Why has racing changed ?

[joeprunes]

Could anyone tell me what has happened to horse racing? It seems to me alot of things have changed. The biggest change is most of the time if a horse is not in the first flight he hasn`t got a chance I use to love to play closers and win pretty good ,now the only way a closer wins is only with a fast pace. years ago with first timmers you couldnt miss playing pedegree,now anybody wins,whats up?Does any of you guys notice the difference over the last 40 yrs?

[levinmpa]

I'm sure part of the answer lies in the fact that the way tracks are maintained is more favorable to speed. At least the dirt tracks. American dirt racing has always lended itself toward the speed horse. That coupled with the fact that breeders are attempting to produce an animal more geered toward speed than stamina is probably the answer. Also, trainers employ a more speed favoring training method when preparing their trainees.

It's always exciting to see a big closer mow the field down on the outside, but the reality is, betting deep closers is a losing proposition. They don't win anywhere near their fair share of races. If you like playing closers, I would suggest concentrating on turf routes only.

I think pedigree still plays a big part in maiden races. That hasn't changed. I continue to get good prices on well bred first time starters. You just have to have the right pedigree information.

[so.cal.fan]

They have made tracks a lot faster over the past 40 years, Joe.
They also have improved equipment and track surface material so that rain and snow and ice, do not slow it up as much.
As far as pedigrees go, I have a theory.
Back in the 1980's Arabs started to deplete our supply of good horses. Just like they did in England. They completely took over English racing.....I beleive as a "pay back" to years of British domination in the Middle East. They had a point to prove, and did.
Now, they would like to do the same in the U.S.
I have been p***ed about this for years.....then 9/11........
We don't have that many good stallions here anymore or good mares.......that is why Cal breds do better than they ever did, or one of the reasons at least.
Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

[Zaf]

Better Living Through Chemistry.

ZAFONIC

[Tom]

we bring slow things to life!

ba dump

[so.cal.fan]

Zafonic:
They have been using the same drugs for the past century.
Different "designer names" is all. Perhaps a few new ones like Clenbuterol and the likes.
Back in the 1890's they were using Heroin, Cocaine, nitro-glycerine, etc.........they still are, or synthetics of.
Some of the top horses of the 1960's here in So. Calif. were
drug enhanced runners.
:(

[Fastracehorse]

Yes,

Most tracks favour front runners most of the time.

And, drugs can improve a horse's performace up to 9 lengths.

So, if U still like late runners when did U wake up from U're coma??

And, if U're loking for consistent performers U should buy a yo yo.

fffastt :eek:

[Zaf]

Originally posted by so.cal.fan
Zafonic:
They have been using the same drugs for the past century.
Different "designer names" is all. Perhaps a few new ones like Clenbuterol and the likes.
Back in the 1890's they were using Heroin, Cocaine, nitro-glycerine, etc.........they still are, or synthetics of.
Some of the top horses of the 1960's here in So. Calif. were
drug enhanced runners.
:(


I still would like to know what cocktail Laz Barrera was using back in the 80's. I think it was Laz. Correct me if I am wrong.

ZAFONIC

[so.cal.fan]

Oscar is more notorious for his "cocktails" Zaf......but Laz may have used a few himself.
I recall one Santa Anita meet, back in the late 70's or early 80's where Laz had 14 winners at the meet, 11 of them were washed out in the paddock.
When the big drug scandal hit, and several leading trainers were "caught", Laz was one of them. They all used the now famous "poppy seed" defense......grooms with bagels with poppy seeds were cause of their "narcotic positives".....
Laz was quoted in a local paper as being "crestfallen".........

:rolleyes:

[Lindsay]

Fastracehorse wrote:

"And, drugs can improve a horse's performace up to 9 lengths."

9.87 lengths in sprints, 12.71 lengths in routes. We don't tolerate sloppiness here.

[Tom]

Oscar drove me to cocktails. Hence, I remember little of the decade. <G>

[kenwoodall]

A bet is still $2! Closers-i like rise in purse level and slow tracks. The conditioner (trainer) is more important than ever. I catch most of my longshot closers by being able to tell by the horse's ptterns that the trainer is placing the horse in the correct race when the horse is peaking. I recently caught Peter's Pumpkin at successively $121, $30, and $14!

[Fastracehorse]

I formulated a speed fig that I believe is very accurate.

I thought I was going to get crucified to suggest it was much as 9 lengths of an improvement.

To be exact I would suggest 8.8 lengths in sprints and 11 lengths in routes.

Further, did U know that in Cal., where they use Bute, that the performance is only increased by 4 lengths in sprints and 5 lengths in routes ( when first-time illegal )??

The difference between Eastern [ outside of Ky of course ] and Western racetracks are significant.

fffastt:p

[Lindsay]

Fastracehorse wrote:

"I thought I was going to get crucified to suggest it was much as 9 lengths of an improvement."

No, Fastracehorse, we crucify people only when we disagree with them about smoking.

"To be exact I would suggest 8.8 lengths in sprints and 11 lengths in routes."

This looks better in that I would expect the advantage to be greater--in terms of lengths--as distances increase, but for the life of me I don't understand how anyone can claim such precision concerning the effects of drugs. My original reply (9.87, 12.71) was serious about the effect of longer distances but was tongue in cheek in its claim of precision.

[hurrikane]

I think a lot of it has to do with the way they are breeding too.
All for speed. They don't weed out horses with defects or problems. As long as they can breed speed they whore em as quick as they can.
Watering down the stock is the end result.
If you like closers try betting on European tracks or maybe Aussies.
Of course getting into the huge hong kong pools could be a good thing too!

[Fastracehorse]

Lindsay,

Yes, U are correct in assuming that there is no way that I thought every individual horse in sprints was going to improve by exactly 8.8 Beyer points.

The aforementioned # is an average of what I believe to expect roughly.

For example, at Woodbine I've noticed there is a range of improvemnet with horses that are first-time lasix. Roughly it ranges between 10-15 points possible improvement.

So, I have a window expectation of a horse's adjd B projection. I think getting too precise is dangerous as it takes alot of creativity out of the game [ a lack of imagination limits one's scope ].

Where I do well is when a horse has an advantage due to his projected fig.. Of course speed figs are useless without the context of handicapping.

fffastt