Question for Cali players

[WinterTriangle]

I avoid these tracks, mostly because it's a very steep learning curve for somebody at my level (only a few years into racing).

this is the problem I have with synthetics, and why I don't wager those tracks, is because they are not all the same. It's not like a 3rd surface, more like 3rd, 4th, and 5th surfaces. Because Pro Ride at SA is not poly at Woodbine, and is not poly at Turfway, Keeneland, Delmar, Arlington. And then we have tapeta, which is a whole 'nother ball game. and then, there was Hollywood.

(this was so obvious today, watching MTB struggle on it, yet Gitano glided over it). of course, MTB was coming off 10 week layoff, and from what I read, trainer didn't expect MTB to do great here, it was more like a test. But he did fine on woodbine poly, not SA pro ride.

so----Unless I get someone to "tutor" me on the subtle surface differences of woodbine, SA, keeneland, delmar, arlington, I can't even BEGIN to handicap these races.

Whereas, dirt is dirt, and turf is turf. So, I've learned this year to just stick with those, because it makes sense to me.

I might want to tackle plastic at some point, any thoughts on reading?

Again, it's not just that it's plastic. It's that there are so many DIFFERENT forms of it. :confused:

[Robert Fischer]

I avoid these tracks, mostly because it's a very steep learning curve for somebody at my level (only a few years into racing).

this is the problem I have with synthetics, and why I don't wager those tracks, is because they are not all the same. It's not like a 3rd surface, more like 3rd, 4th, and 5th surfaces. Because Pro Ride at SA is not poly at Woodbine, and is not poly at Turfway, Keeneland, Delmar, Arlington. And then we have tapeta, which is a whole 'nother ball game. and then, there was Hollywood.

(this was so obvious today, watching MTB struggle on it, yet Gitano glided over it). of course, MTB was coming off 10 week layoff, and from what I read, trainer didn't expect MTB to do great here, it was more like a test. But he did fine on woodbine poly, not SA pro ride.

so----Unless I get someone to "tutor" me on the subtle surface differences of woodbine, SA, keeneland, delmar, arlington, I can't even BEGIN to handicap these races.

Whereas, dirt is dirt, and turf is turf. So, I've learned this year to just stick with those, because it makes sense to me.

I might want to tackle plastic at some point, any thoughts on reading?

Again, it's not just that it's plastic. It's that there are so many DIFFERENT forms of it. :confused:

It seems as if you may be misinterpreting a wide spectrum of important details. Aside from those details is the more important underlying point = The depth, variance and complexity of this game are part of what make it a superior game of skill. Please don't ask for this game to be simplified.

[Bobzilla]

WT, there appears to me to be some variance between the different brands of engineered surfaces as well. A given track might also seem capricious over the course of a day. I think the same can be said, however, for the surfaces that we collectively refer to as dirt or turf, but arguably less so.

As for Mine That Bird. His trainer admitted to being a little disappointed but did offer the suggestion that maybe it was a race he needed. MTB's rider, IMO, stated what I think was the more likely reason for the disappointing finish and that was MTB isn't the same horse on a synthetic than he is on dirt. Now I know MTB was the Canadien 2yo champ last year having won a series of races including the graded Grey stakes over Woodbine's Polytrack. My best guess would be that he won those races because he was so much the more talented that it didn't matter whether or not he was performing on his most suitable surface. Once a horse earns the right to compete against others of comparable talent, especially in G1 Stakes, I do think that the surface becomes a more important variable to weigh when handicapping. Personally, I'm not expecting much improvement from MTB in the Classic, and I highly suspect that Summer Bird will not perform to his best ability in that race as well. Time shall tell and I'd be happy if I'm proven wrong. The funny thing for me is that if either one ran in an Allowance or G3 over the Pro-Ride and won going away, the conventional wisdom would be that they loved the surface. I think many of the G1 winners we see in Cali, particularly leading up to the TC, are probably dirt horses beating up on other dirt horses who have less tolerance for the surface. I'm not sure about POTN who despite a strong Derby, might have been more of a turf animal, but we've seen turf animals in the past run well on dirt when they first attempt it. Many argue that RA should have ran in the BC because she was proven over the Keeneland Polytrack last fall when she won a preliminary allowance. If memoery serves, I don't think that was a day in which there was much closing. Furthermore, if she were to compete over a synthetic against top European turf stars then her task would be infinitely more difficult then the one she had last October when she defeated a field to which she was undoubtably superior. Not saying she couldn't pull it off, but I do think she would have much to overcome.

[andymays]

My take is a little slanted but in my perfect world we would throw everyone associated with synthetic in the United States in jail. The sentence would be equal to the length of time they've made me suffer through it (except in areas with wet weather)! ;)


The last couple of days at Keenland it seemed to favor speed when the surface was wet but as it dried out through the day yesterday it seemed to help the closers. I was in the TVG contest and used the 40-1 shot in the last to get into contention because of his route/turf to sprint angle and his price. When you look through the PP's down the road it's hard to factor the drying out Poly in unless you keep detailed records for the next time these same horses run.

2009-10-10 15:06:17 Bet* Keeneland 10 Trifecta $0.50 4+8+10/4+8+10/1+3+4+5+8+10 $12.00 $662.05
2009-10-10 15:06:47 Bet Keeneland 10 Superfecta $0.30 4+8+10/4+8+10/3+4+5+8+10/1+3+4+5+8+10 $16.20
2009-10-10 15:07:00 Bet* Keeneland 10 Exacta $2.00 4+8+10 $12.00 $432.60
2009-10-10 15:07:12 Bet* Keeneland 10 Win $5.00 10 $5.00 $205.50
2009-10-10 15:07:20 Bet Keeneland 10 Place $6.00 10 $6.00 $74.40


At Santa Anita we saw Gitano Hernando who had never won a graded race before win the grade 1 Goodwood. That speaks volumes about the quality of the other runners in the race. In my pick 4 I used Monzante and Gitano Hernando to kick it off but I used Monzante in my TVG contest play and that most likely cost me the tournament. Then like an idiot I throw out the winner of the last because I felt he ran too close to the pace to win at Santa Anita. Typical of a Jockey changing a horses style on synthetic surfaces, Talamo took this horse a little further off the pace and won. I was an idiot for not using it. I ended up winning for the day anyway but should have won much more. I thought Zenyatta was vulnerable and was very very wrong.


2009-10-10 15:34:14 Bet* Santa Anita 7 Pick-4 $1.00 6+8/1+4+5/1+5+8+9/2+4+5+6+9 $120.00
2009-10-10 15:36:19 Bet* Santa Anita 7 Pick-3 $1.00 6+8/1+4+5/1+5+8+9+11 $30.00 $324.70
2009-10-10 15:36:21 Bet* Santa Anita 7 Pick-3 $1.00 6+8/1+4+5/1+5+8+9+11 $30.00 $324.70
2009-10-10 15:36:51 Bet* Santa Anita 7 Trifecta $1.00 4+6+8/4+6+8/2+3+4+6+7+8 $24.00 $557.50
2009-10-10 15:37:15 Bet* Santa Anita 7 Superfecta $0.50 4+6+8/4+6+8/2+3+4+6+7+8/2+3+4+6+7+8 $36.00 $1442.75
2009-10-10 15:37:47 Bet* Santa Anita 7 Exacta $8.00 4+6+8 $48.00 $799.20

[bisket]

there are differences in dirt courses as well. this is just something that you have to pay attention to on a horse to horse basis. its always a variable. on certain courses i give more weight to a horse running well over it. one thing i have noticed is horses that run well on delmar run well on santa anita. the hollywood surface is a different animal altogether and form doesn't necessarily transfer from hollywood to either santa anita or del mar.

[Robert Fischer]

I was watching and hoping that Mine That Bird would be Heavily backed. If he were heavily bet, I was going to single col john 1/2/3 in a trifecta without MTB in any slot and without Tiago in any slot, with a group of contenders 1/2/3 respectively.
Then repeat that bet but single Tiago 1/2/3 without MTB and Col john in any of the 1/2/3 slots.

I said this in a simple form on twitter a day or two before.


With Mine That Bird at only 5-2 / 7-2 i scrapped that idea. Even with the KD win , the undeserved hype, and the 24hr webcam promotion there simply wasn't a large enough player population to bet the fan favorite down low enough. Blame it on poor use of mass media, blame it on slots, blame it on Takeout, blame it on "innacurate data" even blame it on synthetics i don't care, but I was hoping for some more "dumb" money.

i wasn't planning to use the awful tres nachotacos 1st or 2nd or informed 1st and it turns out with GH winning , The trifecta turned out to be big enough that I would have won after all, I just wasn't thrilled with the idea of the average combination based on the (lack of) win money on MTB and the exacta probs I was seeing.

Mine that Bird isn't a real good surface barometer because he ran to about his level of talent in the Goodwood (4/5 of those who beat MTB are simply stronger horses, and maybe Chocolate Candy is slightly worse than MTB and CC beat him, but Tiago is clearly better and MTB happened to beat Tiago).
THis is similar to saying Curlin couldn't handle synthetics after Curlin made the biggest move in the 2008 BCC, and although that move was premature and thrust him into the role of prey rather than predator with a lot of stretch run to go. (rather than exclude Rachel , Albaraduh's ride on Curlin in the 2007 Kentucky Derby deserves a LONG look. Was it the intangibles like "seasoning" as was blamed, or does Curlin compete for or win the DERBY outright if Albarduh goes up the rail along with Sedgefield ??)

back on track:
these tracks are all different and Andy Mays (who although he opposes synthetic, is very bright) mentions the phrase "except in areas with wet weather" - dirt, turf (and arguably synth but who's counting) can become EXTREME cases of bias in wet weather. It isn't fair to focus on the sloppy tracks that forward flyers fantasize, or the Turf bog or mires with extreme slow downs in fractional pace, however we can't ignore them either when discussing surface changes.

Even dirt or turf is unique from course to course and even when you think you have perfectly equal track Surface, the "track configuration" can bite u in the asmussen - imagine a race from the chute starting effectively on the turn, using a funny run up (timer)distance, with a short run to the 1st turn, using the downhill turf, with the temp rail out 80 feet, using the alternate finish line position etc.... etc... :eek::confused::faint:

lol there is a lot of detail and complexity.
Not trying to disrespect the original poster. It can be certainly frustrating

[Dan H]

In Chapter Six of Betting Thoroughbreds for the 21st Century, Steve Davidowitz discusses synthetic track handicapping. He recommends close observation of early races to detect a speed or closing bias and equal study of synthetic track maintenance. The former is pretty standard for all surfaces, but the latter was a revelation to me (and could explain track to track irregularities). He also provides insight to nine different synthetic tracks, four in California.

[46zilzal]

The big problem with most, but not all synthrocrap courses, is how to handle shippers. Woodbine tends to have only a small percentage of shippers and then mostly on the green so that one is easier than most in that regard.

It plays very consistently THROUGH any one program. Might be the exception although I hear the same thing about Turfway.

[Imriledup]

I avoid these tracks, mostly because it's a very steep learning curve for somebody at my level (only a few years into racing).

this is the problem I have with synthetics, and why I don't wager those tracks, is because they are not all the same. It's not like a 3rd surface, more like 3rd, 4th, and 5th surfaces. Because Pro Ride at SA is not poly at Woodbine, and is not poly at Turfway, Keeneland, Delmar, Arlington. And then we have tapeta, which is a whole 'nother ball game. and then, there was Hollywood.

(this was so obvious today, watching MTB struggle on it, yet Gitano glided over it). of course, MTB was coming off 10 week layoff, and from what I read, trainer didn't expect MTB to do great here, it was more like a test. But he did fine on woodbine poly, not SA pro ride.

so----Unless I get someone to "tutor" me on the subtle surface differences of woodbine, SA, keeneland, delmar, arlington, I can't even BEGIN to handicap these races.

Whereas, dirt is dirt, and turf is turf. So, I've learned this year to just stick with those, because it makes sense to me.

I might want to tackle plastic at some point, any thoughts on reading?

Again, it's not just that it's plastic. It's that there are so many DIFFERENT forms of it. :confused:

Even though the surfaces are all different in So Cal, i think that they play fairly consistent. In other words, you're not going to lose too many races because a runner was compromised by a bias and you tossed him out because his line looked bad and then he came back to win while bias aided.

A lot of these races have moderate pace scenarios and the biases don't really change all that much. If the pace is too fast, closers will win.

I think that the thing you need to know about plastic in Calif is that on many occasions TRACKS will win races and not horses. For example, in the Pac Classic, if you knew the track, you knew that the winner or runner up was going to be coming 7 wide from far back. This is what made Richard's Kid an amazing longshot, he figured to get that type of trip and had Zenyatta's Rider who's known for being extremely patient on these types. The track won that race more than the horse won it.

I think becoming an expert in So Cal racing is just paying close attention to visuals. Watch the races carefully, watch the gallop outs, watch the head ons and really learn the horses and don't worry so much about 'bias' intracacies. You know, you do the best you can, if a track seems to favor closers, really make some notes and remember this for next time.

What i do with these other places (like Kee and Arl) is to just watch a few races and see if speed dies. If speed dies, than i try and exploit a race where there might be a more than honest pace and try and pounce with my closing crew.

[HUSKER55]

I am finding out that there is a difference in almost any track you want to go to and the reason for the difference is "because there is".

I am probably wrong, but, I think that if you are going to be successful you have to keep tabs of what the track is doing in relation to your method of handicapping, today.

I know there are good sets of pars out there. Dave Schwartz makes a good one. But in the end, I think you have to know the current condition of your track.

JMHO

:)

[kitts]

I've been playing for 50 years, mostly California tracks. If you are convinced that these tracks are unplayable, don't play them. I play them and HOL, DMR and GG have treated me well. SA never has and probably never will. My advice is to ignore the Synthetic track doomsayers and make your own decision. Most obvious to me was that early speed seldom dominates the way it used to, but that is fairly easy to get around. And Steve Davidowitz' advice on Synthetics I found helpful. It is sorta like when Turf racing first started years ago-there were plenty of doomsayers then but here we are with turf racing an accepted fact. I am not of the opinion that fine tuning your 'capping to accomodate Synthetics is going to make a big disfference. The bottom line is if you can make money on Synthetics, go for it. If you cannot, then drop those tracks which is easy to do in this day and age.

[toetoe]

Most obvious to me was that early speed seldom dominates the way it used to, but that is fairly easy to get around.

Can you say more about this, Kitts ? :)

[BetCrazyGirl]

Hi, I'm new here obviously but I've read the forums time to time, anyways, I agree with Husker and Kitts and mainly play the Cali tracks since I live in Cali. It hasn't seemed any worse or better to me in handicapping the surfaces here compare to other tracks/surfaces.

[andymays]

Hi, I'm new here obviously but I've read the forums time to time, anyways, I agree with Husker and Kitts and mainly play the Cali tracks since I live in Cali. It hasn't seemed any worse or better to me in handicapping the surfaces here compare to other tracks/surfaces.


Welcome to the Board! :ThmbUp:

[JeremyJet]

Please don't ask for this game to be simplified.

There is also no reason to make the game more complex than it already is. Synthetics, IMHO, do just that.

Regards,

JeremyJet

[WinterTriangle]

To everyone who responded, thank you so much. I'm really getting a lot out of your replies, explanations, and book materials suggested:ThmbUp: .

To Mr Fischer:

Please don't ask for this game to be simplified.

Oh great master, forgive me for asking a question. Surely you're not serious? Where did I ask anyone to "simplify" anything? I asked for information, you know, ways to learn. Insights.

That's the most ungracious snobby reply I've ever received from anyone when asking to learn something.

Great for racing, huh?

FORUMS ARE ABOUT SHARING.

[Robert Fischer]

That's the most ungracious snobby reply I've ever received from anyone when asking to learn something.

don't let one jerk's reply spoil it for you

I probably did a poor job of reading your post, and I may have assumed it was another synthetic-basher



the fact that you notice differences is a good start. I'd recommend starting separate from any consideration of surface, with the horses you know are good enough to compete, and the horses who you don't know enough about to eliminate.
Then maybe, maybe 1 horse who was good enough to win anyway will have an EXTREME disadvantage in pedigree or style that he can't win on the track.
In a race like the Goodwood, Mine That Bird isn't good enough to win from the first comparison before considering the surface, and he figure to be one of the favorites, so he is the kind of horse you look to toss...

[WinterTriangle]

thank you robert, you're a stand-up guy. :)

Nah, I'm not a synth basher, I guess if I was, I wouldn't be interested in learning it.

I'm one of those "adapt or die" persons. So, I'm determined not to avoid it. I strive to be somewhat flexible, have found that to be a *survival skill*

I can decide not to like it, once I understand it. But not liking it just because I don't understand it ......... naw.

[illinoisbred]

thank you robert, you're a stand-up guy. :)

Nah, I'm not a synth basher, I guess if I was, I wouldn't be interested in learning it.

I'm one of those "adapt or die" persons. So, I'm determined not to avoid it. I strive to be somewhat flexible, have found that to be a *survival skill*

I can decide not to like it, once I understand it. But not liking it just because I don't understand it ......... naw.
excellent philosophy-the sport is dynamic, always changing.

[kitts]

To speak to the question from another loyal horseplayer abour me and early speed-

When I first started having a profitable meet or two, I noticed that the horses that won many races were usually on or near the lead. I then tended to gravitate to this horse. With Synthetic, they no longer dominate like they used to. I am pleased to do well eoungh at GG, DMR, HOL and still do not do well at SA. However, my preferring a presser or a closer at Synthetic tracks seems to help.

[fmolf]

To speak to the question from another loyal horseplayer abour me and early speed-

When I first started having a profitable meet or two, I noticed that the horses that won many races were usually on or near the lead. I then tended to gravitate to this horse. With Synthetic, they no longer dominate like they used to. I am pleased to do well eoungh at GG, DMR, HOL and still do not do well at SA. However, my preferring a presser or a closer at Synthetic tracks seems to help.
when one of the nations leading trainers(Baffert) who is cal. based says and i am paraphrasing now...synthetic tracks make slow horses faster and fast horses slower thats all i need to know about it!Now as trainer after trainer in california is coming out against it i will never bet a dollar on it...i did not last year at the breeders cup and will not this year.I will watch the races but if i wager it will be on my home circuit...belmont.....Mr. Fischer..is it true that in England that only the slowest least classiest nags run over the poly while all the claasy horses run on turf?

[Robert Fischer]

Mr. Fischer..is it true that in England that only the slowest least classiest nags run over the poly while all the claasy horses run on turf?

That is a good point :ThmbUp:

I think it is true and will be true that all things being equal, with any track that has Turf and Synth/Poly the better horses will be raced on turf and the synthetic/poly(i'll just call it poly from here on) will be for the cheaper horses.

The times that it does not happen like that are when there is an Artificial Purse Structure. In England/Europe the poly was added after classy Turf racing was established. There isn't as much "artificial" influence on the purse structure in England. - It's all artificial but the Turf and Poly relationship is natural and efficient to market, save a few bigger races and events such as the new poly Derby win/in...

In a place like California, you have a MAJOR Artificial Purse effect not based on natural efficient markets. - We literally took the established purse structure of Dirt and Dirt Stakes and transfered them to POLY. :eek:
So If a race is for example 300K, or its The SHAM Stakes etc... you have what i'm calling here "artificial purse structure". Even in Cali, and other US racing meets, in cases when the conditions are equal the better turf horses tend to be entered on turf over poly.

I was originally very much against poly tracks AT ALL ever. And I was EXTREMELY bothered by the BC being at poly track ever, and then consecutively :bang::mad:.
Some of the same reasons that cause racing to gravitate to Turf or even Dirt rather than Poly - It is aesthetically poor, it has some differences in bias tendency etc... After I learned to trip handicap a little, I at least got some appreciation for Poly, although I wasn't sold on it.

However the one redeeming quality of poly is that 90% of horses can run their race on it (at least some of the better well maintained versions like Pro-ride, cushion track, arlington etc...) This means that the World's best Dirt and Turf runners can compete vs each other. Provided a sufficiently large "artificial" purse structure(and prestige never hurt), Races like the 09,10 BCClassic , the 2010+ Dubai World Cup and probably one or two more will be created, are the new top-class World Championship caliber races.

[fmolf]

That is a good point :ThmbUp:

I think it is true and will be true that all things being equal, with any track that has Turf and Synth/Poly the better horses will be raced on turf and the synthetic/poly(i'll just call it poly from here on) will be for the cheaper horses.

The times that it does not happen like that are when there is an Artificial Purse Structure. In England/Europe the poly was added after classy Turf racing was established. There isn't as much "artificial" influence on the purse structure in England. - It's all artificial but the Turf and Poly relationship is natural and efficient to market, save a few bigger races and events such as the new poly Derby win/in...

In a place like California, you have a MAJOR Artificial Purse effect not based on natural efficient markets. - We literally took the established purse structure of Dirt and Dirt Stakes and transfered them to POLY. :eek:
So If a race is for example 300K, or its The SHAM Stakes etc... you have what i'm calling here "artificial purse structure". Even in Cali, and other US racing meets, in cases when the conditions are equal the better turf horses tend to be entered on turf over poly.

I was originally very much against poly tracks AT ALL ever. And I was EXTREMELY bothered by the BC being at poly track ever, and then consecutively :bang::mad:.
Some of the same reasons that cause racing to gravitate to Turf or even Dirt rather than Poly - It is aesthetically poor, it has some differences in bias tendency etc... After I learned to trip handicap a little, I at least got some appreciation for Poly, although I wasn't sold on it.

However the one redeeming quality of poly is that 90% of horses can run their race on it (at least some of the better well maintained versions like Pro-ride, cushion track, arlington etc...) This means that the World's best Dirt and Turf runners can compete vs each other. Provided a sufficiently large "artificial" purse structure(and prestige never hurt), Races like the 09,10 BCClassic , the 2010+ Dubai World Cup and probably one or two more will be created, are the new top-class World Championship caliber races.
I agree with you on most of your points except that dirt and turf horses can compete equally.I feel it is already proven that dirt form does not translate to poly form whatsoever.the evidence is in the poor records of horses who run predominantly over the dirt surfaces on the east coast.West coast horses have a much better poly track record because oftheir experience racing and training over the tracks.Also this year i am sensing a greater reluctance from east coast trainers in regard to shipping west to run on poly.

[WinterTriangle]

feel it is already proven that dirt form does not translate to poly form whatsoever.

Well I must be learning something, as I avoided Swift Temper like the plague in the Spinster yesterday ( and I think she went off as the favorite) for just that reason.

[Robert Fischer]

the evidence is in the poor records of horses who run predominantly over the dirt surfaces on the east coast. West coast horses have a much better poly track record because of their experience racing and training over the tracks.
I'd like to see what statistics you are referring to. Anecdotally I haven't found this to be true at all. I know that I made a lot of money in the last Keeneland meet by betting against West Coast shippers. I know one was Stardom Bound, and I think the other was Santa Terrista?. Obviously anecdotal evidence doesn't prove much. Jesus Crist, Einstein went and won the Big Cap, Richard's Kid went out and won the Pacific Classic, and Pioneer of the Nile was sent over and dominated the 3yo season. I don't have stats in front of me but you could say that California was a West Coast state being run East Coasted. California has a few special ones, but on the overall picture the best horses seem to still come from the traditional powerhouses.

I agree with you on most of your points except that dirt and turf horses can compete equally. I feel it is already proven that dirt form does not translate to poly form whatsoever.
Fair enough we can't agree on everything. I want to stress that I look at form by how much running the horse did rather than the result. [/QUOTE]
Also this year i am sensing a greater reluctance from east coast trainers in regard to shipping west to run on poly.
It's really an awkward situation with Jess Jackson, who either has no advisers that have explained to him that Curlin simply ran a BIG race with an inefficient trip vs unforgiving rivals, OR even worse he understands that the trip cost Curlin the chance for a winning try, and would rather have faced the also-rans of the handicap division than take on the worlds best.

[fmolf]

I'd like to see what statistics you are referring to. Anecdotally I haven't found this to be true at all. I know that I made a lot of money in the last Keeneland meet by betting against West Coast shippers. I know one was Stardom Bound, and I think the other was Santa Terrista?. Obviously anecdotal evidence doesn't prove much. Jesus Crist, Einstein went and won the Big Cap, Richard's Kid went out and won the Pacific Classic, and Pioneer of the Nile was sent over and dominated the 3yo season. I don't have stats in front of me but you could say that California was a West Coast state being run East Coasted. California has a few special ones, but on the overall picture the best horses seem to still come from the traditional powerhouses.


Fair enough we can't agree on everything. I want to stress that I look at form by how much running the horse did rather than the result.

It's really an awkward situation with Jess Jackson, who either has no advisers that have explained to him that Curlin simply ran a BIG race with an inefficient trip vs unforgiving rivals, OR even worse he understands that the trip cost Curlin the chance for a winning try, and would rather have faced the also-rans of the handicap division than take on the worlds best.[/QUOTE]I should have clarified myself better . i was talking about the breeders cup where a predominant number of the poly races were won by horses who have prepped over the poly tracks ...I do not keep records about other poly tracks because i do not wager on poly races ever.I am sure with due diligence and proper study of running styles and the like i could do as well on poly as i do now on dirt.But why should I?Theirs enough quality dirt and turf racing to go around.

[the_fat_man]

It's really an awkward situation with Jess Jackson, who either has no advisers that have explained to him that Curlin simply ran a BIG race with an inefficient trip vs unforgiving rivals, OR even worse he understands that the trip cost Curlin the chance for a winning try, and would rather have faced the also-rans of the handicap division than take on the worlds best.

Thought this looked familiar.:rolleyes:

Maybe [Curlin] lost a step but even if the hadn't he wasn't winning with the setup he got. No horse was making one of the earlier moves in that race and holding on to the wire. While the connections came away with a distaste for POLY, for me, it exposed them as just being lazy and ignorant. They obviously didn't do any research into POLY as opposed to dirt setups and sacrificed the horse, expecting him to win with a dirt type run. No reason why, if he were reserved early and came with the last flow, he's not right there at the end. And now we need to pick it up yet again with RA. What's the problem? She has enough speed to be able to sit the absolutely perfect DRAFTING TRIP. Just ask Goldikova. She'll be able to control the race. Suck Up and don't bid till midstretch. And they don't want to run her.

This is almost as bad as the horseplayers who refuse easy money by not playing POLY.

[cj]

It is still completely unfair, and wrong, to expect a horse is able to show the same level of ability on two completely different surfaces. It just doesn't work that way, even before the arrival of rubber.

I'm still not sure how "fair" rubber is. Now, instead of front runners winning more than they might randomly be expected to do, closers do. Hmmm, I thought in a race, speed should be an asset.

I don't buy the whole "the best horse" usually wins...I could make a nearly infinite list of horses that were uncompetitive on dirt and won races on rubber.

I'm not talking about horses that ran well but didn't win because they were compromised by race shape or track biases or kick back or any or mystical power that was inhibiting them. I'm talking about horses that showed little to no talent. It was the surface, period.

This has been going on for years on turf. Nobody sees a horse run a struggling race on turf and assumes they just declined if they were successful on dirt. Why do some insist on doing this with synthetics?

[the_fat_man]

I'm still not sure how "fair" rubber is. Now, instead of front runners winning more than they might randomly be expected to do, closers do. Hmmm, I thought in a race, speed should be an asset.



Speed is definitely an asset in races. But these are MATCH races or TIME TRIALS. (Front running) Speed is NOT an asset in cycling, speed skating, auto racing, etc. Those taking the lead in those types of events generally LOSE because the others DRAFT. This is simple physics. This is different from BIASED TRACKS and KICKBACK. Horses that wire on the turf or poly earn it. They have to be clearly best to overcome the advantage of the drafters. Of course, in racing, not all take advantage of this advantage, as the preferred trip is WIDE not INSIDE/BEHIND. Anyone doubting this need only watch a few route races at WO, for example.

I mean, the whole method is warped. You have horses that would naturally RATE, generally, when put behind horses, and GO, when put outside of them. Rather than training/riding them this way, the preferred method is to put them OUTSIDE of horses, with no regard to ground loss or lack of cover, and then FIGHT THEM because they want to go because they're outside. Talk about sending a confusing message to a horse.

[bisket]

It is still completely unfair, and wrong, to expect a horse is able to show the same level of ability on two completely different surfaces. It just doesn't work that way, even before the arrival of rubber.

I'm still not sure how "fair" rubber is. Now, instead of front runners winning more than they might randomly be expected to do, closers do. Hmmm, I thought in a race, speed should be an asset.

I don't buy the whole "the best horse" usually wins...I could make a nearly infinite list of horses that were uncompetitive on dirt and won races on rubber.

I'm not talking about horses that ran well but didn't win because they were compromised by race shape or track biases or kick back or any or mystical power that was inhibiting them. I'm talking about horses that showed little to no talent. It was the surface, period.

This has been going on for years on turf. Nobody sees a horse run a struggling race on turf and assumes they just declined if they were successful on dirt. Why do some insist on doing this with synthetics?
for someone who uses figures in his handicapping i wonder if you ever realized that curlin ran his CAREER FASTEST RACE AT 1 1/4 MILES IN THE CLASSIC.

[Imriledup]

The only thing JJ cares about or knows is that Curlin was off the board in a horserace.


Figures aside, Curlin hadn't been off the board in too many horse races in his career up until his start on plastic.

Jess just put 2 and 2 together.

Think about how you would feel if you owned Curlin and you didn't get THIRD in the BC Classic. You lost to someone named Tiago for 3rd money.

There is a tremendous passion on owning horses and when you own them, you can't see the forest for the trees. Even the most open minded people rate their own racing stock far above anyone else does, that's just human nature.

If you have a great horse like Curlin and you are actually off the board in a horse race, there's no way you're going to listen to ANYONE who's trying to explain to you that your horse actually ran great.

[cj]

for someone who uses figures in his handicapping i wonder if you ever realized that curlin ran his CAREER FASTEST RACE AT 1 1/4 MILES IN THE CLASSIC.

Not by my figures he didn't, not even close.

[Robert Fischer]

Not by my figures he didn't, not even close.

I hate the term "fastest" except for extremely short sprints or something. its just not the right word to me. Keep in mind this isn't a comment on you - "fast" really got popular with the Beyer terminology.

I think Curlin's BCC was his "best" race of 2008 with the exception of maybe Dubai. "Fastest" would replace "best" the way it is commonly (mis?)used. I never really achieved an accurate insight into that World Cup performance.
Maybe his 07 Breeders Cup was his best ifetime, effort I'm not sure.

[Robert Fischer]

Hey CJ,
do me a favor and quote this for me, in case the_fat_man is playing the ignore list game. I would like him to read this response.
Thanks,
Jay

While I did Not copy your opinion of Curlin or any other race ever, and generally am supremely confident in my opinions, I have no problem compromising with the admission that you most likely mentioned Curlin's premature move first:






1- you recognized that Curlin was probably best in the Kentucky Derby, and While I also saw Curlin's EXCEPTIONAL talent and liked Curlin's early races just as much as you, I picked Street Sense and Hard Spun based on abstractions of data. - my second error there was that I believed the results justified my opinion as correct. 2.5 Years later, I finally realize that had Curlin been sent up with Sedgefield he may well have won the '07 Derby.
2- At the time of the 2008 Breeders Cup Classic I had not yet developed an advanced trip handicapping skill-set.
3- I was proud of myself for keying Navigator based on review of his Euro races and physical appearance in the paddock, as well as saying "treat the foreign shippers in the BCClassic with as much respect as you would in the BCTurf "
While I would never copy your opinion, you are responsible for an important part of my handicapping repertoire. Before this year my handicapping skill set was comprised of reading a form, a sportsman's eye, common sense/logic, obvious popular trip pitfalls, and my big "advanced" thing was looking for quirky track configurations and horses that ran with or against them. I applied this skillset to one focus = overrated fan favorites and watching for them(vulture list) until they drew into a losing spot. My Vulture approach provides for the occasional great play, but isn't designed to produce frequent plays. I could see that I needed to get more insight out of watching the races.

"Real Recognize Real"
I could see that you knew what the hell you were talking about, so I looked into YOUR theories and methodology. It is my opinion that within your best skills, you are one of the best around. That includes all the big names. I set out to master your (relevant)theories and methods and gain a complete understanding. I adopted techniques, and some things I fundamentally disagree with and chose not to incorporate after thoroughly exploring them in context. By no means do your philosophy or techniques encompass my entire handicapping skillset. However, your techniques were the horseplayer's equivalent of an EPIPHANY for my handicapping repertoire.

So No, I am Not out here copying your opinions on Curlin or anything else. On some of the obvious, straightforward things like Curlin's 2008 BCC, we will probably have similar opinions. Hopefully this both clarifies this, prevents the mix up in the future, and also gives you a little credit. I'm not sure there is a whole lot else to say. I'm sure Koufax probably picked up his curveball grip from some journeyman on his way up through the minors... -These types of things are all part of the cycle. You and I haven't really communicated other than some brief interaction a few years ago when i was a total beginner to the game. You have actually given me some good fairly recent advice on intuitive pace. Someone might say it's ironic that you wouldn't notice, let alone be on better terms, with someone learning their trade, but anyone that has a clue of your approach would know that there is nothing ironic about an extreme specialist being in his own world. I could really care less about the ignore function. While it would be cool/interesting to occasionally discuss a more complex race where some of the more subtle things are cause for debate, or issues where we interpret and define shapes/instances like intuitive pace in relation to the quality of the runners - I'm not holding my breath. There really is no need for a social aspect in this game. I don't see myself doing much internet chat once I move on. As it is, it has kind of deteriorated for me into procrastination when i probably should be watching more video, or getting some sleep.


-------------------------------------------------------------

Thought this looked familiar.:rolleyes:

It's really an awkward situation with Jess Jackson, who either has no advisers that have explained to him that Curlin simply ran a BIG race with an inefficient trip vs unforgiving rivals, OR even worse he understands that the trip cost Curlin the chance for a winning try, and would rather have faced the also-rans of the handicap division than take on the worlds best.
Maybe [Curlin] lost a step but even if the hadn't he wasn't winning with the setup he got. No horse was making one of the earlier moves in that race and holding on to the wire. While the connections came away with a distaste for POLY, for me, it exposed them as just being lazy and ignorant. They obviously didn't do any research into POLY as opposed to dirt setups and sacrificed the horse, expecting him to win with a dirt type run. No reason why, if he were reserved early and came with the last flow, he's not right there at the end. And now we need to pick it up yet again with RA. What's the problem? She has enough speed to be able to sit the absolutely perfect DRAFTING TRIP. Just ask Goldikova. She'll be able to control the race. Suck Up and don't bid till midstretch. And they don't want to run her. This is almost as bad as the horseplayers who refuse easy money by not playing POLY.

[rokitman]

Hi, I'm new here obviously but I've read the forums time to time, anyways, I agree with Husker and Kitts and mainly play the Cali tracks since I live in Cali. It hasn't seemed any worse or better to me in handicapping the surfaces here compare to other tracks/surfaces.
Hello there :cool:

[cj]

Hey CJ,
do me a favor and quote this for me, in case the_fat_man is playing the ignore list game. ...

PM him please.

[Robert Fischer]

PM him please.
A quote is about the only way to get a response from Campo, hence the request.

If someone can quote the post #34 i would appreciate it
1. - i would like to clarify and cease any accusations like copying his opinions on anything

2. - i'd like to give him credit for indirectly being a valuable teacher"

[fmolf]

does anyone one know why the santas anita track is much darker than it used to be?What are they doing to it?looks like a dirt track now....lol

[46zilzal]

does anyone one know why the santa anita track is much darker than it used to be?What are they doing to it?looks like a dirt track now....lol
synthetics undergo oxidation as they all age

[Fastracehorse]

I find it very similar to dirt in the sense that if a trainer has a horse ready to fire it's a good bet.

Where poly is different than dirt: speed doesn't always dominate/ wide trips aren't neccessarily a detriment.

Also, turf horses can handle poly.

IMHO,

fffastt

[Show Me the Wire]

does anyone one know why the santas anita track is much darker than it used to be?What are they doing to it?looks like a dirt track now....lol


Lots and lots of rain. The soaking made it tighter.