One for the database guys

[Valuist]

Wondering if any of the database guys have stats on this: are first time starters starting from the rail post in sprints at any sizeable disadvantage relative to first timers in other posts? The talking heads are huge on this, though I've never seen anything to back it up. While it can be argued that all first timers are at a disadvantage compared to experienced rivals, I have to question the talking heads assertion. Just have not seen any proof its true.

[GameTheory]

Wondering if any of the database guys have stats on this: are first time starters starting from the rail post in sprints at any sizeable disadvantage relative to first timers in other posts? The talking heads are huge on this, though I've never seen anything to back it up. While it can be argued that all first timers are at a disadvantage compared to experienced rivals, I have to question the talking heads assertion. Just have not seen any proof its true.Don't have any first hand stats, but Dick Mitchell wrote about this in Commonsense Handicapping, referencing a study by Ambrose. Said that maidens in inside posts faredly poorly.

[cmoore]

I'm no database guy or gal. But I won't hesitate betting a first timer on the rail. Especially if the first timer is bred to run fast early.

[BMeadow]

From the April 1998 issue of Meadow's Racing Monthly:

It’s an article of faith that first-time starters are sometimes intimidated by the rail. But is this true?

Mike Helm, who lists every debut winner in his Pedigree Update News, counted up all the first-time starter winners listed for 1997 in the National Charts Weekly and divided them into two groups--winners from the rail vs. winners from the outermost post.

Out of 962 debuting winners, 127 (13.2%) started from the rail while only 71 (7.4%) started from the outermost post.

We don’t know how many first-time starters drew each position, but it’s reasonable to assume there were just as many who drew the outside as drew the rail.

It appears that in races of 4 or 4 1/2 or 5 furlongs, the rail post is actually an advantage since the race starts closer to the turn (the same is true of many distance races, though there were few first-time winners at routes). In longer sprints, the rail proved no special disadvantage. The outer post, on the other hand, was no bargain.

According to Helm, since speed is such a big factor in these races, it didn’t appear that quick first-time starters on the rail had any particular problems unless there were speed horses in nearby slots. No horse likes to get dirt kicked in his face, but a first-timer on the rail is no more likely to have this happen than any other first-timer.

There seems no statistical evidence that the rail is intimidating; if anything, it might offer an advantage to handicappers since these horses might be underbet due to the false beliefs about the rail’s being a bad place to be.

[sjk]

POST CountOfNAME win pct
1 18932 9.15%
2 18979 9.29%
3 18973 9.19%
4 18803 8.69%
5 18845 8.56%
6 18309 8.48%
7 16552 8.00%
8 13419 7.30%
9 9939 6.94%
10 6825 6.67%
11 3803 5.97%
12 2058 5.25%
13 250 5.20%
14 110 3.64%

Since 2003

I don't do races less than 5 furlongs so I have grabbed some horses as fts that made earlier start at short distance but that should not affect pcts.

[markgoldie]

My long-held understanding is that the innermost and outermost posts are an advantage to very green runners. This is not based on statistics but and understanding of how green horses break from the gate. With little experience, they are much more likely to break a bit sideways than seasoned animals. The inner and outer posts therefore lessen the probability of an early collision since there is only a horse on one side of them. Since their competition may be a bit green as well, there is no chance of the dreaded "pinchback" at the start.

[cj]

All 1sters win at about an 8.0% clip and lose 31 cents per dollar bet.

PP1 1sters win at about an 8.7% clip and lose 33 cents per dollar bet.

[andymays]

All 1sters win at about an 8.0% clip and lose 31 cents per dollar bet.

PP1 1sters win at about an 8.7% clip and lose 33 cents per dollar bet.


Do you have a stat for PP1 1sters on synthetic?

[cj]

Do you have a stat for PP1 1sters on synthetic?

Sure. About the rail, or something else?

[andymays]

Sure. About the rail, or something else?


The rail. I'm guessing it's better on synthetic but that's just a guess. I would think that the break from the gate is not as important on synthetic.

[cj]

Overall on synthetics, 1sters win 7.7% and lose on the 25 cents on the dollar.

From the rail on synthetics, 1sters win 8.4% and lose 25 cents on the dollar.

[andymays]

Overall on synthetics, 1sters win 7.7% and lose on the 25 cents on the dollar.

From the rail on synthetics, 1sters win 8.4% and lose 25 cents on the dollar.


Thanks! :ThmbUp:

[BlueShoe]

While on the subject of first starters,is a there a breakdown between those dubuting in straight maiden races vs. those in maiden claimers?The widespread belief is that firsters in claimers are very bad and always should be avoided,but do the stats confirm this?

[sjk]

For Maiden claimers I get win pct of 7.74% and roi of -28.4%.

For Maiden Special I get win pct of 8.69% and roi of -31.4%.

[BlueShoe]

Interesting,that shoots holes in that one.The claimer firsters win slightly less often,but actually have a bit better return.The only time I will ever play a firster is in a race in which the experienced runners have shown little form,and,most important,the first starter receives heavy betting action,ie,tab the tote.

[classhandicapper]

The rail. I'm guessing it's better on synthetic but that's just a guess. I would think that the break from the gate is not as important on synthetic.

Interesting point.

[46zilzal]

Regression to the mean: the result of a database. Specificity lost in averaging.

[Tom]

Databases do much more than average. Try learning what they do before you make yourself look more foolish than normal.

[cj]

Regression to the mean: the result of a database. Specificity lost in averaging.

Spoken like a person that has no idea how to use one. Of course he thinks he does though.

[46zilzal]

Spoken like a person that has no idea how to use one. Of course he thinks he does though.
I used them one since the 70's and realized specificity is a lost aspect of regression to the mean.

[cj]

Spoken like a person that has no idea how to use one. Of course he thinks he does though.

I used them one since the 70's and realized specificity is a lost aspect of regression to the mean.

I nailed it. Of course I only get $2.10 for that brilliant opinion.

[cmoore]

All 1sters win at about an 8.0% clip and lose 31 cents per dollar bet.

PP1 1sters win at about an 8.7% clip and lose 33 cents per dollar bet.

Your second statement probably applies to all post positions..Give or take a percentage point and a few cents.

Here's are some of my stats when it comes to maidens..

Data is from 8/31/2006 through 8/30/2009

Dirt
11,446 races for 3 year old maidens or older....7.2% won by 1st timers
10,035 races for 2 year old maidens...............25.34% won by 1st timers
( horses are considered 2 years old until May 1st of their 3rd year)

Turf
2,992 races for 3 year old maidens or older.....5.01% won by 1st timers
1,109 races for 2 year old maidens................19.66% won by 1st timers
( horses are considered 2 years old until May 1st of their 3rd year)

[Tom]

Compare THIS thread :

http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=62382

with this Eintstein observation! :lol:

I used them one since the 70's and realized specificity is a lost aspect of regression to the mean.

[fmolf]

Your second statement probably applies to all post positions..Give or take a percentage point and a few cents.

Here's are some of my stats when it comes to maidens..

Data is from 8/31/2006 through 8/30/2009

Dirt
11,446 races for 3 year old maidens or older....7.2% won by 1st timers
10,035 races for 2 year old maidens...............25.34% won by 1st timers
( horses are considered 2 years old until May 1st of their 3rd year)

Turf
2,992 races for 3 year old maidens or older.....5.01% won by 1st timers
1,109 races for 2 year old maidens................19.66% won by 1st timers
( horses are considered 2 years old until May 1st of their 3rd year)
I am going to assume that in 2 yr old races their is also a higher % of firsters by the very nature of the races for these younger horses?

[cmoore]

I am going to assume that in 2 yr old races their is also a higher % of firsters by the very nature of the races for these younger horses?

This data is from breedingwinners.com..I wish I had this guys database. I don't know the ratio between 2 and 3 year old first timers. But I would assume the same thing.

[ranchwest]

Spoken like a person that has no idea how to use one. Of course he thinks he does though.

Of course, if he had a database, it probably wouldn't be normal, either. Lol

Some of these stats aren't useful without IV.

[Valuist]

Thanks to those who contributed; it backs up what I suspected. First timers from the rail do not appear to have any disadvantage relative to first timers in other posts. Yet another handicapping myth gets blown up.

This sounds to me like trainerspeak. Trainers are always so paranoid about the rail......God forbid they'd ever want to save ground.

[bobphilo]

I used them one since the 70's and realized specificity is a lost aspect of regression to the mean.

46, You need some clarification of the terms you are misusing. A database is merely a collection of information, which must first be built in order to illustrate any statistical principle, including regression to the mean. Not only are they NOT contradictory, the former is actually required to prove the latter. Yes, specificity is desirable, but the subjects that satisfy the specific conditions you are testing for can only come from a database.

Bob

[bobphilo]

Thanks to those who contributed; it backs up what I suspected. First timers from the rail do not appear to have any disadvantage relative to first timers in other posts. Yet another handicapping myth gets blown up.

This sounds to me like trainerspeak. Trainers are always so paranoid about the rail......God forbid they'd ever want to save ground.

So true, and something proven every year at the Derby PP draw. Trainers pick extreme outside posts and give away tons of ground to avoid the "dreaded rail" - which every study has shown has one of, if not the highest impact value of all posts for this race.

Bob

[the_fat_man]

Thanks to those who contributed; it backs up what I suspected. First timers from the rail do not appear to have any disadvantage relative to first timers in other posts. Yet another handicapping myth gets blown up.

This sounds to me like trainerspeak. Trainers are always so paranoid about the rail......God forbid they'd ever want to save ground.

I don't understand where you're going with this. If it's just about where a horse breaks, then, clearly, 1st timers, and ALL horses, are at a disadvantage when breaking from the rail -- in particular when they break from a chute. If you watch any headons, you'll note that horses breaking from the rail and from the outside are prone to ducking in/out. Does it happen often? NO. But it happens more than enough times to make it relevant. More horses duckin/out when breaking from the rail/outside than horses breaking from any other post -- as the others have horses to either side.

[Valuist]

First off, the numbers don't bear out what you are saying. Maybe some horses do duck in, but horses drawn midpack don't duck in as much because they just bump into another horse.

The whole point was to see if what the talking heads say is true; that first time starters are intimidated by the rail. The results say they are no more hindered by post than are other posts for first time starters.

[cj]

I don't understand where you're going with this. If it's just about where a horse breaks, then, clearly, 1st timers, and ALL horses, are at a disadvantage when breaking from the rail -- in particular when they break from a chute. If you watch any headons, you'll note that horses breaking from the rail and from the outside are prone to ducking in/out. Does it happen often? NO. But it happens more than enough times to make it relevant. More horses duckin/out when breaking from the rail/outside than horses breaking from any other post -- as the others have horses to either side.

Still, it is just a myth that breaking from the rail is a disadvantage of any kind, and not just for maidens. The statistics overs tons of races prove it is not. Of course there are times where, if a horse breaks poor, it looks bad. But breaking poor from any post is pretty much going to cost any horse.

[bobphilo]

Regression to the mean: the result of a database. Specificity lost in averaging.

Regression to the mean is the principle that values of extreme cases tend to return back to the mean (average). It illustrates the power of the mean and not specificity. If you're concerned with specificity, the principle of regression from the mean is the worst principle to illustrate this.
In any case, unless your getting your data from a crystal ball, a database is the first requirement, whether one is concerned with averages or specifc deviations. This is elementary stats.

[ArlJim78]

I have about 1000 races in my database won by first time starters in dirt sprints. There does not appear to be any disadvantage to the rail.

PP win%
1) 10.0
2) 8.8
3) 9.8
4) 9.6
5) 8.3
6) 7.5

[Fastracehorse]

Interesting,that shoots holes in that one.The claimer firsters win slightly less often,but actually have a bit better return.The only time I will ever play a firster is in a race in which the experienced runners have shown little form,and,most important,the first starter receives heavy betting action,ie,tab the tote.

It takes a while to get used to it but trainers often spot firsters against competetion they think they can beat.

U also have the fresh angle, which is one of the best angles in horse racing, again IMO.

If U are a good handicapper, and play exotics, but don't play firsters, U will notice these are the horses to most often blow up your tickets.

fffastt

[the_fat_man]

Still, it is just a myth that breaking from the rail is a disadvantage of any kind, and not just for maidens. The statistics overs tons of races prove it is not. Of course there are times where, if a horse breaks poor, it looks bad. But breaking poor from any post is pretty much going to cost any horse.

You're supporting this?

The argument, from those who make it, is not necessarily that the horses are breaking from the rail but, rather, that they'll continue inside for the entire race. This fits in with their contention that horses don't like to run inside (or between or behind) other horses. Anyone watching races even recreationally knows that this is all BS, as plenty of horses win inside. It's just LAZY and STUBBORN horsemen who don't want to take the time to teach horses to run the 'right way'. And jockeys who lack the balls, and the strength, to ride them the right way.

Now, how exactly does the data being utilized here confirm or refute this? Did someone watch all those races and is thus able to tell us where these horses were AROUND the track?

Or are we just going with the numbers and considering the position refuted? What exactly is being refuted here? Clearly, the horse on the rail has a better chance of being on the rail the entire race but this certainly doesn't have to be the case.

This is just lazy handicapping.

[cj]

You're supporting this?

...

I don't see where we disagree. There is an old racetrack myth that first timers breaking from the rail are bad bets. I know plenty bettors that won't touch a 1ster from the rail.

Now, for the most part, I think first timers are bad bets regardless of post. But there is certainly no reason to dismiss one just because it draws the rail. That is all I was saying, nothing more, nothing less.