Del Mar/Arlington Polytrack discussion. Can you beat Poly?

[Imriledup]

Whenever a discussion comes up about Polytrack, a few people come on and complain and say Poly is crap and i can't win and then a few people say "i can win". I want to hear from the people who are actually thriving on Poly and have found that not only are you doing consistently well with Poly, but you find it 'easier' to beat than conventional dirt.

Personally, i won't bet Poly anymore. I admit, i'm not as good on Poly because the basis of my handicapping is pace and rider strategy. I need to know the exact pace scenario before making a wager. If i'm going to bet on a closer, i have to know if the early pace is going to be fast enough to set up his run. I've found that there are too many situations where riders don't go as fast on the track as they figure to on paper. There are too many jocks 'thinking' on Poly, i've found that my best success is when jocks DON'T think and just ride the horse according to how the horse normally gets ridden. If he's speed, you go. If you have to duel, well, than you duel. On Poly, there are less 'duels', which has hurt 'what i do' as a handicapper.

Now, you can argue that if i'm really great, why can't i adjust? Well, i can adjust and have tried as hard as possile, but there are too many random scenarios that i feel enter into the equasion. There is too much jockey 'strategy' if you will that gets in my way.

There are too many races that i'm going to lose because a rider on a speed horse didn't ride for speed, grabbed the one dimensional horse and changed the pace scenario enough were my bet will perish. That stuff cuts into my bottom line enough where i struggle to cut a profit at the end of the day.

Poly hasn't been around that long, so if you are indeed a player who has 'beaten' the poly, there is still a little more time left in 'the long run' to really prove that you can stand the test of time. If you have beaten Del Mar the last couple seasons, is it possible you just got lucky and its going to end badly for you this season?

I'd like to hear from anyone who has won or lost on poly and what is your strategy going forward. I won't play it anymore, i just think that it messes with my mind, i don't know if what i'm seeing is 'true' or false and i can't seem to really TRUST anything. Even if i had a good meet and won i still wouldn't feel confident enough for the next meet to 'dive in' with two hands and bet serious money and be confident that i won't get destroyed.

Sure, there is upside with Poly, any track can be beaten, but i just feel that the downside is too great with Poly. I feel that with dirt, if i have a bad meet, i might lose a little and go back to the drawing board....even the best players in American don't win every meet or every year. But, with Poly, if feel that if i have a bad meet, i can get obliterated and lose too much.

[andymays]

I know at Del Mar they couldn't add all the ingredients because of environmental restrictions. One ingredient they couldn't add was jelly cable(I think that's what it was called) whatever that is.

[46zilzal]

I am of the STRONG opinion that it is the drainage beneath, and not the Poytrack per se that makes these courses different. Woodbine hasn't changed as much as others and it is the drainage differences that has, I think, a lot to do with the wild variances day to day at many of these.

[46zilzal]

I know at Del Mar they couldn't add all the ingredients because of environmental restrictions. One ingredient they couldn't add was jelly cable(I think that's what it was called) whatever that is.
Jelly CORD. a binding agent.

At Woodbine, they had a deal with the Polytrack people for stability. The company came back and did a major re-surfacing twice with Jelly cord.

[miesque]

I like playing the Arlington Polytrack and have been succesful doing so. In direct contrast, I have not do that well on the Del Mar Poly (in fact its been rather ugly at times) although I remain hopeful that I can maybe reverse that trend this summer. I consider the Arlington Polytrack to be more formful at least from the perspective I am looking at races from (which makes sense because I am cashing tickets so of course its going to seem logical to me). One comment I would make is that if I did not watch a bunch of replays for each race, then I would most likely not do well at Arlington. I personally feel that watching replays in conjunction with reviewing the PPs is essential when handicapping turf and synthetic, but that could just be a result of the way I synthesize information.

[statepierback]

I stopped playing Poly track a while back. The 24 second opening quarters got to be too much and since then I've lost interest. Del Mar isn't the same. There are other options out there that suit my style of handicapping much better.

[KidCapper]

I play most polytrack races like they on are on turf. You basically get the same pace set ups you get in a turf race. Focusing mostly on stalkers and pressers .

[fmolf]

I play most polytrack races like they on are on turf. You basically get the same pace set ups you get in a turf race. Focusing mostly on stalkers and pressers .i agree with that and that is what makes it so tough for me....when you start handicapping every race for closers and pressers i have found that racing luck/traffic problems/and jockey error are more prevalent

[miesque]

i agree with that and that is what makes it so tough for me....when you start handicapping every race for closers and pressers i have found that racing luck/traffic problems/and jockey error are more prevalent

Instead of directly focusing on closer/pressers what I look at is the "late kick" of a horse aka a horse's ability to quicken/accelerate at the right time when called which is the common element between a synthetic like Polytrack and Turf (its also why I much prefer turf racing to dirt, I love watching explosive acceleration such as Goldikova in the BC Mile). A horse with quick tactical, acceleration can more adeptly take advantage of fleeting opportunities like a brief gap opening in a wall of horses and thereby with the help of a savvy rider are better equipped to create their own luck. It may not always work and they may not always be successful, but they have a much better chance then the grinders who suceptible to bad racing luck. Also, you do need to look at the pace set-up for the overall race beause there are some early speed horses that when left to their own devices on the lead can sprint home like a jackrabbit and be long gone if they also happen to possess a quick late turn of foot when they don't use up their reserves early.

[Imriledup]

Instead of directly focusing on closer/pressers what I look at is the "late kick" of a horse aka a horse's ability to quicken/accelerate at the right time when called which is the common element between a synthetic like Polytrack and Turf (its also why I much prefer turf racing to dirt, I love watching explosive acceleration such as Goldikova in the BC Mile). A horse with quick tactical, acceleration can more adeptly take advantage of fleeting opportunities like a brief gap opening in a wall of horses and thereby with the help of a savvy rider are better equipped to create their own luck. It may not always work and they may not always be successful, but they have a much better chance then the grinders who suceptible to bad racing luck. Also, you do need to look at the pace set-up for the overall race beause there are some early speed horses that when left to their own devices on the lead can sprint home like a jackrabbit and be long gone if they also happen to possess a quick late turn of foot when they don't use up their reserves early.

Nice post! You know, this post is why horse racing is great. Personally, i prefer dirt races over turf and here we have someone who does better on turf than dirt. This is what makes this the greatest game on earth, there's more than one way to skin a cat!

[fmolf]

Instead of directly focusing on closer/pressers what I look at is the "late kick" of a horse aka a horse's ability to quicken/accelerate at the right time when called which is the common element between a synthetic like Polytrack and Turf (its also why I much prefer turf racing to dirt, I love watching explosive acceleration such as Goldikova in the BC Mile). A horse with quick tactical, acceleration can more adeptly take advantage of fleeting opportunities like a brief gap opening in a wall of horses and thereby with the help of a savvy rider are better equipped to create their own luck. It may not always work and they may not always be successful, but they have a much better chance then the grinders who suceptible to bad racing luck. Also, you do need to look at the pace set-up for the overall race beause there are some early speed horses that when left to their own devices on the lead can sprint home like a jackrabbit and be long gone if they also happen to possess a quick late turn of foot when they don't use up their reserves early.
how do you determine late foot?do you use ability time like scott advocated /do you add bris late paceand speed figure as bris states is effective in their literature or do you go strictly by last quarter time?.....or do you use some sort of average pace calculation to determine wo will have anything left at the end?...beginning to sound like how dirt races are handicapped isn't it?

[Robert Fischer]

I think you have to watch and learn that specific track with attention for a while.

Watching the replays for each race a few times each.

You have to be on the lookout for bias.
Maybe a little different than what you look for in dirt bias.

Are horses passing each other in the stretch?
Are horses tiring?
are the true unrateable sprinters seemingly all stretching out to a mile a mile and a sixteenth or are they seemingly all quitting?
are those same sprint oriented animals all working 6 or 7 furlongs with consistently fast times? or are they limited to around 4 furlongs maybe 5 for the works?
Where are the jockeys going? Are the jockeys trying to press up on the outside? are they willing to sit inside and save ground or is the kickback too harsh to do that?
You try to watch and observe whether the horses with the best setups are winning or at least running competitively. - if they aren't you may not understand what the best setups really are if the track has some bias.


beyond understanding the surface, and hopefully understanding a meaningful bias that will hurt a few favorites, it comes down to the same things that will win money anywhere else.

I have had limited success with Arlington = 1.- beating an occasional weak pletcher fav.(and now he left :(), 2. looking for wire-to-wire runners from keeneland

Del Mar is a major meet

[DeanT]

Does anyone have some interesting stats on first time poly and second time poly for horses coming from dirt?

[toussaud]

something is being missed.

it's not so much the poly track. if you can hanidcap dirt and turf damnit you can handicap poly if you tried hard enough. it's not rocket science.


what gets me is not the surface, but the surfaces on a circuit. meaning, for instance I mainly play the midwest circuit.


I lose about 2 months a year in wagering just beucase of track switches. I'm the type of player, that will not play a horse until he has a race over a surface. I'm not jumping on arlington opening day becuase it's opening day when all the horses have 8 month layoffs and having had a AWS race in a year or so. you aren't handicapping, you are guessing.

then the races that horses that are usually turf horses, gets washed off and goes to AWS.. etc


if all horses ran on all AWS, I could care less. there would be correlation between tracks. but say a midwest horse can start off at turfway, go to oaklawn, then go to churchill, ship to arlington and end the year at keeneland. That's 4 different track surfaces that are all main surfaces

[fmolf]

something is being missed.

it's not so much the poly track. if you can hanidcap dirt and turf damnit you can handicap poly if you tried hard enough. it's not rocket science.


what gets me is not the surface, but the surfaces on a circuit. meaning, for instance I mainly play the midwest circuit.


I lose about 2 months a year in wagering just beucase of track switches. I'm the type of player, that will not play a horse until he has a race over a surface. I'm not jumping on arlington opening day becuase it's opening day when all the horses have 8 month layoffs and having had a AWS race in a year or so. you aren't handicapping, you are guessing.

then the races that horses that are usually turf horses, gets washed off and goes to AWS.. etc


if all horses ran on all AWS, I could care less. there would be correlation between tracks. but say a midwest horse can start off at turfway, go to oaklawn, then go to churchill, ship to arlington and end the year at keeneland. That's 4 different track surfaces that are all main surfaces
their are still enough tracks with good old fashioned dirt on them so i never have to play a poly race! although i pine for action on breeders cup day i will bet other tracks and watch the races only.. i also think the gambling public is speaking loud and clear to tracks with poly in the form of reduced handle and field size!....arlington is thriving though