Run ups at Hastings

[banacek]

I have always archived the BRIS Hastings charts. I just noticed that the Equibase result charts list the run-up distances - I just started saving those too, but only fom August 7. The 6f run-up have changed the last couple of years and it has taken some work to adjust my figures. Last weekend the 6f run-up was listed at 96 feet, while the 6.5f was listed at 24 feet.

Too late to get the older charts, but I was wondering if anyone had the Equibase charts from April 18,19, 25, or 26 - almost all races were at 6f. I just wanted to check to see if the 6f run-up distances were the same at the start of the meet - even if someone could just check-probably improper to send them as much as I'd like them. There were 2 or 3 races which messed me up..seemed mistimed or different run-ups..and I need to correct my variants.

Thanks

[cj]

I don't believe the run ups were available in the charts back then. Clearly, the run up has changed from last year for 6f races.

In races where the variant just doesn't make sense, I often would watch the replay and specifically check the run up, and not just at Hastings.

[46zilzal]

The gate placement varies by a few few feet. My camera used to have to be placed in EXACTLY the same spot due to line of sight with the radio transmitter, and I rarely had to vary my camera angles....RARELY. The timer (very old and often malfunctions, lucky the fellow doing the back up timing is EXCELLENT and has been at it for years) would be the more likely culprit.

Initially, when 6 furlongs was only limited to 2 year olds, the gate was placed at the old position. Late last season, when they started to run 6 for older horses, there was a reaction from the trainers that being on the outside was a real disadvantage, so they backed up the gate for older and it has remained there ever since. TIMED as 6 furlongs, but run a bit longer so that the outside horses had a better shot to that very quick run to a tight clubhouse turn.

[banacek]

I did work in the winter to make new pars and variants..especially dealing with adjusting times from 6f to 6.5f races and vice-versa. I was really happy with the adjustments.

But then the 6f races this year seemed different from the past. The numbers started over-rating a horse who ran 6f versus one who ran at 6.5f. It became apparent early on and I've made some on-the-fly adjustments which seem ok, but I'm not totally happy with them.

Could be my adjustments weren't as good as I thought, but it seems apparent something changed from the 6f races last year..I was guessing it was the run-ups.

I had thought they changed the run-ups in fall 2007 to give a longer run..

[cj]

To be a little more specific, the races last year at 6f ran about 17 points slower than those at 6.5f on the Beyer scale. If you deducted 10 points at 6.5f, you added 7 at 6f.

This year, the 6f races are running about 9 points FASTER than the 6.5f races. If you deduct 10 points at 6.5f, you deduct 19 at 6f.

The track is actually providing a great case study to see the effect of run up on pace time and final time, though I'm sure they don't know it.

[sjk]

The 6 furlong races at Hst have been a mystery for a good many years.

[proximity]

The track is actually providing a great case study to see the effect of run up on pace time and final time, though I'm sure they don't know it.

either they don't know or they do know and just don't care. i'm not sure which is worse.

anyhow having consistent runups and getting accurate fractional and final times would be a good starter project for hana/ntra to pursue. i mean if we can't get the races started consistently and timed accurately then what hope is there to lower takeouts, have consistent medication rules from state to state,......?

[banacek]

To be a little more specific, the races last year at 6f ran about 17 points slower than those at 6.5f on the Beyer scale. If you deducted 10 points at 6.5f, you added 7 at 6f.

This year, the 6f races are running about 9 points FASTER than the 6.5f races. If you deduct 10 points at 6.5f, you deduct 19 at 6f.

The track is actually providing a great case study to see the effect of run up on pace time and final time, though I'm sure they don't know it.

Interesting cj..makes sense based on what I've seen. What would you say the time difference would now be between 6f and 6.5f..in other words, how much would you have to add to a 6f time to approximate a 6.5f time. This would depend on the time I guess, but if a horse ran say 112 at 6f, what do you numbers suggest an equivalent 6.5f time would be?

Thanks

[classhandicapper]

To be a little more specific, the races last year at 6f ran about 17 points slower than those at 6.5f on the Beyer scale. If you deducted 10 points at 6.5f, you added 7 at 6f.

This year, the 6f races are running about 9 points FASTER than the 6.5f races. If you deduct 10 points at 6.5f, you deduct 19 at 6f.

The track is actually providing a great case study to see the effect of run up on pace time and final time, though I'm sure they don't know it.

Is Beyer correcting properly?

[andymays]

These were sent to me from Hasings a while back. They were posted in the othre run up thread!


- 6 Furlongs the run up is 96 FT
- 6 1/2 it is 24 Ft
- 1 1/16 Mile it is 20 Ft
- 1 1/8 Mile it is 30 ft

In the other thread we found that Equibase had the most accurate run ups. We also go Churchill downs to admit that they had been giving out the wrong run ups for 6f for God knows how long!

[formula_2002]

These were sent to me from Hasings a while back. They were posted in the othre run up thread!


- 6 Furlongs the run up is 96 FT
- 6 1/2 it is 24 Ft
- 1 1/16 Mile it is 20 Ft
- 1 1/8 Mile it is 30 ft

In the other thread we found that Equibase had the most accurate run ups. We also go Churchill downs to admit that they had been giving out the wrong run ups for 6f for God knows how long!
why is it necessary to have a runup?

[46zilzal]

why is it necessary to have a runup?
Tradition and to let the horse get into stride before they are timed.

Q-horses are timed right out of the gate they are so quick.

[andymays]

why is it necessary to have a runup?


Im sure someone like CJ would know the answer.

If I had to take a wild guess I would say that maybe the reasoning came from a time before they had starting gates. I honestly don't know the real reason.

[macguy]

why is it necessary to have a runup?


It's not always practical to have the starting gate set right in the exact spot that the race timing starts from. This usually has to do with where the gate goes after the horses have started. Start-ups vary from track to track, and distance to distance. Some distances at some tracks have no run up, and some tracks have listed run-ups (I believe) as much as 200ft.

Hst changing the starting gate position for the 6f races was a bit of hot button topic for me. As far as I can see, if you were to read the racing form, there was absolutely NO mention of the new 6f starting gate position. This was just prior to Equibase publishing run up distances. Anyone who simply read the form and followed PPs would of had no clue whatsoever that the location of the gate had been changed.

I personally felt that it was enough of a difference that the races should have been carded at About 6f, but there didn't seem to be too many other people that shared my concern, either that or they weren't aware of the new gate position.

[46zilzal]

I personally felt that it was enough of a difference that the races should have been carded at About 6f, but there didn't seem to be too many other people that shared my concern, either that or they weren't aware of the new gate position.
They were INITIALLY and then that designation somehow disappeared over time

[formula_2002]

PERHAPS THE REASON FOR A RUNUP CAN BE FOUND HERE.

"Throughout the history of horse racing, there have been proposals as to how better to start a race. A commonly used starting system for horse races was devised in the mid nineteenth century by Admiral Rous, a steward of the Jockey Club and public handicapper. A starter, standing alongside the jockeys and horses, dropped his flag to signal the start. An assistant some 100 yards down the course raised a second flag to indicate false starts.[1]
An official starter might be well paid, but his duties were very demanding. Early in the twentieth century, he was supported by perhaps a single assistant who primed the spring-barrier, as well as the clerk of the course. In the present day there are many attendants to steady runners from super-structured barrier stalls.[1]"

[46zilzal]

Before the gate races were often held up for 30 minutes or more with riders, traniers and owner complaining about their horse not being prepared. I have a shot of a race in the great book on Man O'War showing a man with a bull whip behind the group to insure they would all move forward once the barrier was raised.

It used to be an art to "jump" ahead and try to beat the barrier. Some riders were very good at it to.

[andymays]

On a Friday night (1996 I think) at Hollywood Park they ran a turf race without a gate.

It had been raining all day and the turf course was too soft to roll the gate out and in order to run the race without everyone scratching they ran it from a standing start and no starting gate!

[46zilzal]

On a Friday night (1996 I think) at Hollywood Park they ran a turf race without a gate.

It had been raining all day and the turf course was too soft to roll the gate out and in order to run the race without everyone scratching they ran it from a standing start and no starting gate!
Really works with turf since the early fractions don't have the relevance that they do on the main

[cj]

Is Beyer correcting properly?

Usually. ;)

[cj]

Interesting cj..makes sense based on what I've seen. What would you say the time difference would now be between 6f and 6.5f..in other words, how much would you have to add to a 6f time to approximate a 6.5f time. This would depend on the time I guess, but if a horse ran say 112 at 6f, what do you numbers suggest an equivalent 6.5f time would be?

Thanks

The difference in the standard Beyer chart is about 6.54 seconds. I would say that due to the run up, you now have to add about 7.19 seconds to get an equivalent 6.5f time.

[cj]

why is it necessary to have a runup?

There is a very, very simple answer to that question. It is not necessary to have a run up.

[banacek]

The difference in the standard Beyer chart is about 6.54 seconds. I would say that due to the run up, you now have to add about 7.19 seconds to get an equivalent 6.5f time.

Thanks cj, sounds about right. Before they changed ithe run-up it must have been close to 6 seconds!

[cj]

Thanks cj, sounds about right. Before they changed ithe run-up it must have been close to 6 seconds!

And who the hell knows what the run up will be next year?

[banacek]

And who the hell knows what the run up will be next year?

Yeah, they might be interested in knowing that people are actually betting on these races and would appreciate some consistency...or at least let us know about the change. I had to add about a second extra to the 6f as a rough estimate once I saw what was going on this spring.

[46zilzal]

And who the hell knows what the run up will be next year?
For OLDER fields of horses, 6f will be the same.

6.5f NEVER varies more than a foot or two max

[cj]

For OLDER fields of horses, 6f will be the same.

6.5f NEVER varies more than a foot or two max

We'll see about the 6f races. They have been all over the place. I've never said once there was a problem with the 6.5f races.

[banacek]

And who the hell knows what the run up will be next year?

Well, you can say that again, CJ. I just watched opening day..the 6fs had a run up of 24 feet according to Equibase..last year runups 96 feet. (I watched a replay from opening day last year and today to ccompare... just to make sure.)

I just don't know why they have to goof around with things all the time...they might be interested to know that people actually bet on these races!

Well, I'll try to compensate..might turn out to be to my advantage, but it is very frustrating.:mad: