Outside posts at small tracks

[Harmonicaslim]

I'd like to know how much of a disdvantage is the outside post in sprints at Charles Town, Delta or similar sized tracks? Many thanks.

Slim

[cj]

The outside is actually VERY good at CT.

[shoelessjoe]

CJ is 100% right on this ever since the turns were banked it does help the outside posts .Watch especially when its raining up there the inside part of the track gets really bogged down because of the drainage.

[jotb]

CJ is 100% right on this ever since the turns were banked it does help the outside posts .Watch especially when its raining up there the inside part of the track gets really bogged down because of the drainage.

It all depends on the weather. When it first rains at CT and the track is sealed the inside is a good place to be and early pace horses do well. When the track dries out (listed muddy, good or even fast) then the inside is not the place to be.

Going back to the original question about sprints and post position, I would say in 4.5F races the outside posts have the advantage only if the horses have enough early speed to get clear. If they don't have enough speed to get over then it's a problem because they will be wide down the backside. The big disadvantage at 4.5F is the 1 post especially if the horse has no early speed.

At the middle distance races at CT (6.5F and 7.0F) it's better to draw as close to the inside as possible. The 6.5F race are tough for the outside posts because the 1st turn comes up pretty quick so if you have a horse that draws the 9 or 10 hole and has early speed, more than likely, you will get hung out wide on that first turn unless you pop out of the gate on top and get over before the first turn. This is where the jock comes into play. If the horse can't make the lead before the turn then it's the jocks down to get that horse well positioned going into the first turn. There are a handful of jocks here at CT that can handle this situation but there are plenty of jocks that can't handle this situation because they don't read the pp's well and don't get their horse positioned right. They use up their horse early trying to get the lead only to be very wide on the turn and then continue wide down the backside.

Joe

[cj]

Despite what jotb says, and I know that he is knowledgeable about the Chuck, the numbers tell a different story. With no other handicapping applied, here is the ROI from each post since June 1, 2007 for 6.5 and 7 furlong races:

Runners Return ROI Post
1450 $2,189.30 75.49% 1
1450 $2,371.30 81.77% 2
1450 $2,786.70 96.09% 3
1450 $2,087.50 71.98% 4
1444 $2,104.40 72.87% 5
1417 $2,127.35 75.07% 6
1321 $2,220.75 84.06% 7
1111 $2,706.25 121.79% 8
816 $1,596.00 97.79% 9
467 $937.45 100.37% 10

I forgot to mention, the ROI stats do include some rebates.

[Harmonicaslim]

Thanks. Very interesting. Not what I would have thought at all.

Slim

[cj]

Of course, the first table concentrated on betting, so it is possible the inside posts win more often but are overbet. So I looked with betting not a factor. Below shows the post position and the percentage of expected winners each gets. 1.00 would mean a post gets exactly the number that could be expected randomly. Less means the post underperforms, more means the post outperforms expectations:


1 1.07
2 0.94
3 0.98
4 0.92
5 0.87
6 0.99
7 1.00
8 1.27
9 0.99
10 1.20


Clearly there is an advantage to being outside, though being on the rail, and the rail only, is OK also.

[LottaKash]

Despite what jotb says, and I know that he is knowledgeable about the Chuck, the numbers tell a different story. With no other handicapping applied, here is the ROI from each post since June 1, 2007 for 6.5 and 7 furlong races:

Runners Return ROI Post
1450 $2,189.30 75.49% 1
1450 $2,371.30 81.77% 2
1450 $2,786.70 96.09% 3
1450 $2,087.50 71.98% 4
1444 $2,104.40 72.87% 5
1417 $2,127.35 75.07% 6
1321 $2,220.75 84.06% 7
1111 $2,706.25 121.79% 8
816 $1,596.00 97.79% 9
467 $937.45 100.37% 10

I forgot to mention, the ROI stats do include some rebates.

Hey CJ, thx for this post......am I correct in assuming that if I sent enough kash thru the machines, that I could make an e-z living just betting Post #8 without lifting a finger to do anything else?.......1,111 races seems to be a pretty good sampling.......

best,

[shoelessjoe]

Jotb,I dont know about what you said when it first starts raining there,what I have observed is when the tracks sloppy horses will win who are closing on the outside part of the track.

[cj]

Hey CJ, thx for this post......am I correct in assuming that if I sent enough kash thru the machines, that I could make an e-z living just betting Post #8 without lifting a finger to do anything else?.......1,111 races seems to be a pretty good sampling.......

best,

Geesh, I post one good stat and the winner of the 5th (8 to 1 ML) wins and pays $5 from the 8 hole. What a bunch of vultures! :lol::lol::lol:

[cj]

And now, in race 7, the outside horse (the 8) wins and pays $13 from a 10 to 1 ML. I'm banning myself.

[46zilzal]

At our bull ring, horses outside of 6 drop off markedly in sprints.

[cj]

I had no idea you were a track owner.

[LottaKash]

Geesh, I post one good stat and the winner of the 5th (8 to 1 ML) wins and pays $5 from the 8 hole. What a bunch of vultures! :lol::lol::lol:


Too Funny, CJ......

[jotb]

Of course, the first table concentrated on betting, so it is possible the inside posts win more often but are overbet. So I looked with betting not a factor. Below shows the post position and the percentage of expected winners each gets. 1.00 would mean a post gets exactly the number that could be expected randomly. Less means the post underperforms, more means the post outperforms expectations:


1 1.07
2 0.94
3 0.98
4 0.92
5 0.87
6 0.99
7 1.00
8 1.27
9 0.99
10 1.20


Clearly there is an advantage to being outside, though being on the rail, and the rail only, is OK also.

I'm certainly not going to say your stats are wrong but you really don't want to draw an outside post especially going 6.5F and 8.5F. At 6.5F the first turn comes up pretty quickly and at 8.5F the break is right on the turn. If you draw post 8,9,or 10 going 6.5F you better have enough early speed to clear before the first turn. Many jockeys here will gun from the gate (thinking they can make the lead) only to find themselves extemely wide into that first turn. The only way the jockey can overcome this situation is if the horse is tons the best but for the most part they will not be able to recover. If the outside post (8,9,or 10) clear before the first turn then that's a different story because for the most part, Charles Town is a speed favoring track. I would imagine that most of the horses you show winning at these post positions (6.5F) won in wire to wire fashion or were in races where the other horses in the race were lacking early speed meaning the horse from the outside was able to get good position going into the first turn (outside the other speed horse).

There are many trainers here at CT that expect (give instructions to the jockey) their horse to make the lead with a horse that has cheap speed. Many trainers like many handicappers can't read the pp's well. They seem to focus only on their horse and just because their horse was on the lead the last time (maybe from post 1, 2, or 3) they don't take into account this is a different group of horses (maybe more horses with early speed) expecting the same situation should set up. Many races are loss not because the jockey screwed up but more because the trainer reads the race incorrectly.

In the 8.5F races you start on the turn so the outside post is not a good draw especially if the horse is a need to lead type. The horse will not get the lead until they run down the grandstand side the first time. If the horse don't like dirt in his face the rider is forced to keep him clear (outside of the front runners). If the horse don't have the lead by the time they reach the second turn it's basically over. These type of distance races are won by horses that save ground (most of the race) until they make their run into the far turn. The jockey waits until the lead horse starts getting out and slips up the fence or steers his horse off the fence and gets outside setting his horse down for the drive through the stretch.

I was wondering if you had a way to see how many horses that won from the outside posts going 6.5F or 8.5F wire to wire and how many horses lost that had early speed but didn't make the lead and still won. I just can't believe an outside post at these distances have an edge over horses that have inside posts.

Best regards,
Joe

[cj]

I'm certainly not going to say your stats are wrong but you really don't want to draw an outside post especially going 6.5F and 8.5F.

Joe

I wasn't talking about 8.5 races, I'll have to look those up. It is clear, however, the outside posts do have an edge around two turns. I don't know why, I can only assume the banking helps.

The edge from a simple "who wins" standpoint is decent. From a betting standpoint, it is huge, because it appears many believe the same thing you do. I understand what you are saying, but the numbers simply don't show it. It is these kinds of fallacies I look to exploit.

[takeout]

I don’t have any stats on it but I don’t think the 6.5 and 7 furlong distances should be combined.

[cj]

Fair enough, so I split them up:

6.5f:

Runners Return ROI Post
751 $1,118.60 74.47% 1
751 $1,211.80 80.68% 2
751 $1,684.20 112.13% 3
751 $1,096.40 73.00% 4
750 $1,137.80 75.85% 5
739 $1,164.20 78.77% 6
688 $919.80 66.85% 7
576 $1,308.80 113.61% 8
423 $845.00 99.88% 9
239 $425.20 88.95% 10

7f:

Runners Return ROI Post
712 $879.20 61.74% 1
712 $945.00 66.36% 2
712 $893.80 62.77% 3
712 $788.40 55.37% 4
707 $755.20 53.41% 5
691 $772.60 55.90% 6
645 $1,102.80 85.49% 7
546 $1,249.60 114.43% 8
402 $636.20 79.13% 9
233 $467.40 100.30% 10

At 8.5 and 9f, the outside is very poor.

At 4.5, the 10 again is huge, and the general trend is outside is better than inside:

Runners Return ROI Post
1046 $1,306.60 62.46% 1
1046 $1,438.40 68.76% 2
1046 $1,466.20 70.09% 3
1046 $1,027.40 49.11% 4
1038 $1,509.60 72.72% 5
1008 $1,596.00 79.17% 6
919 $1,079.40 58.73% 7
770 $1,121.60 72.83% 8
556 $929.40 83.58% 9
277 $867.60 156.61% 10

[takeout]

Thanks. That’s very interesting.

[rufus999]

Northlands Park has a long run to the first turn. Post position means nothing there.

rufus:9::9::9:

[cj]

Northlands Park has a long run to the first turn. Post position means nothing there.

rufus:9::9::9:

I'll see...

[takeout]

Something that bothers me about post position data is when I notice things like the #1 hole is not being used, yet the result chart will show a horse leaving from the #1 hole, which is actually the #2 hole. This throws all the other numbers off by one. I checked on this for CT on Sunday (9/14/08) and it was done in 5 of the 9 races, (1st, 5th, 6th, 7th, 9th). (I checked the result charts against the replays.)

They didn’t do it in the one 1&1/16th mile race, that they could have, (the other one had a full field) but I have seen it done in the past – which seems insane to me because they start by going right in to a turn.

Questions: Aren’t automated post position studies kind of at the mercy of the starter and chart caller? If he/they were consistent in how they did it I guess it could be programmed for so that it wouldn’t go into databases wrongly. But, like everything else racing, it probably just depends on who is doing it at the time and whatever their whim is. I’m pretty sure that at some point in the past (they’ve had several starters at CT in recent years) I saw a 1&1/16th mile race where they didn’t use either of the first two holes. That meant the #1 horse actually came out of post #3 but the result chart probably said post #1. I can’t think of any way to defend against this.

[jotb]

Something that bothers me about post position data is when I notice things like the #1 hole is not being used, yet the result chart will show a horse leaving from the #1 hole, which is actually the #2 hole. This throws all the other numbers off by one. I checked on this for CT on Sunday (9/14/08) and it was done in 5 of the 9 races, (1st, 5th, 6th, 7th, 9th). (I checked the result charts against the replays.)

They didn’t do it in the one 1&1/16th mile race, that they could have, (the other one had a full field) but I have seen it done in the past – which seems insane to me because they start by going right in to a turn.

Questions: Aren’t automated post position studies kind of at the mercy of the starter and chart caller? If he/they were consistent in how they did it I guess it could be programmed for so that it wouldn’t go into databases wrongly. But, like everything else racing, it probably just depends on who is doing it at the time and whatever their whim is. I’m pretty sure that at some point in the past (they’ve had several starters at CT in recent years) I saw a 1&1/16th mile race where they didn’t use either of the first two holes. That meant the #1 horse actually came out of post #3 but the result chart probably said post #1. I can’t think of any way to defend against this.

Good point takeout. Actually this does not take place at only CT. I noticed this yesterday at Pha Park. It was one of the early races on the card. The reason why they don't use the 1 post is because of the rail. Supposely it's better for the jockeys and horses. I guess so much for accurate post position stats.

Best regards,
Joe

[jotb]

Fair enough, so I split them up:

6.5f:

Runners Return ROI Post
751 $1,118.60 74.47% 1
751 $1,211.80 80.68% 2
751 $1,684.20 112.13% 3
751 $1,096.40 73.00% 4
750 $1,137.80 75.85% 5
739 $1,164.20 78.77% 6
688 $919.80 66.85% 7
576 $1,308.80 113.61% 8
423 $845.00 99.88% 9
239 $425.20 88.95% 10

7f:

Runners Return ROI Post
712 $879.20 61.74% 1
712 $945.00 66.36% 2
712 $893.80 62.77% 3
712 $788.40 55.37% 4
707 $755.20 53.41% 5
691 $772.60 55.90% 6
645 $1,102.80 85.49% 7
546 $1,249.60 114.43% 8
402 $636.20 79.13% 9
233 $467.40 100.30% 10

At 8.5 and 9f, the outside is very poor.

At 4.5, the 10 again is huge, and the general trend is outside is better than inside:

Runners Return ROI Post
1046 $1,306.60 62.46% 1
1046 $1,438.40 68.76% 2
1046 $1,466.20 70.09% 3
1046 $1,027.40 49.11% 4
1038 $1,509.60 72.72% 5
1008 $1,596.00 79.17% 6
919 $1,079.40 58.73% 7
770 $1,121.60 72.83% 8
556 $929.40 83.58% 9
277 $867.60 156.61% 10


The 4 post going 4.5 is pretty low for ROI at CT and I was curious to know if it's because of low odds or wins. It has to be one of the two but then again it could be that many of the horses from the 4 post going that distance get pinched back at the start. At CT when they break from this distance there are many races, where there is a tremendous amount of bumping at the start. Horses running from the outside crossing over and the inside horses getting out at the start could effect the 4 hole. Regardless, at CT you need to break quick and have speed otherwise most of the time you are screwed.

Best regards,
Joe

[cj]

Hey CJ, thx for this post......am I correct in assuming that if I sent enough kash thru the machines, that I could make an e-z living just betting Post #8 without lifting a finger to do anything else?.......1,111 races seems to be a pretty good sampling.......

best,

Just an update...still raking in the dough. These are all since my last post, 9-12 through 11-19. It does not include tonight (which has a $119.80 post 8 winner at 6.5f).


Runners Return ROI Post
116 $225.80 97.33% 1
108 $186.80 86.48% 2
114 $111.50 48.90% 3
117 $158.15 67.59% 4
117 $176.35 75.36% 5
113 $236.95 104.85% 6
103 $106.25 51.58% 7
94 $226.90 120.69% 8
74 $295.50 199.66% 9
41 $34.55 42.13% 10

[jotb]

Just an update...still raking in the dough. These are all since my last post, 9-12 through 11-19. It does not include tonight (which has a $119.80 post 8 winner at 6.5f).


Runners Return ROI Post
116 $225.80 97.33% 1
108 $186.80 86.48% 2
114 $111.50 48.90% 3
117 $158.15 67.59% 4
117 $176.35 75.36% 5
113 $236.95 104.85% 6
103 $106.25 51.58% 7
94 $226.90 120.69% 8
74 $295.50 199.66% 9
41 $34.55 42.13% 10


I think that $119.80 mutual came from post 6. He was #8 on the program. If you have the time CJ, I was wondering if you can tell me how many of the horses running 6.5F that won from the 8 post went wire to wire.

Joe

[cj]

I think that $119.80 mutual came from post 6. He was #8 on the program. If you have the time CJ, I was wondering if you can tell me how many of the horses running 6.5F that won from the 8 post went wire to wire.

Joe

No, I don't keep that information. I can tell you running style entering the race is not a factor. The only horses that performed poorly were 1st time starters and those designated NA, which means they don't show any competitive races in the last 10. Post 8, 6.5f only.

Runners Return ROI Style
18 $30.30 84.17% 1st
100 $284.20 142.10% E
127 $297.65 117.19% EP
154 $232.50 75.49% NA
112 $300.40 134.11% P
94 $303.70 161.54% PS
42 $110.30 131.31% S

Post 8, 6.5 AND 7f

Runners Return ROI Style
29 $43.15 74.40% 1st
185 $513.75 138.85% E
237 $803.15 169.44% EP
280 $384.60 68.68% NA
234 $589.30 125.92% P
189 $430.75 113.96% PS
116 $328.40 141.55% S

At 7f, the numbers are ridiculously slanted to the outside:

Runners Return ROI Post
803 $1,142.65 71.15% 1
803 $1,137.25 70.81% 2
803 $1,086.85 67.67% 3
803 $1,035.05 64.45% 4
798 $1,018.90 63.84% 5
782 $1,069.50 68.38% 6
726 $1,277.10 87.95% 7
623 $1,534.05 123.12% 8
458 $928.30 101.34% 9
264 $570.00 107.95% 10

I just don't see any way that is a fluke.

[jotb]

Thanks for the information. The trainers at CT hate to get these outside post positions at 6.5F. They don't mind the outside as much going 7.0F because the jocks have a little bit more time to get positioned early on. If you get caught extremely wide on that first turn you better be much the best to win. At this 6.5F distance you have to break sharp and go on with your horse immediately either making the lead or get over to get a decent postition.

Thanks,
Joe

[rrbauer]

Some of the smaller tracks have chutes that lead into the main track at the head of the stretch. One that comes to mind is Los Alamitos (5f oval). They used to run a 2-week mixed meet there as the Orange Cty Fair Meet. The inside posts at 7f are screwed. I used to bet against odds-on horses breaking from the 1 or 2 hole with impunity because they would get shuffled back and not be able to clear for over a furlong until the chute hits the main track. 6 1/2 at Fairplex can provide a similar disadvantage for inside horses as the outside horses are "gunning" trying to mitigate their wide draw before they hit the turn and the inside horses get trapped as the others come over.

Good stuff, CJ. Thanks.

[Jeff P]

I'm not following CT.

Ran some rail position data for tracks where I do have data this morning after reading this thread. Found it interesting and thought I'd share...

Rail Position is simply a head count of each horse in the starting gate where the horses are counted from the rail out. Horse closest to the rail gets a 1. Second closest gets a 2... next one gets a 3... and so on... until all of the horses are counted.

Here's what I have in my Q4 2008 database 10/01/2008 up to and including 11/17/2008 for those cards where I have data...


First, Dirt Sprints:

************************************************** **************************************
DIRT SPRINTS - OUTER 3 Rail Positions only
BY TRACK sorted by Win ROI Run Date: 11/21/2008 8:04:32 AM
************************************************** **************************************
WIN WIN WIN PLACE PLACE
TRACK PLAYS WINS PCT IMPACT ROI PLACES PCT ROI
************************************************** **************************************
BEU 126 17 0.1349 1.1281 1.5246 35 0.2778 1.004
TDN 69 10 0.1449 1.2118 1.1304 20 0.2899 0.9594
BEL 188 19 0.1011 0.8455 1.1258 45 0.2394 0.7763
KEE 264 39 0.1477 1.2352 1.1246 67 0.2538 0.9564
DEL 312 50 0.1603 1.3405 1.1157 98 0.3141 0.8758
HOO 156 24 0.1538 1.2862 1.0327 42 0.2692 0.8865
CDX 273 28 0.1026 0.858 0.9557 54 0.1978 0.6593
CRC 435 56 0.1287 1.0763 0.9398 100 0.2299 0.6964
AQU 207 23 0.1111 0.9291 0.8833 54 0.2609 0.7459
HAW 510 58 0.1137 0.9508 0.8337 109 0.2137 0.7306
DED 183 26 0.1421 1.1883 0.8301 40 0.2186 0.7372
TPX 18 2 0.1111 0.9291 0.8056 5 0.2778 0.9694
GGX 426 62 0.1455 1.2168 0.6857 134 0.3146 0.8421
WOX 518 53 0.1023 0.8555 0.6685 113 0.2181 0.8024
PHA 405 46 0.1136 0.95 0.6477 97 0.2395 0.7128
TUP 540 55 0.1019 0.8522 0.6356 117 0.2167 0.5814
OSA 234 26 0.1111 0.9291 0.6329 56 0.2393 0.7385
PMX 294 36 0.1224 1.0236 0.5861 75 0.2551 0.6173
LAD 114 9 0.0789 0.6598 0.5412 22 0.193 0.7044
SUF 66 9 0.1364 1.1407 0.5273 18 0.2727 0.7106
LRL 150 16 0.1067 0.8923 0.5047 40 0.2667 0.5907
HOL 201 20 0.0995 0.8321 0.4781 45 0.2239 0.6065
FGX 30 3 0.1 0.8363 0.43 5 0.1667 0.41
FLX 222 22 0.0991 0.8287 0.4011 50 0.2252 0.4847
MED 30 5 0.1667 1.3941 0.3933 7 0.2333 0.4583
************************************************** **************************************
25 Track Codes from file: C:\2008\Q4_2008\pL_profile.txt
************************************************** **************************************


************************************************** **************************************
DIRT SPRINTS - INNER 3 Rail Positions only
BY TRACK sorted by Win ROI Run Date: 11/21/2008 8:19:38 AM
************************************************** **************************************
WIN WIN WIN PLACE PLACE
TRACK PLAYS WINS PCT IMPACT ROI PLACES PCT ROI
************************************************** **************************************
HOL 201 33 0.1642 1.1929 1.1114 59 0.2935 0.9149
LRL 150 26 0.1733 1.2591 1.0607 45 0.3 0.807
BEL 189 37 0.1958 1.4225 1.0447 63 0.3333 0.9659
DED 183 21 0.1148 0.834 1.0186 46 0.2514 0.9885
TUP 540 91 0.1685 1.2242 0.878 166 0.3074 0.8558
KEE 264 26 0.0985 0.7156 0.8561 44 0.1667 0.6417
WOX 518 67 0.1293 0.9394 0.8512 125 0.2413 0.7649
PHA 405 60 0.1481 1.076 0.8259 114 0.2815 0.7721
GGX 426 55 0.1291 0.9379 0.7955 108 0.2535 0.6957
AQU 207 32 0.1546 1.1232 0.7857 52 0.2512 0.7068
HAW 510 64 0.1255 0.9118 0.7773 138 0.2706 0.8591
HOO 156 12 0.0769 0.5587 0.7436 27 0.1731 0.6679
DEL 312 45 0.1442 1.0476 0.7433 87 0.2788 0.7269
CDX 273 30 0.1099 0.7984 0.681 60 0.2198 0.6883
CRC 435 60 0.1379 1.0019 0.6779 124 0.2851 0.9236
FLX 222 41 0.1847 1.3419 0.6777 70 0.3153 0.7876
TPX 18 3 0.1667 1.2111 0.65 4 0.2222 0.6556
FGX 30 5 0.1667 1.2111 0.6067 10 0.3333 0.7367
MED 30 5 0.1667 1.2111 0.5867 12 0.4 0.68
OSA 234 24 0.1026 0.7454 0.562 52 0.2222 0.7312
PMX 294 43 0.1463 1.0629 0.5201 77 0.2619 0.7736
TDN 69 9 0.1304 0.9474 0.5188 17 0.2464 0.7225
SUF 66 10 0.1515 1.1007 0.4424 17 0.2576 0.6439
BEU 126 12 0.0952 0.6916 0.3802 22 0.1746 0.427
LAD 114 11 0.0965 0.7011 0.3228 24 0.2105 0.4044
************************************************** **************************************
25 Track Codes from file: C:\2008\Q4_2008\pL_profile.txt
************************************************** **************************************




Next, Dirt Routes


************************************************** **************************************
DIRT ROUTES - OUTER 3 Rail Positions only
BY TRACK sorted by Win ROI Run Date: 11/21/2008 8:08:17 AM
************************************************** **************************************
WIN WIN WIN PLACE PLACE
TRACK PLAYS WINS PCT IMPACT ROI PLACES PCT ROI
************************************************** **************************************
BEU 42 7 0.1667 1.3738 2.0738 16 0.381 1.6214
TDN 48 6 0.125 1.0301 1.5188 8 0.1667 0.5083
FLX 102 13 0.1275 1.0508 1.2725 26 0.2549 0.7466
MED 15 2 0.1333 1.0985 1.24 4 0.2667 1.0867
AQU 132 21 0.1591 1.3112 1.1057 36 0.2727 0.7557
HOL 72 11 0.1528 1.2593 1.0528 18 0.25 0.7076
LRL 84 11 0.131 1.0796 1.0345 17 0.2024 0.7113
PMX 78 9 0.1154 0.951 0.8923 19 0.2436 0.5936
PHA 171 26 0.152 1.2527 0.8918 46 0.269 0.6415
GGX 201 28 0.1393 1.148 0.8498 61 0.3035 0.8244
HOO 57 7 0.1228 1.012 0.814 13 0.2281 0.5737
HAW 288 37 0.1285 1.059 0.7733 77 0.2674 0.7604
DED 87 10 0.1149 0.9469 0.7598 15 0.1724 0.5161
DEL 171 24 0.1404 1.1571 0.7462 50 0.2924 0.6813
OSA 108 13 0.1204 0.9922 0.6926 23 0.213 0.6472
WOX 270 34 0.1259 1.0376 0.6694 65 0.2407 0.7457
CRC 216 24 0.1111 0.9156 0.6602 56 0.2593 0.7639
CDX 150 17 0.1133 0.9337 0.6493 34 0.2267 0.838
SUF 63 7 0.1111 0.9156 0.6286 14 0.2222 0.481
KEE 117 12 0.1026 0.8455 0.5983 29 0.2479 0.9846
LAD 30 1 0.0333 0.2744 0.43 4 0.1333 0.5467
TUP 156 14 0.0897 0.7392 0.4077 32 0.2051 0.6167
TPX 42 2 0.0476 0.3923 0.1857 6 0.1429 0.619
BEL 78 4 0.0513 0.4228 0.1788 14 0.1795 0.4532
FGX 24 0 0 0 0 4 0.1667 0.625
************************************************** **************************************
25 Track Codes from file: C:\2008\Q4_2008\pL_profile.txt
************************************************** **************************************

************************************************** **************************************
DIRT ROUTES - INSIDE 3 Rail Positions only
BY TRACK sorted by Win ROI Run Date: 11/21/2008 8:23:11 AM
************************************************** **************************************
WIN WIN WIN PLACE PLACE
TRACK PLAYS WINS PCT IMPACT ROI PLACES PCT ROI
************************************************** **************************************
BEL 78 14 0.1795 1.2507 1.3346 27 0.3462 1.0346
GGX 201 35 0.1741 1.2131 1.2353 58 0.2886 0.8731
AQU 132 19 0.1439 1.0026 1.222 39 0.2955 1.0379
SUF 63 12 0.1905 1.3273 1.1905 20 0.3175 0.9825
HOL 72 11 0.1528 1.0647 1.0861 25 0.3472 1.0243
MED 15 3 0.2 1.3935 1.0533 5 0.3333 1.3667
TPX 42 4 0.0952 0.6633 1.0333 8 0.1905 0.6952
KEE 117 13 0.1111 0.7741 0.9855 27 0.2308 0.8436
PHA 171 29 0.1696 1.1817 0.9667 57 0.3333 0.8105
HAW 288 39 0.1354 0.9434 0.866 67 0.2326 0.7191
CDX 150 19 0.1267 0.8828 0.858 30 0.2 0.636
PMX 78 16 0.2051 1.4291 0.7628 25 0.3205 0.7827
CRC 215 32 0.1488 1.0368 0.753 60 0.2791 0.9005
HOO 57 7 0.1228 0.8556 0.7439 11 0.193 0.6456
DED 87 11 0.1264 0.8807 0.7356 22 0.2529 0.8333
FLX 102 14 0.1373 0.9567 0.7211 28 0.2745 0.6348
TUP 156 26 0.1667 1.1615 0.6974 52 0.3333 0.966
DEL 171 25 0.1462 1.0187 0.6637 52 0.3041 0.7099
WOX 270 33 0.1222 0.8514 0.6146 73 0.2704 0.8609
LRL 84 17 0.2024 1.4103 0.6024 31 0.369 0.7804
OSA 108 12 0.1111 0.7741 0.5972 26 0.2407 0.6
BEU 42 4 0.0952 0.6633 0.5452 8 0.1905 0.5202
LAD 30 3 0.1 0.6968 0.4233 5 0.1667 0.45
TDN 48 3 0.0625 0.4355 0.1458 9 0.1875 0.3323
FGX 24 1 0.0417 0.2906 0.1083 1 0.0417 0.0708
************************************************** **************************************
25 Track Codes from file: C:\2008\Q4_2008\pL_profile.txt
************************************************** **************************************


Here's one that caught my eye... horses drawing the rail in Dirt/Synth/Pro Ride Sprints (under 8f) at OSA-SAX:
Data Window Settings:
999 Divisor Odds Cap: None
Dirt (All*) SPRINTS (From Index File: C:\2008\Q4_2008\pL_profile.txt)
Track: OSA-SAX

Data Summary Win Place Show
Mutuel Totals 1009.00 1141.60 1121.40
Bet -1434.00 -1434.00 -1434.00
Gain -425.00 -292.40 -312.60

Wins 78 156 234
Plays 717 717 717
PCT .1088 .2176 .3264

ROI 0.7036 0.7961 0.7820
Avg Mut 12.94 7.32 4.79


By: Rail Position

Rail Pos Gain Bet Roi Wins Plays Pct Impact
1 -116.60 156.00 0.2526 4 78 .0513 0.4714
2 -56.20 156.00 0.6397 7 78 .0897 0.8250
3 -32.20 156.00 0.7936 13 78 .1667 1.5321
4 -60.40 156.00 0.6128 8 78 .1026 0.9428
5 121.60 156.00 1.7795 15 78 .1923 1.7678
6 -38.00 148.00 0.7432 12 74 .1622 1.4906
7 -64.60 130.00 0.5031 4 65 .0615 0.5657
8 -43.80 118.00 0.6288 5 59 .0847 0.7790
9 -32.00 86.00 0.6279 4 43 .0930 0.8551
10 -12.00 60.00 0.8000 3 30 .1000 0.9192
11 -44.40 52.00 0.1462 1 26 .0385 0.3536
12 -34.40 40.00 0.1400 1 20 .0500 0.4596
13 -14.00 14.00 0.0000 0 7 .0000 0.0000
14 2.00 6.00 1.3333 1 3 .3333 3.0641

I have very little doubt that individual distances within the broad categories of sprint (under 8f) and route (8f and over) on specific track surfaces have their own individual tendencies. IMHO being aware of and paying attention to path biases tends to be a wise thing to do.


-jp

.

[rrbauer]

Jeff,
Don't understand the last example. Rail Position? Is that "post" position?

[Jeff P]

In most cases, rail position and post position are interchangeable terms.

But not always.

Rail Position is simply a head count of each horse in the starting gate where the horses are counted from the rail out. Horse closest to the rail gets a 1. Second closest gets a 2... next one gets a 3... and so on... until all of the horses are counted.

Scratches can cause rail position and post position to be different. Example: 10 horse field (I can dream can't I) and the #2 horse scratches. When people refer to the #3 horse they tend to think of it in terms of post position 3 (the saddle cloth number.) But in this situation the #3 horse occupies rail position 2 in the starting gate.

Coupled entries are another example. I've seen races where the #1 horse is assigned rail position 5 or 6 in the gate and the 1A is assigned rail position 11.

Hope I've managed to explain the difference in the way I think of rail position vs. post position in a way that makes sense.


-jp

.

[cj]

Thanks for the information. The trainers at CT hate to get these outside post positions at 6.5F. They don't mind the outside as much going 7.0F because the jocks have a little bit more time to get positioned early on. If you get caught extremely wide on that first turn you better be much the best to win. At this 6.5F distance you have to break sharp and go on with your horse immediately either making the lead or get over to get a decent postition.

Thanks,
Joe

One thing to keep in mind, I'm talking from a betting perspective, not necessarily a win percentage one. Based on Win percentage, the trainers are still probably wrong to not want the outside. The middle is the disadvantage. These are all the 6.5 furlong races...EXP is expected winners from the post (it includes field size) and IV is impact value of the post, where 1.00 is break even.

St W W% Pt Exp IV
830 126 15.18% 1 99 1.27
830 103 12.41% 2 99 1.04
830 99 11.93% 3 99 1.00
830 84 10.12% 4 99 0.85
829 88 10.62% 5 99 0.89
817 92 11.26% 6 97 0.95
765 68 8.89% 7 88 0.77
647 95 14.68% 8 71 1.34
485 46 9.48% 9 51 0.90
279 29 10.39% 10 28 1.04


I have two conclusions I draw from this. One, trainers are right that the inside is good but they undervalue the outside. Two, bettors way, way overvalue the inside and way,way undervalue the outside.

Many tracks have quirks like this.

[rrbauer]

In most cases, rail position and post position are interchangeable terms.

But not always.

Rail Position is simply a head count of each horse in the starting gate where the horses are counted from the rail out. Horse closest to the rail gets a 1. Second closest gets a 2... next one gets a 3... and so on... until all of the horses are counted.

Scratches can cause rail position and post position to be different. Example: 10 horse field (I can dream can't I) and the #2 horse scratches. When people refer to the #3 horse they tend to think of it in terms of post position 3 (the saddle cloth number.) But in this situation the #3 horse occupies rail position 2 in the starting gate.

Coupled entries are another example. I've seen races where the #1 horse is assigned rail position 5 or 6 in the gate and the 1A is assigned rail position 11.

Hope I've managed to explain the difference in the way I think of rail position vs. post position in a way that makes sense.


-jp

.

I understand/understood all of that. I don't understand the report. Is the row adjacent to the #1 , those races for the horse closest to the rail? and #2 for the horse 2nd out, #3 third out, etc? And, if that's the case then the report says that the only positive results were with the 5th horse out and the 14th horse out?

Thanks in advance for the clarification.

[RonTiller]

I was wondering if you had a way to see how many horses that won from the outside posts going 6.5F or 8.5F wire to wire...
All CT races 6.5F Post 8 since 1/1/2008:

36 out of 380 horses made it to the lead at the 1/4 from Post 8.
Of those 36, 17 went on to win.

All CT races 6.5F All Post Positions since 1/1/2008:

484 out of 4197 horses made it to the lead at the 1/4, all Post Positions.
Of those 484, 151 went on to win.

This is a breakdown by year, going back to 1991, of Post 8 at CT 6.5F. Staring in 2007, IV and Win % dramatically increase for Post 8. Hmm...

Yr t R_D pp Starts Wins Win% Win_IV
2008 CT 6.5 8 380 53 13.94 1.29
2007 CT 6.5 8 466 63 13.51 1.23
2006 CT 6.5 8 452 46 10.17 0.93
2005 CT 6.5 8 449 51 11.35 1.06
2004 CT 6.5 8 481 47 9.77 0.92
2003 CT 6.5 8 455 48 10.54 0.99
2002 CT 6.5 8 418 32 7.65 0.72
2001 CT 6.5 8 410 44 10.73 1
2000 CT 6.5 8 352 25 7.1 0.66
1999 CT 6.5 8 399 35 8.77 0.81
1998 CT 6.5 8 316 26 8.22 0.75
1997 CT 6.5 8 279 17 6.09 0.54
1996 CT 6.5 8 150 14 9.33 0.82
1995 CT 6.5 8 158 19 12.02 1.05
1994 CT 6.5 8 299 25 8.36 0.77
1993 CT 6.5 8 365 39 10.68 0.99
1992 CT 6.5 8 371 45 12.12 1.11
1991 CT 6.5 8 449 35 7.79 0.72

Ron Tiller
HDW

[Jeff P]

Is the row adjacent to the #1 , those races for the horse closest to the rail? and #2 for the horse 2nd out, #3 third out, etc? Richard, you have it exactly right.

And, if that's the case then the report says that the only positive results were with the 5th horse out and the 14th horse out?Yes. But this gets into the area of interpretation. Ask a dozen players what the data in the table means to them and you're likely to get a dozen different answers.

Personally, I'd bet that for each specific slot subsets within the data exist that are both positive and negative. But I'd never be one to go there. I'm more likely to look at the table and make a more general interpretation - something along the lines of:

1. For whatever reason - crowding/course layout/maybe even the surface itself - horses drawn on the rail in these races at OSA-SAX were having their chances severely compromised.

2. For whatever reason - crowding/course layout/maybe even the surface itself - horses drawing middle posts in these same races at OSA-SAX were having their chances enhanced.



-jp

.

[takeout]

This is a breakdown by year, going back to 1991, of Post 8 at CT 6.5F. Staring in 2007, IV and Win % dramatically increase for Post 8. Hmm...Interesting. Anyone have any theories???

[miesque]

For whats its worth when looking at historical post position results, Charles Town did some work on the track banking the turns and replacing the surface in late summer of 2004.

[cj]

I thought that had been mentioned here, but maybe not. It certainly changed the way the tracks plays.