if nothing is done about the current surface, we can look forward to more betting opportunities at least somewhere down the road.

To me it is clearly a track superintendant issue, and the relatively new one at NYRA certainly should be under scrutiny, as during his relatively new tenure we have seen a number of surface problems that simply never existed before. Last Fall, upon returning to Belmont from Saratoga, the turf course couldn't be used for a number of days. The Aqueduct turf course has also suffered similar problems. Perhaps these problems arose from neglect by previous maintenance crews but it does seem at least curious that they came up under this person's supposed watch. The Aqueduct main track, long considered on of the best in the business, suffered serious problems this fall, so much so that one week in the beginning of November the races were switched to the inner so that repairs could be made. And now we have this ridiculous, and extended, inner bias.

I find it curious that more horsemen aren't complaining ( perhaps they are ) as these races are being run in such an unfair manner that many horses simply have no chance before they leave the gate. On the other hand, there are always beneficiaries of these situations as well, so perhaps there is some evening out factor. Regardless of how one looks at it, there are upsides and downsides, but this is one bias that supercedes all others.

[46zilzal]

I don't think there is any doubt that the brutally cold weather has contributed to this inside bias that we have seen over the past few weeks. As the temps get warmer we will see if it continues. I happen to really enjoy this inside bias, but valid points are made about horses coming back that fell victim to it. Prices should be infalted on those in the future.


EVERY year, for the past 6 years, I have noticed a direct correlation to the speed biases at Philly, inner Aqu, FE, Finger Lakes, and Woodbine WHEN IT WAS COLD......Must not be coincidence to recur so often and so predictably.

[Stevie Belmont]

There ya go.....

I know....

[toetoe]

tlg,

You're terrifying me with the thought that the jockeys' minds must be read now (BRRRR!). Imagine Espinoza and Samyn (don't laugh --- the fields have been so bad that they've been on legitimate singles in some sequences) planning their adjustments:

Jose: Okay, I'll grab the lead with a five-wide move in this four horse field and, if convenient, reach over and punch another jockey on my way past.

Jean_Luc: Okay, if I don't fall off coming out of the gate, I'll just stay in the irons and maybe win it.

[the little guy]

I don't think there is any doubt that the brutally cold weather has contributed to this inside bias that we have seen over the past few weeks. As the temps get warmer we will see if it continues. I happen to really enjoy this inside bias, but valid points are made about horses coming back that fell victim to it. Prices should be infalted on those in the future.


I couldn't disagree more. The bias existed as soon as they came to the inner in late November and stayed through the new year for the most part. The weather was unseasonably warm during that time.

I must think differently than most as I don't believe it is weather related, and frankly don't care WHY it exists, and just try to use it to my advantage if possible. The simple fact is this bias has existed under all circumstances.....warm, cold, no rain, after rain, after snow....a virtual cornicopia of situations.

[the little guy]

tlg,

You're terrifying me with the thought that the jockeys' minds must be read now (BRRRR!). Imagine Espinoza and Samyn (don't laugh --- the fields have been so bad that they've been on legitimate singles in some sequences) planning their adjustments:

Jose: Okay, I'll grab the lead with a five-wide move in this four horse field and, if convenient, reach over and punch another jockey on my way past.

Jean_Luc: Okay, if I don't fall off coming out of the gate, I'll just stay in the irons and maybe win it.


Funny ( and sad )....but also true and the reason playing during the bias is difficult and trecherous.

[aaron]

During the bias, I have been basically going race to race,rather than trying to hit a pick 3 or 4. I think you have a better chance and less risk this way.I also agree with tlg, this bias has been in effect since the inner track opened and is not weather related.The weather has warmed up,so lets see if the bias changes tomorrow.
I think that the bias exsists because the track superintendent is in over his head. He's been here a few years and the conditions of the tracks seem to be detoriating. It may not be all his fault,but why it is not addressed anywhere does not make any sense.

[NYPlayer]

At every racetrack in america, the rail is always biased, and it's fairly easy to understand why - It's the shortest route to the wire. So it comes as no surprise to me that horses that stay near the rail win a disproportionate share of races. When a horse makes a three wide move in a sprint, he's losing nearly 3 lengths worth of ground. So if this kind of closer manages to nose a horse who ran competitively on the rail, you know it actually ran three lengths better (your speed figure ought to reflect this). It gets even worse when talking about a two turn race. A horse will have practically no chance if he goes five wide on the first turn.

As for this Aqueduct's meeting, I've seen quite a few races where horses won making a wide move and I've had at least a few off the pace types (who usually have run a couple of paths wide) win for me (paying some pretty generous prices too). I wouldn't say I've observed anything that I'd classify as out of the ordinary.

Whatever poeple want to think of the track is fine by me, but I think its a rotten shame that a track superindendent gets blamed for creating the bias deliberately, as was the case at CD during the BC season. There's no proof that any normal track maintenance routine can create significant uneveness in the racing surface without it being conspicuously obvious. Such accusations are based on mere conjecture.

[Tom]

Rails are not always biased favorable. Sometimes, the rail is bad due to drainage inward, or who knows what else. Shortest distance is not always the fastest.

[ranchwest]

Rails are not always biased favorable. Sometimes, the rail is bad due to drainage inward, or who knows what else. Shortest distance is not always the fastest.

You are correct.

Also, some horses can't handle being close to the rail, sorta clostraphobic.

And, some horses like to be moving up a half-length off because they can see their target.

I've even seen horses that were blind in one eye and could only run well when their seeing eye was seeing the other horses, rail or outside post.

So, while there may or may not be a rail bias, some horses don't do well on the rail.

[Valuist]

Rails are not always biased favorable. Sometimes, the rail is bad due to drainage inward, or who knows what else. Shortest distance is not always the fastest.

I agree. Nowadays, we see many more dead rail tracks than good rails, especially in the cooler climates. But those numbers are dwindling (Arlington going Poly, Turfway now Poly).

[Indulto]

... Whatever poeple want to think of the track is fine by me, but I think its a rotten shame that a track superindendent gets blamed for creating the bias deliberately, as was the case at CD during the BC season. There's no proof that any normal track maintenance routine can create significant uneveness in the racing surface without it being conspicuously obvious. Such accusations are based on mere conjecture.And your statement regarding CD rail bias on BC day isn’t conjecture? ;)

IMO both superintendents are/were responsible for their respective reprehensible rails, but I doubt their results were deliberate much less motivated by personal profit.

To me the difference in the two situations is that the AQU bias is no surprise to the “customers” while the BC day bias definitely was.

If nothing else comes of the BC day fiasco, players and the press are likely to be more prepared and pro-active about spotting biases. BC venues should be monitored well in advance of race day, and there should be hell to pay from the NTRA for any noticeable difference from the previous day unless weather is a factor.

I would also advocate more timely compensation for abnormal post position advantage than occurred at CD, but how to we know Invasor didn't also benefit disproportionately from those measures taken at the last-minute?

Surely the owners can support the players on this one.

[NYPlayer]

And your statement regarding CD rail bias on BC day isn’t conjecture? .

Well, I'm not the one saying there was something wrong with the track. The Super explained what his crew does to maintenence the track, and that's good enough for me. At every track I've been to the maintence is usually a pretty orderly process designed to smooth out every part of the track equally. Of course, this process can't ensure that every part of the track is exactly even. I doubt it's possible to do this.

IMO both superintendents are/were responsible for their respective reprehensible rails, but I doubt their results were deliberate much less motivated by personal profit.

To me the difference in the two situations is that the AQU bias is no surprise to the “customers” while the BC day bias definitely was.

If nothing else comes of the BC day fiasco, players and the press are likely to be more prepared and pro-active about spotting biases. BC venues should be monitored well in advance of race day, and there should be hell to pay from the NTRA for any noticeable difference from the previous day unless weather is a factor.

I would also advocate more timely compensation for abnormal post position advantage than occurred at CD, but how to we know Invasor didn't also benefit disproportionately from those measures taken at the last-minute?

Surely the owners can support the players on this one.

It seems you're starting out with the assumption that there was a bias. How can you be sure there was a bias? Lot's of people on this board commented afterword that they didn't think CD was biased on that day even though they do, in general, believe in track biases. Invasor won while starting from post 11, and making a move while running off the rail. Davidowitz said that was because the Super put extra water on the track, but Andy Beyer explained the win by saying Invasor had stayed close to the rail throughout (while not mentioning the horses that were actually on the rail most of the way and that finished well behind the top two). Before there can be "hell to pay" you have to prove soemthing was wrong with track and that the Super could actually have done something about it. Wouldn't ya say?:) :)

[NYPlayer]

Shortest distance is not always the fastest.

Weather phenomena aside, I think what your saying is awfully hard to prove. I suspect that if you look at the number of wire-to-wire wins at just about any track in America, you'll find the percentages are pretty consistent. I'd be curious to find out.

[aaron]

The weather warmed up today.Its still my opinion, that the track is playing inside.

[Stevie Belmont]

Well yea it has existed, but over the past few weeks it has been magnified big time, the inside is the place to be. I don't think the inside was as nearly as biased as it has been over the past few weeks. Last Sunday the 11th was an overwheliming inside bias, and yes I do believe the ice cold weather has contributed to it being even more magnified. I expect the inside to continue ot be the place to be, even as it warms up, but it might not be as powerful as it has been...lets face it, the inside is awlays a good place on the inner.



I couldn't disagree more. The bias existed as soon as they came to the inner in late November and stayed through the new year for the most part. The weather was unseasonably warm during that time.

I must think differently than most as I don't believe it is weather related, and frankly don't care WHY it exists, and just try to use it to my advantage if possible. The simple fact is this bias has existed under all circumstances.....warm, cold, no rain, after rain, after snow....a virtual cornicopia of situations.

[Tom]

Weather phenomena aside, I think what your saying is awfully hard to prove. I suspect that if you look at the number of wire-to-wire wins at just about any track in America, you'll find the percentages are pretty consistent. I'd be curious to find out.

I was not talking about wire to wire wins - only a rail bias, which is not always an early bias.

[the little guy]

Well yea it has existed, but over the past few weeks it has been magnified big time, the inside is the place to be. I don't think the inside was as nearly as biased as it has been over the past few weeks. Last Sunday the 11th was an overwheliming inside bias, and yes I do believe the ice cold weather has contributed to it being even more magnified. I expect the inside to continue ot be the place to be, even as it warms up, but it might not be as powerful as it has been...lets face it, the inside is awlays a good place on the inner.


I simply don't agree. The bias was extreme from the opening of the inner meet until the Christmas break on many days, and then started again two to three days after the break, and the weather was warm during that time. Plus, as Aaron just pointed out, it was as strong as ever today ( until it rained ) and the weather is around 40 degrees.

Like I said before, worrying about why makes little sense, as the only important point is that it exists, and you have to deal with it. I don't care if it's caused by sun spots, or nefarious movement by Martians, as the biased oval is the only thing of true importance.

[the little guy]

I was not talking about wire to wire wins - only a rail bias, which is not always an early bias.


Tom, consider the initial argument you are dealing with. :bang:

[Stevie Belmont]

It's still going strong. This thread is like, yea there is a bias, we know that. The debate is when has the bias been the strongest. Well since the cold snap to right now as I type, it's been very prevelant and strong. Maybe it was this strong early on. I did not notice it as much, but the numbers of the finishers speak for themselves over this period. All I do know for sure sure is, like you said deal with it, and make it work in your favor, how ever one wants to go about it is up to them.


I simply don't agree. The bias was extreme from the opening of the inner meet until the Christmas break on many days, and then started again two to three days after the break, and the weather was warm during that time. Plus, as Aaron just pointed out, it was as strong as ever today ( until it rained ) and the weather is around 40 degrees.

Like I said before, worrying about why makes little sense, as the only important point is that it exists, and you have to deal with it. I don't care if it's caused by sun spots, or nefarious movement by Martians, as the biased oval is the only thing of true importance.