Belmont Needs To Bring Back 1 1/4M Chute

[Thomas Roulston]

The grossly unfair practice of starting 1 1/4-mile dirt races on the turn at Belmont clearly cost Quality Road the Jockey Club Gold Cup.

If that race had started out of the old chute, QR would have won (and I have no personal axe to grind here as I didn't use either of them).

Doing this in a Grade I is totally unacceptable (and while they're at it, the 1 1/16 M races on the Inner Turf Course at Belmont need to get the bum's rush as well).

[illinoisbred]

Didn't Unbridled win the BC Classic there from post 14?

[PaceAdvantage]

Why is it suddenly a problem now? They've been running 10f races like this at Belmont forever....how are you so sure that QR didn't end up on the better part of that slop-fest based on the unique starting configuration?

Inside certainly wasn't the place to be...

[Imriledup]

Didn't Unbridled win the BC Classic there from post 14?

I think he was a closer who was able to drop over. Pace pressers get hung wide from that spot.

[aaron]

Why is it suddenly a problem now? They've been running 10f races like this at Belmont forever....how are you so sure that QR didn't end up on the better part of that slop-fest based on the unique starting configuration?

Inside certainly wasn't the place to be...
It has always been a disadvantage at Belmont in 11/4 races breaking from the outside. Even if the inside is off,you can get better position at the break.

[Java Gold@TFT]

Please don't ignore the fact that the gate is set to the outside rail and not the inside rail. The outside post is not losing any huge amount of ground in a 7 horse field on Belmont's sweeping turn. If you look at the gate in a traditional sense the horses would be in stalls 1-7 but at 10F at Belmont they are in stalls 5-12. it may appear that any horse may have been able to take advantage of any bias but the truth is that post position #1 is out in the middle of the track.

[SaratogaSteve]

Please don't ignore the fact that the gate is set to the outside rail and not the inside rail. The outside post is not losing any huge amount of ground in a 7 horse field on Belmont's sweeping turn. If you look at the gate in a traditional sense the horses would be in stalls 1-7 but at 10F at Belmont they are in stalls 5-12. it may appear that any horse may have been able to take advantage of any bias but the truth is that post position #1 is out in the middle of the track.

excellent analysis, it is biased similar to the 8.5F start for the ITC there... :ThmbUp:

[ghostyapper]

It's bad enough belmont has 1 turn 9 furlong races now you want them to have a 1 turn 10 furlong one?

Keep it the way it is.

[cj]

The 1 1/4 races certainly start on a stupid part of the track. That said, it is VERY unlikely that cost Quality Road the race. If he couldn't hold off Summer Bird after that pace, he is not going to beat him any time soon.

[46zilzal]

The 1 1/4 races certainly start on a stupid part of the track. That said, it is VERY unlikely that cost Quality Road the race. If he couldn't hold off Summer Bird after that pace, he is not going to beat him any time soon.
but the quagmire had nothing to do with it?

Ever run on that part of the beach that is wet top to bottom. Wheels spin

[cj's dad]

QR showed little heart in the stretch - SB did !!

Last time I checked it was sloppy and it was raining on all parts of the track !!

Advantage ??

NONE !!

[TiznowfaninNY]

I think he was a closer who was able to drop over. Pace pressers get hung wide from that spot.

Tiznow from post 10 and St. Liam from post 13.

[cj]

but the quagmire had nothing to do with it?

Ever run on that part of the beach that is wet top to bottom. Wheels spin

The part of the beach that is wet is the fastest part, although as usual your post has nothing to do with the thread at hand.

The point of the thread was that starting outside was a disadvantage because the race starts on a turn. I don't have time to explain every thread to you. Please try to read a little before spouting off. I'm sure you take your time when considering your Sovereign Award vote or which horse to redboard, so do us all a favor and try it more often.

[Valuist]

Didn't Unbridled win the BC Classic there from post 14?

Yes, but THAT, and winning the Kentucky Derby wasn't enough for him to be named Horse of the Year. That had to go to an unworthy winner in Criminal Type (aptly named).

[Market Mover]

Please don't ignore the fact that the gate is set to the outside rail and not the inside rail. The outside post is not losing any huge amount of ground in a 7 horse field on Belmont's sweeping turn. If you look at the gate in a traditional sense the horses would be in stalls 1-7 but at 10F at Belmont they are in stalls 5-12. it may appear that any horse may have been able to take advantage of any bias but the truth is that post position #1 is out in the middle of the track.


Good call. Basic geometry dictates that any inside post position supposed bias is negated by this setup at Belmont...Cigar also started towards the outside in his 95 BC Classic..

[cj]

Wouldn't the obvious answer be to use the 9f chute and move the finish line down a furlong? I realize the jockeys would probably screw it up, but that is what they do other places when the geometry of the track causes problems.

[Tom]

Please try to read a little before spouting off. I'm sure you take your time when considering your Sovereign Award vote or which horse to redboard, so do us all a favor and try it more often.

Hey zilly, get a database and look it up! :cool:

[Robert Fischer]

The grossly unfair practice of starting 1 1/4-mile dirt races on the turn at Belmont clearly cost Quality Road the Jockey Club Gold Cup.

If that race had started out of the old chute, QR would have won (and I have no personal axe to grind here as I didn't use either of them).

Doing this in a Grade I is totally unacceptable (and while they're at it, the 1 1/16 M races on the Inner Turf Course at Belmont need to get the bum's rush as well).

I love what this thread explores - the effect of quirky track configurations

However I disagree that it should be changed. Yes it hurts the premise that the race is supposedly 100% fair to all post positions. However, it is a (relatively) complex effect and it as an added factor to consider that

everyone isn't even aware that it happens, and-
takes some skill to handicap(gather insight from past races involving this type of situation)
and related to #2 - takes some skill to ANTICIPATE and use in a race that is run at the configuration "today"
any things/factors that call on 1,2,and 3 above I LOVE to see in a race (well to a reasonable level, lets not get carried away with bu!lsh!t)

So in my opinion , I generally like the quirky configuration bias(which is what they are) even though they come at the expense of the sport itself to some degree. I keep a 'book' on the different config bias around the country - anything that is pronounced and doesn't show up in the data or past performances. My stance is that the gambling game is what is important not the fairness of the sport(although any crap that ends up *severly* damaging the sport hurts the gambling game too)

I will get a chance and go over the race again, I only watched the replay once and only to see the outcome , not with a critical eye.

[Robert Fischer]

I will get a chance and go over the race again, I only watched the replay once and only to see the outcome , not with a critical eye.


After a thorough review I can't rule out that the track configuration didn't determine the outcome.



In other words there is a real chance that it did, but I don't see it being clear-cut either way.



Another thing that is evident is how *uckIng WIDE they went.



Obviously Johnny V combined his typical fear/comfortzone with possibly a perceived outside bias - and at the same time he dictates track placement. I think the wide trips (separate from the outside post), also played a role that possibly determined the outcome and made it a little more difficult to draw conclusions from the original premise

[Java Gold@TFT]

Wouldn't the obvious answer be to use the 9f chute and move the finish line down a furlong? I realize the jockeys would probably screw it up, but that is what they do other places when the geometry of the track causes problems.
cj, I have come to expect much more from you ;) If they ran a 10F race out of the 9F chute they would have to move the finish line to somewhere in the clubhouse turn to measure 10F. Sorry if I missed any sarcasm that may relate to Keeneland's moving finish line. That one is moveed UP into the stretch and not placed soemwhere on a turn. (Not sure how serious you were, sorry but some around here don't understand the geometry of tracks.)

[cj]

cj, I have come to expect much more from you ;) If they ran a 10F race out of the 9F chute they would have to move the finish line to somewhere in the clubhouse turn to measure 10F. Sorry if I missed any sarcasm that may relate to Keeneland's moving finish line. That one is moveed UP into the stretch and not placed soemwhere on a turn. (Not sure how serious you were, sorry but some around here don't understand the geometry of tracks.)

I actually thought there was more than a furlong between the finish line and the turn. Now, if you say they can't do the run out on a turn, maybe.

I went and watched a replay of the Belmont this year since I can't find a diagram with dimensions. It takes them 15 seconds to get from the finish line to the turn.

[Java Gold@TFT]

I actually thought there was more than a furlong between the finish line and the turn. Now, if you say they can't do the run out on a turn, maybe.

I went and watched a replay of the Belmont this year since I can't find a diagram with dimensions. It takes them 15 seconds to get from the finish line to the turn.
If you watch the race again closely you will see where the 1/8th pole is and it is right next to the start of the Widener turf course. I'm not saying it is impossible to finish a race at that point - just completely impractable. You HAVE to finish in front of the owners. My eyesight shows the point of finish in a 10F race would be somewhere near the first barns out back. The 10F chute will never come back because it has been developed with barns and the training track that wasn't there before. It's as much a part of history as the one mile chute next to the clubhouse at Saratoga.

[cj]

I'm not saying there aren't reasons not to do it. I'm sure there are smarter people at NYRA that have thought about the dilemma and left it as is.

What I was saying is that the race would not end on the turn. There is clearly more than a furlong from the finish line to the turn to my eye and using a timer on a few old Belmonts backs this up. Granted, there isn't much more, but there is a furlong and a few yards. When I made the initial post, I thought there was more to be honest.

[Marshall Bennett]

Why did they do away with the 1 1/4 chute in the first place ?

[cj]

I would guess they needed the space.

[Java Gold@TFT]

Why did they do away with the 1 1/4 chute in the first place ?

It's part of the training track they put in. Click on the little pic to see the whole thing.


http://s2.largeimagehost.com/TN/XXUtUcs/tn_belmont.jpg (http://s2.largeimagehost.com/img/untilted/XXUtUch/belmont.jpg.html)

[FenceBored]

It's part of the training track they put in. Click on the little pic to see the whole thing.


http://s2.largeimagehost.com/TN/XXUtUcs/tn_belmont.jpg (http://s2.largeimagehost.com/img/untilted/XXUtUch/belmont.jpg.html)

Great picture. It prompted me to go to Google maps to see if you can get a closer look; you can. If they had an interest, they could restore the longer chute. And if you look at the main track, you can even see the 1/16th poles by their shadows. Looks like there is almost a full 3/16ths from the finish line to the turn.

[Marshall Bennett]

Thanks for the picture Java . Explains a lot . :ThmbUp: