First night of 1m 1/16 at Yonkers

[The Bit]

What does everyone think? Speed is still doing well. It was thought the outside horses would have a better chance of leaving but the drivers ultimately dictate that, and so far they seem hesitant.

The track is either fast tonight or, the change of distance has really messed with the pace/inner fractions of these races.

I'll have a better idea after I take a look at some charts.

All in all some stretch running bombs did win and hit the board but some horses that made sense won on the lead, so it seems it might be a step in the right direction.

[pandy]

I bet two horses tonight, both left the gate and both won, $11 from post 6, $22 from post 7. I would not have bet either one of these horses at the mile distance.

The start up is not as long as it was when they ran 1 and 1/16 races years ago. That's because the stretch is 660 feet, where it used to be 440 feet. So, I believe that they used to start at least 200 feet further back. Horses from posts 7 and 8 could easily get the lead and the first quarters were very fast.

The way it looked tonight, you still need a quick horse and a top gate driver to get the lead, but, the closers have a better chance because of the longer stretch and also the extra sixteenth makes it tougher for a front runner to hang on. Cheap speed won't win as much, but sharp quality speed horses will.

It's only one night but overall it seems much better. But, it's cold now so the ultimate test will be warmer weather. Harness racing is much better now when its cold because it slows the races down and closers have a better chance. The biggest problem is in the summer where most tracks become a steady stream of wire to wire runaway winners at short prices.

[Ray2000]

Change always creates interest...

Total Handle: $667,349 1/20 thu
Total Handle: $526,573 1/21 fri
Total Handle: $639,138 1/22 sat
Total Handle: $598,712 1/24 mon
Total Handle: $694,066 1/25 tue
Total Handle: $708,521 1/29 sat
Total Handle: $717,869 1/31 mon

Total Handle: $844,971 2/3 thur

[pandy]

That's pretty remarkable, especially for a night when Meadowlands raced.

My feeling on the Yonkers handle. Logic would indicate that the handle would go up. There are many crossover players who bet both harness and thoroughbreds. The bulk of these type of players will not bet a harness track where the rail wins over 23% of the time and posts 6, 7, 8 rarely win, and there are a lot of winning favorites. They'll bet the Meadowlands, which is more like a t-bred track.

But with the mile and a sixteenth distance, those players will give Yonkers a try.

The purist harness bettor that likes half mile track racing, some will be turned off by the longer distance. But I don't know if there are many of them left anyway.

Chalk Harness bettors also won't like it, but few if any of them win, so there aren't many of them left either.

Professional harness bettors will like it, and it will most likely lure some of the big harness bettors who normally only bet Meadowlands and Canadian tracks.

You can't please everyone but logic would say that the handle goes up. There's no doubt that the racing was much better last night due to the longer distance.

Another bonus for Yonkers, Meadowlands meets will be short in the future, and they may not even race in the winter. If Gural is in charge, he sounds like he doesn't want too many dates, and the politicians concur.

[Tom]

Dumb question for Pandy....will the Diamond software recognize the new distance?

[pandy]

Good question. The Diamond System, which produces a pace-balanced compounded rating, sort of like velocity ratings, breaks each race down into 1/16 of a mile increments, so it will rate the Yonkers races perfectly.

By the way, www.harnesscharts.com (Harness Eye) has my latest column posted and my columns, which come out every two weeks, will be published on that site.

[The Bit]

Bartlett was one Down the Stretch this morning with Bob Heyden. In summary, he said that it is making it easier to leave from the outside post, which is producing more action early, but that it has caused the middle halfs to have less action and guys aren't moving as early as they used too. I noticed this last night while watching. Guys aren't moving first over on the 2nd trip over the front stretch anymore, they were waiting until the back stretch.

So it seems we have the Woodbine affect. Faster first quarters, but backed down middle halfs and sprints home that make it impossible to come from the outer tier.

Guess we will see how this plays out?

[pandy]

They've were waiting until the backstretch even before the distance switch, that's one of the problems that harness racing has, no one wants to pull against the tough speed and the outside flow is late developing. This is especially bad on half and five eighth tracks.

When they ran this distance years ago, when the stretch was shorter, the outside horses had a much longer run up and the first quarters were so fast that it didn't make any difference if they backed down the middle half. Now they are not starting that far back because of the longer stretch.

I understand Bartlett's point. However, the slower middle half might help the outside flow, not hinder it. So far after two nights it seems to me that the outside flow is reaching the leader more often.

One of the biggest problems that harness racing circa 2011 has is that in many races the leader tries to steal off through the middle-half (bottom the field out) and often does, which leaves the outside flow way back and basically wipes out the chances of the entire second tier.

Years ago the middle-halfs were slower and the races were better because the outside flow could pull right up to the inside flow.

[pandy]

Is down the stretch on radio?

[The Bit]

Yeah Bob Down the Stretch is in Sirius/XM radio Saturday mornings. They do a harness segment with Bob Heyden at 10:15.

I think I'd disagree about the movement. I was watching even closer last night and I just felt like they sat in longer than usual. But it is subjective.

Here some wire to wire numbers:

Thursdays to Thursday and Friday to Friday comparisons because the same classes are carded for the most part.

2.3 - 5
1.20 - 4
1.13 - 6

2.4 - 5
1.28 - 6
1.21 - 3
1.14 - 2

I realize how small the sample size is.

To compare classes on the last two Thurs cards, one at 1m the other at 1 1/16th

Broken down: Date -- 1st Qtr // 3rd Qtr -- Mid. Half -- FQ

FM12500Clm ... 2-3 -- 28 // 128.4 -- 60.4 -- FQ = 29
......................1-20 -- 28.2 // 128 -- 59.4 -- FQ = 30.1
FMNw4k ........ 2-3 -- 27.2 // 127.1 -- 59.4 -- FQ = 29.3
.....................1-20 -- 28 // 127 -- 59 -- FQ = 29.1
FMNw5k ......... 2-3 -- 28.3 // 129.4 -- 61.1 -- FQ = 29.1
......................1-20 -- 28.1 // 127.2 -- 59.1 -- FQ = 28.4
FM15000Clm ... 2-3 -- 27.1 // 125.4 -- 58.3 -- FQ = 28.1
......................1-20 -- 28.3 // 127.4 -- 59.1 -- FQ = 29.2
FMNw8k ........ 2-3 -- 27.3 // 126.3 -- 59 -- FQ = 28.2
.....................1-20 -- 27.2 // 126 -- 58.3 -- FQ = 29
20kClm ......... 2-3 -- 29 // 128.1 -- 59.1 -- FQ = 28.2
....................1-20 -- 28.4 // 127 -- 58.1 -- FQ = 29.1
....................1-20 -- 29.2 // 128 -- 58.3 -- FQ = 29.2
25kClm ......... 2-3 -- 27.2 // 125 -- 57.3 -- FQ = 29
.....................1-20 -- 28.1 // 127 -- 56.4 -- FQ = 28.4

Take that for what you will. It certainly seems that the slower middle halfs are going to produce faster final quarters. Which may get the first over horse into a better position, but if you are 2nd or 3rd over in a 20k claimer you are going to have to come home in 27.4 and 27.3 to win while in the outer tier on the turn. Forget it.

[pandy]

If they went back to the conventional (wood) sulky we wouldn't be having this discussion. The steel bike ruined the outside flow. Imagine if MLB used aluminum bats? It would severely damage the sport, long games that never end, final scores 22-21. Harness racing made the mistake of allowing steel sulkies, and now off-centered bikes, which is ridiculous, and they have paid the price. Harness racing handed over thousands of its regular bettors to the thoroughbred industry on a platter.

If you watch a thoroughbred race now, it looks EXACTLY like it did 30 years ago. If you watch a harness race now, it DOES NOT look like a harness race did years ago when the sport was booming. They changed something that wasn't broken, and you know what happens when you do that.

[The Bit]

I'm too young to remember that era. I didn't become interested in the sport until the late 80's and early 90's, because my uncle owned and trained a few. And at that point I was only 8 to 12 years old so I don't remember much about it during that time frame either.

I commend them for trying to change. However, I feel this may make it worse. I cannot stand the racing at Woodbine which is the direction I feel this may go, especially considering Bartletts comments this morning. The wicked first quarters lead to glacial middle halfs and a sprint home that leaves 6 of the 10 horses with no real shot. Nobody pulls until the turn, nobody quarter moves except for Jody, yada yada yada. I could go on and on but it is terrible racing and they tried to go to 7 furlongs to help but that didn't do much good either.

[pandy]

I don't think this will make it worse, but whether or not it accomplishes what they want, give the outside posts a better chance, remains to be seen. It's quite a bit different than Woodbine because even with the longer run to the first turn, it's still much more difficult to leave at Yonkers than it is at Woodbine.

[Ray2000]

USTA took down the Post Position stats for 2010 and they have not answered my "Ask the USTA".

Here are the numbers I have for Yonkers, Post Stats 12/5/09-12/20/2010

These are not the official numbers, only the ones I recorded.
(There ARE nights when I don't bet :D)


Post 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Starts 2586 2580 2593 2572 2594 2562 2479 1880
Wins 634 457 417 427 408 188 114 72
% Wins 25% 18% 16% 17% 16% 7% 5% 4%

Expect 339 338 340 337 340 335 320 235
% Bias 87% 35% 23% 27% 20% -44% -64% -69%

Bet$ $5172 $5160 $5186 $5144 $5188 $5124 $4958 $3760
Ret'n$ $4611 $4218 $4336 $4216 $5027 $2946 $2337 $1922
ROI% -11% -18% -16% -18% -3%* -43% -53% -49%


We'll see how the outside posts are trending after 500 or so race nights.

* pp 5 slightly distorted by Hurrikane Anthony on Nov 15 $121.00 to win and Ghee's House $103.50 on Apr 24





.

[pandy]

I think post 1 was 24% last year, way too high and as you can see, 25% in your post. Years ago when they went to 1 1/16 I believe that post 1 dropped in half from 24% to 12% but that won't happen now because they are not starting as far back as they did then.

[Postime]

Friday Nite Race #9 Finished in order 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8
This 1 1/16 is going to blow up in there face, quick start charted 1 1/16, thats all it amounts to, just something to screw up everybodys charts.

[The Bit]

Pandy,

Bartlett made mentioned of the prior attempt at this distance and the effect on post position 1. He said something along the lines of that the new starting point is far enough down the stretch that it gives the #1 a fair shot to leave and get position. He alluded to having the horse straightened out before the start. I'm assuming he meant that the prior attempt had the start so close to the turn that the one horse came off the turn and the gates folded before they settled into the straight. I'm pretty sure he wasn't driving there at the time, but perhaps that is what he was told.

Perhaps that is more the reason that pp 1 did so poorly.

[pandy]

Well, in the one mile races, the race starts very close to the turn, and post 1 dominates. When they ran 1 1/16 years ago, the race started 220 feet further back than the 1 1/16 start now, so post 1 got buried and only won around 12%.

He's right, now post 1 does have a fighting chance because the start isn't that far back. But, my prediction is that the win% of post 1 will drop from 24% to somewhere around 17%. Generally speaking, the win percentage of almost every post except 1 and 2 could go up. It's not only easier to leave from the outside that it was at a mile, but its easier to leave from posts 3, 4 and 5.

It may be tough to check the actual stats because they are still going to run stakes races and Series Finals at a mile.

[The Bit]

3rd Q vs. 4th Q tonight at Yonkers ...

R1 - 29 -- 29.3
R2 - 29.4 -- 27.4
R3 - 29.2 -- 28
R4 - 28.3 -- 28.2
R5 - 29 -- 28.2
R6 - 29 -- 28.3
R7 - 29.1 -- 28.2
R8 - 28.3 -- 28.2


Thats all the charts that are available so far, but if the average final quarter is going to be around 28.1 or 28.2, the results are not going to be good. That means a horse 2nd or 3rd over is going to have to come home in 27.4 or 27.3 on a turn behind a horse that is no doubt stalled first over.

[pandy]

The races were very good Saturday night. Three horses from post 6 won from off the pace, and one horse from post 7. A horse coming off a huge closing effort from post 8 wired the field from post 8. No winner drew off and won easily on the front end. 5 favorites won but only two odds-on, and most importantly, the winners, even the longshots, were not that hard to come up with.

This is one of the problems that Yonkers had when they race a mile. When the races start directly in front of the first turn, there are a lot of races with modest paces with the rail horse setting a modest pace. If the rail horse doesn't hang on, often a bizarre longshot that tags along 3rd or 4th along the pylons shoots up the passing lane and wins at 30-1 but there's no way anyone in their right mind could be the horse, he just won because half the field were compromised by their poor post/bad flow. This won't happen that often now.

The last quarters are going to be fast on Saturday nights because the horses are so good. On the weekday cards they will be slower.

[The Bit]

I realize the better horses are going to come faster, but if the 4th quarter is faster than the 2nd or 3rd hasn't that started a whole new problem?

R1 - 29 -- 29.3 / Post 6 3rd over
R2 - 29.4 -- 27.4
R3 - 29.2 -- 28
R4 - 28.3 -- 28.2
R5 - 29 -- 28.2
R6 - 29 -- 28.3
R7 - 29.1 -- 28.2 / Post 6 2nd over
R8 - 28.3 -- 28.2
R9 - 29.2 -- 29.1 / Post 8 but came 1st over, chart says anyway
R10 - 29 -- 29.2 / 26.3 first quarter
R11 - 28.4 -- 28.4 / Post 6 3rd over
R12 - 28.2 -- 28.4 / Post 2 1st over

Look at the outside post winner that came from the outer tier. Three of the four have something in common. Either the final quarter was slower than the 3rd quarter or equal to it ( R9 was .1 quicker but you see the point ). Three of the four were also some of the slowest final quarters of the night. Idealic Life was phenomal to overcome the pace in race 7 and win from post 6. The others needed the pace to collapse or atleast be even. If the pace quickened on the turn, either the horse first over, on the lead, or in the pocket won.

Four Trumps won from post 8, but that race also can be used as evidence of what is going to happen when these horses get that middle half. PSIloveuheartbreaker, an open type horse ( so is Four Trumps, or close ) tries to come first over into the final quarter and never gets close at 2/5 or 3/5. Never even threatened to get close.

Last night you had four wire to wire winners, four first up winner and a pocket sitting winner. 9 of the 12 races were won by the horses that were either 1st, 2nd or 3rd ( they are charting Orr as being 4th but first up, I don't remember him being first up ).

Atleast we have something to talk about.

[harness2008]

I have tracked the 3 racing nights at the 1 1/16 distance and the previous 5 racing nights at Yonkers run at a mile for comparison purposes. I have normalized the running times to the USTA Yonkers equivalent of 2:00 and normalized the last fraction in the 1 1/16 races to its 1/4 mile equivalent. Feel free to disagree with me if you feel I've missed something.

Here is the breakdown of each quarter, 1 1/16 races compared to mile races.

1st Q - +.6683 seconds
2nd Q - -.085 seconds
3rd Q - -.5833 seconds
4th Q - 0 seconds

The comparison with Woodbine is only half correct. There is a much madder dash in the opening panel as everyone has alluded to, then the race settles down with a slightly slower than average 2nd Q. The 3rd fraction is where the races slow down even further helping the frontrunners of course but also horses in the outer flow since a move in this area is normally into a much slower than average fraction. However I've discovered that so far the last panel is merely average with par which gives any horse who is relatively close a chance at the prize. The frontrunners are indeed assisted with a pedestrian middle half but the outside flow still has its chance as long as they can get into a contending position entering the last fraction.

[The Bit]

The final quarters look close to par, without opening up the data I have to compare. Isn't this further proof of the problem? You now have front runners that get a breather prior to coming home in what is par for the class. And, in my opinion and from what Bartlett said on the radio, these guys are waiting to move even longer, which means they are moving into that par paced 4th quarter instead of already being in contention.

I keep an Excel sheet for par times, and here is what I have for 40 and 50 claimers during the cold weather months prior to this distance change:

The 3rd quarter is faster than the 4th, because guys moved during the 3rd quarter forcing the pace setter to go. Now, they are not moving which has slowed that 3rd quarter down. This pattern is/was prevalent pretty much without exception.

40kClm 28 57.3 29.3 126 28.2 154.4 28.4

50kClm 27.4 57.1 29.2 125.1 28 154 28.4

Good discussion none the less.

[pandy]

This change isn't going to make it perfect. The best way to run races at Yonkers would be go move the start back even further, like they did at 1 1/16 years ago, and leave the finish line where it is.

But so far from what I've seen this a big improvement over the one mile races with the race starting right in front of the first turn.

If you haven't watched any of the one mile races, go back to when it was warmer, before the frigid weather, and watch some replays. Over the past few years at Yonkers, there have been streaks where post 8 didn't win a race in several weeks and nights where all 12 races were won by posts 1 and 2. I've written about it in my columns.

So far after 3 nights, posts 6, 7, 8 have accounted for 11 wins in 36 (31%) races, which I believe is double what their normal percentage would be. The big test however will be when it gets warm.

I may interview Bartlett myself, I'm curious if the drivers realize what a good race is to the bettors, or if they are more concerned with their own driving style. Some of the drivers may like the idea that they could gun their horse through a fast third quarter to "put some distance" between them and the field, but that actually ruins the race from both a betting and fan perspective (unless you bet the leader) because the outside flow struggles to reach.

[The Bit]

Bob,

I think we can agree on this ...

If the drivers would choose to move into that 3rd quarter, this change would prove beneficial, but no one is pulling out on the front stretch the first time around and not many more are pulling on the 3rd turn. So instead of advancing into a 29.x or 30.x quarter, they are than trying to advance into a sub 29 or 28 4th quarter.

And you have to be an open horse dropping in against claimers, to pull that off. See Idealic Life.

[pandy]

They weren't pulling early when the races were at a mile either because the leader got away with a soft first quarter. To me it seems like overall the outside flow has been much better this week.

[botster]

The racing has to be better, attracting some new fans, and help bettors with bigger parimutuals.There is no reason to believe it won't be.The majority of horsemen are positive that this switch will help their horses stay sounder and help their stables earnings.

Just because the switch was made to the new distance, one cannot expect the overnights to be competed as if amateaur drivers were competing in the races.Guys making ill timed moves just for the sake of trying to burrie the front end speed and turning the racing into circus events.

"It's all good at the Hilltop".

[pandy]

That's what happens at Harrington in Delaware, 1/2 miler. It's inside speed favoring so the drivers get into cut throat speed duels trying to get the lead, usually the rail horse and an outside leaver and it screws up the entire race.

[The Bit]

2nd race tonight ... 27.1 followed by 57.3 and 126.4 ...

Wire to wire winner, no flow, first over horse is all out to never in get close. Horses that never left the cones run 1,2, and 4. Same old racing just made worse.

I hope you guys are right!

[The Bit]

3rd race ... 28.1 -- 58.3 -- 127.4 ...

Better flow, horse 2nd over won.

[The Bit]

7 of 12 races were wire to wire winners tonight. 10 of 12 winners never left the pylons. The two outer tier winners came 2nd over into paces that had collapsed. We had 2nd quarters of 30.3, 30.3, 31.2, 31.3 on the pace and a 3rd quarter of 30.1 on the pace. And I'm not talking about maidens or non-winners of 2 extended, these are 20 claimers getting those quarters. The non-winners of 5k trot went 30.3 in the 2nd quarter and the leader went wire to wire. How do you think a decent 20 claimers is going to do after getting a 31 and change breather on the front?

Any change of tune?

[pandy]

Not every card at any track is going to produce prices. If they ran the races at a mile last night, it certainly wouldn't have been any better.

By the way, that radio interview with Bartlett is mentioned in the latest Harness Update newsletter www.harnessracingupdate.com. The headline reads, "Bartlett gives thumps up to Yonkers distance races."

[The Bit]

Who said anything about prices? 5 of the 12 winners last night paid double digits?

I need more evidence than an opinion just to decide that this change has worked. Other than your PP stat, which is the one area this change is going to help, we have nothing else to go on yet. I can pull up the charts and show wire to wire winners, running lines of the winners and losers, internal fractions etc. I support the change, I want the racing to be better which will make the betting better, but so far I can't lie to myself and say I should invest more of my money there because this changed helped. It hasn't unless you like a horse from the outside post that is being driven by Gingras, Brennan, Bartlett, Holland or Pantaleono and can leave.

Botster says "it has to be better". Why? What so far has happened to support that theory? Nothing has. And to claim it is creating new fans is at the very least questionable, have you read some of the comments on blogs and web sites about this change? Letter to the editor on Harness Racing Update? USTA has a poll up right now and the majority of people don't support the change in distance, so that claim is also unsubstantiated. You also claimed that the newer race bikes haven't changed the pace of the racing based upon two efforts by conditioned horse named Tom Paine, disregarding the fact he had two entirely different trips and in the 2nd one brushed to the front on a night when speed was terrible.

This change is going to help the outside pp's get position, if they choose to. However, in my opinion, the racing has not improved one bit outside of the initial quarter. It has regressed.

Bob,

I listened to the interview, he was happy with the change because he felt like he could get into position. Did I say otherwise somewhere? However, in the interview, he also says things that support what I am saying here. He flat out said they aren't and won't be moving as early.

I want it to work. I'm still betting on the racing. To say whether it has or has not is premature at this point, but the evidence so far is showing that while the outside post have a better chance of getting into the race early, the rest of the race stinks and may make things harder than ever for the outer flow. Is that an improvement? Seems like a sideway move at best.

[The Bit]

Bob,

You have mentioned many times and in many places before than you are a pace handicapper. Looking at the race within the race and internal fractions and how they affect performances etc.

If that is the case, than conventional pace wisdom tells ya that if a horse gets a soft early and middle pace, that is makes it very difficult for horses coming from behind. You've written it!

That being said, you can't argue that 30 and 31 and change 2nd and 3rd quarters are doing anything but giving the front runners and horses on the pylons behind them an advantage right?

[CHeCK EyE]

Does anybody think that with Yonkers switching to 1 1/16, that i could benefit the Meadowlands? I suppose Yonkers would have to keep the 1 1/16 mile racing, but for the first Saturday of the new distance, there were a handful of Yonkers horses that were entered over at the Meadowlands. Granted one would have to wait and see if they continue to race at the Meadowlands or if they just wanted to try or what have you. Just a thought though...

[The Bit]

Who knows. Bostser claims above that the majority of horsemen like the idea and think that it will keep horses sounder. I haven't seen that written anywhere or said by anyone in public, so who knows.

Bob Heyden was doing the interviewing of Bartlett last Saturday and he didn't have anything good to say about the change in distance. And considering he does a lot of the paddock reporting, winner circle reporting etc. at the Meadowlands, I'm thinking he may have his finger on the pulse when it comes to the opinion of the horsemen.

[harness2008]

This new racing distance is still in its infancy and I don't really think based on what I've seen that the drivers have adapted to how to actually attack the race from a tactical point of view. On paper it appears that the added distance in the last fraction would benefit the closers but that is perception and not reality.

The opening quarter is indeed faster with the 2nd and final fractions being on the average side. It's the 3rd quarter where the drivers needs to make a contending move to put themseves in a decent position for the drive and to also put some pace pressure on the frontrunners. This is where I believe these mile 1/16 contests are won and lost.

As long as the frontrunner has no pressure dawdling thru a pedestrian middle half, he's home free. A little 3rd quarter pressure and things change a bit. However the drivers are generally not moving during the slowest fraction of the race allowing the leader an additional breather and by the time they reach the stretch it's over.

Give the drivers more time to adjust than just 5 racing cards and the racing should get more contentious once they realize that conventional wisdom is not working here. I wouldn't rush to judgement one way or another just yet.

[Ray2000]

I'd be interested to know if they train differently to account for the added 1/16.
Do they go their training mile at 1-1/16? or is the distance too small to matter.
Any trainers here care to comment?

[The Bit]

On paper it appears that the added distance in the last fraction would benefit the closers but that is perception and not reality..

Agree. Reality so far is speed is doing just as well if not better.

The opening quarter is indeed faster with the 2nd and final fractions being on the average side. It's the 3rd quarter where the drivers needs to make a contending move to put themseves in a decent position for the drive and to also put some pace pressure on the frontrunners.

Agreed again. The opening quarter seems to be .3 to one full second faster on average. Now, my data shows that the 2nd and 3rd quarters have been slower than average. The 2nd most drastic than the 3rd. I have also said already in this thread that the outer flow would be better off moving earlier, moving into that 3rd quarter rather than waiting until the 4th quarter when the pace picks up as they are now.


As long as the frontrunner has no pressure dawdling thru a pedestrian middle half, he's home free. A little 3rd quarter pressure and things change a bit. However the drivers are generally not moving during the slowest fraction of the race allowing the leader an additional breather and by the time they reach the stretch it's over..

First part is basic pace handicapping. Second part is the problem I have with the results so far. They are not moving. They aren't even moving as early as they used to at a mile, Bartlett said it in his radio interview and I have seen in night in and night out with my own eyes. The leaders are not challenged until the 4th quarter when all they have to do is sprint a quarter mile. Too late.

Give the drivers more time to adjust than just 5 racing cards and the racing should get more contentious once they realize that conventional wisdom is not working here. I wouldn't rush to judgement one way or another just yet.

It is certainly premature to judge either way. But, so far, the evidence is showing that while more outside post may win, the last 3/4's of the race are gonna be decided by the 1/2 mark and the outer flow is going to be worse than ever. It was about 15 - 20 degrees last night and 7 horses still won wire to wire.

[botster]

Not every card at any track is going to produce prices. If they ran the races at a mile last night, it certainly wouldn't have been any better.

By the way, that radio interview with Bartlett is mentioned in the latest Harness Update newsletter www.harnessracingupdate.com (http://www.harnessracingupdate.com). The headline reads, "Bartlett gives thumps up to Yonkers distance races."

This about sums it up.Why is BIT trying to debate this issue? Their is nothing more detrimental in the sport right now excluding the regulation of preracing horses that has hurt the game more than 1/2 mile tracks racing at a mile.Boring, prehistoric lineup finishes with poor favorites hitting the board at alarming percentages.I ask again how in the world can this be as bad or worse?

You don't have to be Einstien to figure out this will keep horses sounder either.What do you think was happening when these already sore, hurting horses, hit that first turn full throttle right off the gate? Drivers were openly concerned about their safety with that short run into the first turn...that is a fact!

The mile and sixteenth racing was better the first time it was here.The racing was better, because the payoffs were better.Closers overall do better at this distance and that helps everyone, but the "Gas Guys" and constant chalk players.

[botster]

Who said anything about prices? 5 of the 12 winners last night paid double digits?

Botster says "it has to be better". Why? What so far has happened to support that theory? Nothing has. And to claim it is creating new fans is at the very least questionable, have you read some of the comments on blogs and web sites about this change? Letter to the editor on Harness Racing Update? USTA has a poll up right now and the majority of people don't support the change in distance, so that claim is also unsubstantiated. You also claimed that the newer race bikes haven't changed the pace of the racing based upon two efforts by conditioned horse named Tom Paine, disregarding the fact he had two entirely different trips and in the 2nd one brushed to the front on a night when speed was terrible.



Ultimitely prices are what makes the game interesting.Do you think any average spectator that falls upon a harness race while taking a casino losing streak break cares to see a "merrygoround" $15.00 exacta payout?

You seem to be intelligent, so I do say this with the utmost respect.You seem to be one of these guys that just like to argue for the sake of arguing.Bikes have changed the speed of the game, but not two, three, six, or eight seconds faster.My point with TOM PAINE was just that... something of interest reguarding that debate.If you read my post closely you would have seen I indicated the two different trips with both bikes.

Most horseman that I have discussed this topic with agree with me.That should mean something in a debate...NO? Go to your local track and take a survey 50 horseman, or so.Ask them the most significant factor on what has made the times faster since the late 70's.Breeding and preracing will be 1 AND 2.

[The Bit]

This about sums it up.Why is BIT trying to debate this issue? .

I guess because I'm so foolish that I use actual charts and data along with my own two eyes to form the basis for my opinions. Stupid me!

Their is nothing more detrimental in the sport right now excluding the regulation of preracing horses that has hurt the game more than 1/2 mile tracks racing at a mile.Boring, prehistoric lineup finishes with poor favorites hitting the board at alarming percentages.I ask again how in the world can this be as bad or worse?

We agree about the first part, but until you actually show me how things are better, you have no argument. All you have is another unsubstantiated opinion.

The racing was better, because the payoffs were better.Closers overall do better at this distance and that helps everyone, but the "Gas Guys" and constant chalk players.

But this isn't the case so far and to say otherwise just shows that you aren't taking into consideration what is actual happening on the racetrack. The payoffs have been better not because the closers and outer flow are more involved, it is because the outside post can leave and get a decent spot, which is something I have said has changed. This has been positive. However, the racing is worse, the outer tier has no chance and closers are not doing better and they may be doing worse. The internal fractions are handing the race over to the front runners and those behind him on the pylons.

Show me some evidence to support this opinion of yours. Show me a night in which the outer flow is live and we have a bunch of middle/back pack winners and horses winning from 2nd and 3rd over. Because as it stands now, you have no basis for you argument and just seem kind of uninformed.

You argument that closers should do better at a 1 1/16 in theory is correct. However, it is the same amateur concept that most beginning handicappers apply to closing thoroughbred sprinters that stretch out to a mile or longer. It is wrong.

And since your brought up Einstein, I guess you still think that the change is racebikes hasn't affected the times and pace of races? Just sayin! lol

[The Bit]

Ultimitely prices are what makes the game interesting.Do you think any average spectator that falls upon a harness race while taking a casino losing streak break cares to see a "merrygoround" $15.00 exacta payout?

You seem to be intelligent, so I do say this with the utmost respect.You seem to be one of these guys that just like to argue for the sake of arguing.Bikes have changed the speed of the game, but not two, three, six, or eight seconds faster.My point with TOM PAINE was just that... something of interest reguarding that debate.If you read my post closely you would have seen I indicated the two different trips with both bikes.

Most horseman that I have discussed this topic with agree with me.That should mean something in a debate...NO? Go to your local track and take a survey 50 horseman, or so.Ask them the most significant factor on what has made the times faster since the late 70's.Breeding and preracing will be 1 AND 2.

I support this change so I'm certainly not arguing for the sake of argument. I'm arguing because nothing has shown this distance change to be better. Bottom line. I admit that it has made it easier for outside horses to leave, which has lead to more prices from those post. So, in that regard, the change has been better. However, that doesn't mean the racing and the actual race is any better and by no means does it mean the closers a fairing any better. I can argue two sides right? I want the racing to be better. I want the outer flow to be involved so it isn't a follow the leader workout. However, I don't have to fool myself into believing that something is what it isn't whether or not I want it to be.

I don't really care about the race bikes and nor do I have an opinion on how much the bike has changed the racing. I do know, if you go from wood to metal to plastic wheels etc. things are going to go faster. My point to your argument was to draw a conclusion based upon one horse and two trips is ridiculous. The bike has changed the racing, tough to measure how much? You want to poll the horseman, how about asking the drivers if the bikes don't matter that much how come they are spending $1000's on the latest and greatest? Fair question right?

[botster]

I guess because I'm so foolish that I use actual charts and data along with my own two eyes to form the basis for my opinions. Stupid me!



We agree about the first part, but until you actually show me how things are better, you have no argument. All you have is another unsubstantiated opinion.



But this isn't the case so far and to say otherwise just shows that you aren't taking into consideration what is actual happening on the racetrack. The payoffs have been better not because the closers and outer flow are more involved, it is because the outside post can leave and get a decent spot, which is something I have said has changed. This has been positive. However, the racing is worse, the outer tier has no chance and closers are not doing better and they may be doing worse. The internal fractions are handing the race over to the front runners and those behind him on the pylons.

Show me some evidence to support this opinion of yours. Show me a night in which the outer flow is live and we have a bunch of middle/back pack winners and horses winning from 2nd and 3rd over. Because as it stands now, you have no basis for you argument and just seem kind of uninformed.

You argument that closers should do better at a 1 1/16 in theory is correct. However, it is the same amateur concept that most beginning handicappers apply to closing thoroughbred sprinters that stretch out to a mile or longer. It is wrong.

And since your brought up Einstein, I guess you still think that the change is racebikes hasn't affected the times and pace of races? Just sayin! lol

I respect what you are saying SO FAR with the distance change.

Your right... the better prices have come, because of the early speed of better price horses getting position (but what is wrong with that?).This game today, because of the breed and the preracing has become very speed favoring and that will not level off until they regulate the preracing.The days of Jimmy Doherty closing from last to first at the M1 are long gone.The bike issue was already discussed in my other post.
Peace!

[The Bit]

Your right... the better prices have come, because of the early speed of better price horses getting position (but what is wrong with that?).


Nothing is wrong with that? I haven't said anything is wrong with that. That is a positive change associated with the distance change. But closers aren't doing any better and the last 3/4 of the race stink.

[The Bit]

Now that I'm putting the charts into Excel ...

7 more wire to wire winners Friday night. Only two winners in the outer flow and they both came first over. 10 of 12 winners never left the pylons and 7 of them won gate to wire. You guys need to quit kidding yourselves.

[botster]

Now that I'm putting the charts into Excel ...

7 more wire to wire winners Friday night. Only two winners in the outer flow and they both came first over. 10 of 12 winners never left the pylons and 7 of them won gate to wire. You guys need to quit kidding yourselves.

Bit... I hope you give a little more time for an accurate conclusion than a few weeks on real life experiences.Bob and myself have witnessed these distance races here at Yonkers in the past and closers were doing better.The only person here being kidded is yourself.You will see, that the lower class races will produce better prices, and more off the pace winners.

Friday and Saturdays will produce many front speed and pocket winners.The class and speed favoring bias of today is just too strong.

It is my opinion that the higher class races should almost never be wagered on for this reason. 25k claimers, or those that race for comparible condition prices, is where I do most of my wagering.Trotting events are more favorable to play in my own opinion.Cheaper horses are more inconsistant and hurt the general public more often.

[The Bit]

Bit... I hope you give a little more time for an accurate conclusion than a few weeks on real life experiences.Bob and myself have witnessed these distance races here at Yonkers in the past and closers were doing better.The only person here being kidded is yourself.You will see, that the lower class races will produce better prices, and more off the pace winners.


lol

You are killing me! Yesterday afternoon I was right with regards to the prices and the closers. And you claimed that until the breeding and preracing is controlled that speed will rule.

Tonight you change your tune and it is the class of the race that is the problem and I'm kidding myself. Huh?

So anything higher than 25k claimers shouldn't be wagered on and the lower class horses hurt the public and are too inconsistent. Huh? That leaves ya about 4 classes ( using pars which I'm sure you are armed with, that leaves ya 20k, 25k and Nw5kl6, Nw6kL6 and Nw8kL6 ) to bet on and about 10 trot races a week?

What is going to change moving forward botster that is going to make the closers fair better? The class of the racing isn't changing. It has been the same for quite a while and if anything has gotten better. They are now writing the "have to have been 1st, 2nd or 3rd in last x starts" into the 10 claimers. So now even the 10 claimers aren't your usual 10 claimers. So what makes you think things are going to change? Bob has said time and time again the weather makes the racing better. Well, it was about 15 degrees one night last week and that couldn't even help. The time is running on out the weather. So, other than your hopes and dreams, what makes you think things will change? Just your opinion right?

Most people want to bet on higher class racing but it is your opinion they shouldn't. Most people can't stand trotters because they break too often but you think they make great plays. I'm sure you like betting 2 year olds too? Your opinions seem to be in the minority most of the time.

It is my opinion that the higher class races should almost never be wagered on for this reason. .Cheaper horses are more inconsistant and hurt the general public more often.

This is a gem! :bang:

[pandy]

One thing that has really changed with the new distance is that you don''t see those weird longshots paying $50 from post 3 that get lucky and win because no one left and the rail horse couldn't last. The longshots that have been winning were hittable.

[rowboat]

You should have checked previous handles. 11-15 829,968 12-4 693323 11-29 826950 12-3 748972 11- 13 909970. 12-4 751729
yonkers was just coming off the holiday break.They had a million dollar handle the night of champions. April 14th an interview with derrick giwner he said yonkers approached 100000 per race.this week was crap for handle.The renewal of a new experiment is waiting grim reaper

[Ray2000]

I have no way to get the handles from last year. Whether this "week before-week after" means anything in the long term is questionable but here are the handles for the first 8 days of 1 1/16 mile

Total Handle: $667349 1/20 thu
Total Handle: $526573 1/21 fri
Total Handle: $639138 1/22 sat
Total Handle: $598712 1/24 mon
Total Handle: $694066 1/25 tue
Total Handle: $708521 1/29 sat
Total Handle: $717869 1/31 mon....Ave $650318

Total Handle: $844971 2/3 thur
Total Handle: $704750 2/4 fri
Total Handle: $714415 2/5 sat
Total Handle: $686465 2/7 mon
Total Handle: $581161 2/8 tues
Total Handle: $532124 2/10 thur
Total Handle: $670315 2/11 fri
Total Handle: $680781 2/12 sat ...Ave $676872
ave without 1st night attraction..... $652858


This means even less with such a small sample..


Last Year for ~2600 races
Post 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Win% 25% 18% 16% 17% 16% 7% 5% 4%
ROI% -11% -18% -16% -18% -3% -43% -53% -49%


8 days in Feb 2011 at 1-1/16
Post 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Starts 96 96 96 96 96 96 94 81
Wins 16 16 9 21 12 14 5 3
Win% 17% 17% 9% 22% 13% 15% 5% 4%
ROI% -42% -31% -56% -7% -24% -18% -62% -24%

[Ray2000]

The Bit,

I agree with Botster on this one.



It is my opinion that the higher class races should almost never be wagered on for this reason. 25k claimers, or those that race for comparible condition prices, is where I do most of my wagering.Trotting events are more favorable to play in my own opinion.Cheaper horses are more inconsistant and hurt the general public more often.


The high class races are too easy for the general public, they get hurt on the cheaper class and that's where you find the best overlays.

Attached is a graph of the running balance of 160,000 race picks by Ray's Robot sorted on TrackMaster class. There is a definite break point on Trifectas (blue line), Exactas (green), and Win (black) at the 77 - 80 class level.



.

[lamboguy]

The Bit,

I agree with Botster on this one.





The high class races are too easy for the general public, they get hurt on the cheaper class and that's where you find the best overlays.

Attached is a graph of the running balance of 160,000 race picks by Ray's Robot sorted on TrackMaster class. There is a definite break point on Trifectas (blue line), Exactas (green), and Win (black) at the 77 - 80 class level.



.nice graph. you guys are pretty sharp. now i know why i lose all the time!

[The Bit]

One thing that has really changed with the new distance is that you don''t see those weird longshots paying $50 from post 3 that get lucky and win because no one left and the rail horse couldn't last. The longshots that have been winning were hittable.

This I agree with, especially longer prices from the outer post. If you take into consideration intent, early speed and the driver, you can come up with the horses that may leave at more than fair value.

[The Bit]

This means even less with such a small sample..


Last Year for ~2600 races
Post 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Win% 25% 18% 16% 17% 16% 7% 5% 4%
ROI% -11% -18% -16% -18% -3% -43% -53% -49%


8 days in Feb 2011 at 1-1/16
Post 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Starts 96 96 96 96 96 96 94 81
Wins 16 16 9 21 12 14 5 3
Win% 17% 17% 9% 22% 13% 15% 5% 4%
ROI% -42% -31% -56% -7% -24% -18% -62% -24%



This is not what I thought. I thought the outside two post would have been helped somewhat, but so far they aren't. If you had asked me whether or not the win % from those post had improved, I would have bet on yes. Just goes to show that perception and reality are two different things and without data/information you are guessing.

[DeanT]

I cant see this working because it never really has worked. The large run up to the first turn at Woodbine produces similar results with the same horses and drivers as at Mohawk without the straightaway. 1 3/16th trails at Greenwood long ago produced the same style of racing as well. All run ups tend to do, imo, is allow for a little more of a rest if the first quarter is faster. This is a speed game now.

The only races I saw a change in style was the 2 mile ones at Georgian when they try those. There are a few lead changes because parking out a guy a half mile into the race is futile with so much further to go.

I'm open to it though. If the numbers show it works or makes the racing better then go with it. I hope they dont try it for a month and then quit like so many other places do.

[The Bit]

I cant see this working because it never really has worked. The large run up to the first turn at Woodbine produces similar results with the same horses and drivers as at Mohawk without the straightaway.

Get your war club ready, you are gonna need it! :)

[The Bit]

The Bit,

I agree with Botster on this one.





The high class races are too easy for the general public, they get hurt on the cheaper class and that's where you find the best overlays.

Attached is a graph of the running balance of 160,000 race picks by Ray's Robot sorted on TrackMaster class. There is a definite break point on Trifectas (blue line), Exactas (green), and Win (black) at the 77 - 80 class level.



.

Ray,

Impressive stuff. Data and information, that is the way to discuss things!

I guess my view point is that I was a fan first. When my family had horses, I was too young to bet, but I enjoyed the racing for the racing. And to this day, I am a fan first and bettor 2nd. If I couldn't wager on the Meadowlands, I would still be interested in the horses and drivers. So I wager on the products that are higher class and interesting to me. You and I have talked and I've mentioned that for the most part I only bet the racing in this area because I know the drivers, trainers, horses etc.( Yonkers, Chester, Meadowlands, Dover, etc. ) And most of the racing in this area is of the upper echelon.

My feeling is that the majority of bettors would rather bet on the higher class racing. The lower quality of racing last year and especially last fall is the reason that most people believe the Meadowlands really started to slide. Am I wrong in thinking that?

[pandy]

Tim Bojarski wrote a column today on the USTA saying that he doesn't like it, for the usual reasons, he can't figure out the final times. But it sounds like he isn't a regular Yonkers bettor.

We have to remember here that we are not comparing Yonkers to Woodbine, or any other track. The comparison is, Yonkers racing a mile with the races starting very close to the first turn, or Yonkers racing a mile and a sixteenth with the races starting further back.

The bottom line is, if you compare the one mile races to the new distance, at Yonkers and Yonkers only, there is no comparison, the longer races are better for several reasons.

[Ray2000]

My feeling is that the majority of bettors would rather bet on the higher class racing. The lower quality of racing last year and especially last fall is the reason that most people believe the Meadowlands really started to slide. Am I wrong in thinking that?


No I don't think you're wrong thinking that, I would rather bet on higher class racing myself (when I can), but there's 2 games going on here the game in the program and the game on the board.

When I first saw my own graph I thought that's not hard to explain, by segmenting out the lower class fields I'm simply eliminating a lot of races at the BigM, WEG and Balmoral, tracks where I perform miserably. However the same class pattern holds true for most of the tracks.

So maybe it's the class factor, plus playing against the sharpest of sharks who play big money and must play at the big pool tracks. The quality of these competitors means the game on the board is too tough, the odds are in line with the horses' actual chances of winning and in that case there are no good bets. This is what I meant when I said "The high class races are too easy for the general public" I meant too easy to set the odds right considering the caliber of players, touts, free web picks, TV show anchors, pool size, oval size, the consistency of the horses, drivers, trainers and of course the...."Speed Rules" factor.

If this is true then the slide at the BigM might actually be helpful in finding an underbet prospect.
Who knows, ... as the sharks and whales swim away.:)

.

[DeanT]

I think that's right Ray. I think the biggest factor in that is today's wagering environ and depth of field.

In a top level race at the M now we have one or two horses who look like ok plays, but they probably are not anywhere near ROI positive. When we look at the other six horses, they are close to fair. It's what it is in a seven or eight horse field of OK horses.

Six years ago we had a ten horse field of good horses, where seven of them could win with a trip at a minimum. I could find what I thought was an ROI positive play almost every race. When I watch harness now all I see is overbet horses and I dont think it was like this ten years ago.

[botster]

lol

You are killing me! Yesterday afternoon I was right with regards to the prices and the closers. And you claimed that until the breeding and preracing is controlled that speed will rule.

Tonight you change your tune and it is the class of the race that is the problem and I'm kidding myself. Huh?

So anything higher than 25k claimers shouldn't be wagered on and the lower class horses hurt the public and are too inconsistent. Huh? That leaves ya about 4 classes ( using pars which I'm sure you are armed with, that leaves ya 20k, 25k and Nw5kl6, Nw6kL6 and Nw8kL6 ) to bet on and about 10 trot races a week?

What is going to change moving forward botster that is going to make the closers fair better? The class of the racing isn't changing. It has been the same for quite a while and if anything has gotten better. They are now writing the "have to have been 1st, 2nd or 3rd in last x starts" into the 10 claimers. So now even the 10 claimers aren't your usual 10 claimers. So what makes you think things are going to change? Bob has said time and time again the weather makes the racing better. Well, it was about 15 degrees one night last week and that couldn't even help. The time is running on out the weather. So, other than your hopes and dreams, what makes you think things will change? Just your opinion right?

Most people want to bet on higher class racing but it is your opinion they shouldn't. Most people can't stand trotters because they break too often but you think they make great plays. I'm sure you like betting 2 year olds too? Your opinions seem to be in the minority most of the time.



This is a gem! :bang:

Bit, you seem to be one of these guys that are looking for clear cut, black and white way to win at the races.Many factors along with experience pave the way to winning.When you take my words and try to say "SEE HERE YOU SAID THIS, AND HERE YOU SAID THAT", shows your utter folly in trying to comprehend the intricate way that I handicap.Their are entangables that cannot always be put into words in a forum, because of many reasons.

I have come across guys like yourself trying to make quick conclusions and thinking it's automatic.It just doesn't work that way.As a handicapper if you are not in the minority you will have less chance of winning.

Their are very limited plays for us today and when Yonkers makes a very encouraging (has to better move) to help the bettors and the horsemen you somehow try to debunk it!!

I have come across some sharp guys here on this forum and in no way are downplaying their claims, or expertise, but only can speak from my own experience.

You would try to debunk the second coming if you could.:p

[rowboat]

First make the three best draw the outside posts.No more 3-5 shots on the rail.Second people have a tendency to see stats their way and be objective.Like at the start i read the 1 is not winning.Did yoo see how many sucky horses were in the 1 post.And then how many sucky horses in every race.Just because they give high purses doesnt mean they attract tons of good horses.If i gave you a yonkers program no trainer no driver no post and asked you just to pick the contenders would you get 4 a race that were contenders.Until you get up the ladder no.claimers are better suited because they are not forced up the ladder.A few wins and seconds and next you are knocking boots NW 25k and you dont belong there.You need to do an impact study on the 6-7-8 and handicap them if they are contenders outside of the post.Some horses only come in the money 1-2 poles but not 4-5 how are they going to win 6-7-8.The class of horses at yonkers suck.They ride the rail to get the small purses not move and pay the bills.It is an old mans game as far as owners go.

[The Bit]

Their are very limited plays for us today and when Yonkers makes a very encouraging (has to better move) to help the bettors and the horsemen you somehow try to debunk it!!


Any evidence support this or just more non-sense you can't quantify?

That is what I thought. :D

[The Bit]

botster here is your chance ...

Answer one question ... what has happened, or will happen due to this change in racing distance at Yonkers that will improve the racing? Don't try to pin point my personality or figure out who I am or tell me about your spot plays. This thread and I don't care anything about that. This thread was to discuss the change in racing distance at Yonkers and the affects it would have or had on the racing.

So far, the only information presented has shown that the internal fractions are slower and that as many and possible more races are going wire to wire. We have also seen an inordinate amount of races won by horses that never leave the pylons ( at prices ) and the outer flow struggles to get into contention ( sometimes heavy favorites ).

We discussed that it was making it easier for outside post positions to get into the race early, which would seemingly help those post win more races. However, Ray has debunked that myth aside from post 6. Post 7 and 8 and winning the same amount of races they had prior.

So, aside from PP 6, the outside post ARE NOT doing any better. The closers are not fairing any better. The outer tier, is not dong any better.

So please, take the floor and explain what part of the racing has improved and why? Or what will happen in the coming weeks or months that will change what we have seen in the few few weeks of the new distance.

Again, what happened in the past and what you believed to be true then doesn't matter now. What is happening now and what will happen moving forward is really at that matters.

So please, give me a reason to believe that this change has actually changed anything?

[NJ Stinks]

By the way, www.harnesscharts.com (http://www.harnesscharts.com) (Harness Eye) has my latest column posted and my columns, which come out every two weeks, will be published on that site.

Just to be sure I've got it right, Pandy, the website above does not sell PP's. Is that correct?


Note: I can and have bought buy Harness Eye at a local newstand.

[The Bit]

7 more leaders at the 1/2 mark won last night. Only 2 winners from the outer flow.

Meaning 10 of 12 races last night were won by horses that never left the pylons. 7 of those 10 were won by the horse leading at the 1/2 mark.

Saturday night actually was ok. Only 4 wire to wire winners. However, those nights are getting to be few and far between.

Brennan won with a horse last night from the 8 hole and never left the cones.

[pandy]

That's right, Harness Eye is not able to sell pps online.

[SchagFactorToWin]

I'd like to know how the distance change is effecting everyone's profitability, not just their handicapping method. Are you guy's seeing any change in your bottom line at Yonkers?

So far, mine has not changed (that's a good thing!).

I would have preferred a drop in take-out to changing the distance, though.

[pandy]

The first night of the new distance I hit two longshots from posts 6 and 7, since then I've cooled off. I'm putting free Yonkers picks on my site.

I like it better because I don't have to handicap posts. Last night I liked a favorite from post 6 and I bet it confidently and it won at 6-5. I never would have bet that horse if the race were at a mile.

[botster]

Any evidence support this or just more non-sense you can't quantify?

That is what I thought. :D

You just don't get it.

The only evidence that would satisfy you, would be if I were to deposit any of the winnings into your bank account.Good fortune trying to figure out your easy way to the winners circle.Study your fractional times and ignore any obvious positives the game throws your way.:rolleyes:

[The Bit]

You just don't get it.

The only evidence that would satisfy you, would be if I were to deposit any of the winnings into your bank account.Good fortune trying to figure out your easy way to the winners circle.Study your fractional times and ignore any obvious positives the game throws your way.:rolleyes:

What are these obvious positives? It is easier to keep saying that and trying to change the subject than it is to admit you have nothing and look foolish huh? :D

And what does this have to do with a way to the winner circle? What is this easy way you speak of? I play horses by numbers and names. This thread was simply to discuss the changes, or in this case, lack thereof associated with this distance change. You can't seem to stay on that topic.


I don't need you depositing money into my account. Chances, I'm winning your money already. :cool:

[The Bit]

You just don't get it.

The only evidence that would satisfy you, would be if I were to deposit any of the winnings into your bank account.Good fortune trying to figure out your easy way to the winners circle.Study your fractional times and ignore any obvious positives the game throws your way.:rolleyes:

And why do you continue to speak to me like I'm the only one claiming that this isn't working? Almost to a person the feeling has been that it isn't and won't work? Yet you keep acting as if I'm the person that feels that way. I'm flattered!

I know, we all must be idiots and you are the only person with ability to decipher why this change is working and will continue to do so. :lol:

[pandy]

Guys, one of the biggest problems with this board and others is that people get into personal attacks. This was a great thread when we kept it on the topic. This change at Yonkers is important, whether you like it or not, because Harness Racing is on the way out, and if the industry doesn't either correct the mistakes they've made in the past (steel sulky, artificial insemination, lasix, etc.), or try something new, this will be like dog racing.

Your input is important, but don't make it personal.

[baconswitchfarm]

[QUOTE=botster].When you take my words and try to say "SEE HERE YOU SAID THIS, AND HERE YOU SAID THAT", shows your utter folly in trying to comprehend the intricate way that I handicap.


That is the greatest thing I have ever read on here. :p

[The Bit]

Guys, one of the biggest problems with this board and others is that people get into personal attacks. This was a great thread when we kept it on the topic. This change at Yonkers is important, whether you like it or not, because Harness Racing is on the way out, and if the industry doesn't either correct the mistakes they've made in the past (steel sulky, artificial insemination, lasix, etc.), or try something new, this will be like dog racing.

Your input is important, but don't make it personal.

He keeps telling me what kind of personality traits I have and what kind of guy I am. I even made a point to tell him to leave me and what he thinks of me out of it and just discuss the topic, he can't seem to pull that off!

You and I didn't agree but we were discussing what was actually taking place on the track and the cause and affect of each point. All he added to this conversation was "it has to be better".

[PaceAdvantage]

I urge all to take heed of pandy's sage advice...or suffer my wrath...

I too tire of these personal clashes....ENOUGH

Like a frustrated parent, I don't care who started it....just END IT

[botster]

[QUOTE=botster].When you take my words and try to say "SEE HERE YOU SAID THIS, AND HERE YOU SAID THAT", shows your utter folly in trying to comprehend the intricate way that I handicap.


That is the greatest thing I have ever read on here. :p


I thought that one up just for you BSF.Sometimes you just gotta have a sense of humor about it all.:D

[botster]

I urge all to take heed of pandy's sage advice...or suffer my wrath...

I too tire of these personal clashes....ENOUGH

Like a frustrated parent, I don't care who started it....just END IT

I apologize...I had already put it to rest, but I wont resurrect it again.

[The Bit]

2.15

4 wire to wire winners including a $50 and a $103 dollar horse
9 winners never left the pylons

Of the three winners that left the pylons, two of them were first over and the other was second over.

Winners running positions at the 1/2:

2
2
3
4 - Wins from first over
6 - Wins from 2nd over
2
1
1
3 - Wins from first over
1
2
1

Broken into a track profile type number that you would use in thoroughbred racing pace handicapping, your track profile is 2.3 ...

12 races, only a single winner came from the back half or closers portion of the field.

The $103 horse left from post 8.

[The Bit]

2.11

7 wire to wire winners
9 winners never left pylons
2 winners came from back half of field

Winners positions at 1/2:

2
3
1
1
1
4
1
1
1
6
5
1

Avg. win position 1/2 = 2

2.12

4 wire to wire winners
6 winners never left pylons
3 winners from backhalf of field

Winners position at 1/2:

1
1
4
2
1
6
2
5
2
1
2
5

Avg. win position 1/2 = 3

2.14

7 wire to wire winners
9 winners never left pylons
2 winners from backhalf of field

Winners position at 1/2:

1
1
1
1
1
4
1
1
8
6
4
2

Avg. win position 1/2 = 3 ( the 8 helped that and he never left the pylons )

2.15

4 wire to wire winners
9 winners never left pylons
1 winner from backhalf of field

Winners position 1/2:

2
2
3
4
6
2
1
1
3
1
2
1

Avg. win position 1/2 = 2

48 races, only 8 horses half come from back half of field, or 5th or worse position.

48 races, 22 of those races have been won wire to wire. My high school math teacher would say that is almost half?

48 races, 32 of those races have been won by horses who are 1 or 2 at the 1/2 mark. He would also claim that is 2/3rds?

48 races, 33 of those races have been won by horses that never left the pylons? That even shocked me. I guess it shouldn't given the amount of wire to wire and pocket sitting winners.

Over 48 races, the average 1/2 mile position of the winners is 2.

Any thoughts?

[wjchild]

I'd love to see some comparable stats from the same period last year, or even the same number of race nights preceding the distance change.

[The Bit]

You ask, you recieve:

12.13

5 wire to wire winners
5 winner never left pylons
2 winners from back half of field

Winners position 1/2 mark:

1
3
1
2
4
1
1
5
1
1
5

Avg. position of winner at 1/2 = 2
12.14

4 wire to wire winners
7 winner never left pylons
4 winners from backhalf of field

Avg. 1/2 position of winner:

6
3
5
1
1
2
2
3
5
1
6
1

Avg. position winner at 1/2 = 3

12.16

3 wire to wire winners
6 winners never left pylons
2 winners from back half of field

Winners position 1/2 mark:

1
6
4
2
2
4
6
1
2
1
1
4

Avg. 1/2 position of winner = 3

12.17

3 wire to wire winners
7 winners never left pylons
0 winners from backhalf of field

Winners 1/2 mark position:

3
4
1
4
2
3
4
3
1
1
2
2

Avg. 1/2 position of winner = 3

48 races, 8 winners came from back half of field
48 races, 15 wire to wire winners
48 races, 26 winners were either 1 or 2 at 1/2 mark
48 races, 25 winners never left pylons

Over the 48 races, the average 1/2 position of the winners is 3.

[The Bit]

You ask, you recieve more:

12.3

4 wire to wire winners
8 winner never left pylons
3 winners from back half of field

Winners position 1/2 mark:

5
7
1
2
2
2
5
4
1
1
1
3


Avg. position of winner at 1/2 = 3

12.4

8 wire to wire winners
8 winner never left pylons
4 winners from backhalf of field

Avg. 1/2 position of winner:

5
1
1
1
6
1
1
1
1
5
1
6

Avg. position winner at 1/2 = 3

12.6

5 wire to wire winners
8 winners never left pylons
3 winners from back half of field

Winners position 1/2 mark:

1
5
1
7
2
7
2
1
1
1
2
2

Avg. 1/2 position of winner = 3

12.7

4 wire to wire winners
7 winners never left pylons
4 winners from backhalf of field

Winners 1/2 mark position:

5
1
2
1
6
2
1
1
4
1
6
6

Avg. 1/2 position of winner = 3

48 races, 14 winners came from back half of field
48 races, 21 wire to wire winners
48 races, 31 winners were either 1 or 2 at 1/2 mark
48 races, 31 winners never left pylons

Over the 48 races, the average 1/2 position of the winners is 3.

[The Bit]

2.11/2.15

48 races

8 winners from backhalf of field
22 wire to wire
32 winners 1 or 2 at 1/2 mark
33 winners never left pylons
Avg. 1/2 mark pos. of winner = 2

12.3/12.7

48 races

14 winners from backhalf of field
21 wire to wire
31 winners 1 or 2 at the 1/2 mark
31 winners never left pylons
Avg. 1/2 mark pos. of winner = 3

12.13/12.17

48 races

8 winners from back half of field
15 wire to wire
26 winners 1 or 2 at the 1/2 mark
25 winners never left pylons
Avg. 1/2 mark pos. of winner = 3

The 12.3/12.7 set are close to the 2.11/2.15 set, but closers still did better, 14 winners to 8.

[harness2008]

I haven't tracked a winners profile in general concerning Yonkers so I'm curious if these mile 1/16 stats mirror the general stats accumulated from the previous mile races run. I'm not referring to winning post positions here just basic running styles that win.

Empirically you can back this up with your numbers so do you think that these stats are just what Yonkers winners produce no matter what distance of the race they run or do you think that the mile 1/16 races are further escalating the problem that Yonkers is even more of a frontrunners racetrack with the added distance?

[The Bit]

I haven't tracked a winners profile in general concerning Yonkers so I'm curious if these mile 1/16 stats mirror the general stats accumulated from the previous mile races run. I'm not referring to winning post positions here just basic running styles that win.

Empirically you can back this up with your numbers so do you think that these stats are just what Yonkers winners produce no matter what distance of the race they run or do you think that the mile 1/16 races are further escalating the problem that Yonkers is even more of a frontrunners racetrack with the added distance?

Such a small sampe it is tough to tell. Looking at those sets of numbers, we had one set that was basically the same aside from back half winners. Than we had the other set that was a sharp contrast to what the new distance #'s showed. Which has been my stance all along ... things may be getting worse to some degree, but I know for certain they aren't getting better.

My theory on the set of old dist. numbers that mirror the new dist. number aside from back of the field winners is this. It is less likely that the pace of the races at the new distances is going to collapse entirely because of the par or slightly slower than par internal fractions. Even if the leader doesn't have the stamina to hold on, the back half is going to be too fast for any closers to have an impact leaving it to the first over challenger or more likely the horses on the pylons behind him. However, at a mile, it was more likely that the pace would melt down. Two or three horses would leave forcing the issue early and than someone would challenge first over in the 3rd quarter, causing the race to fall apart and allowing the closers to get in range, thus explaining the additional number of back half winners.

Cliff notes version ... at a mile, it was more likely that the pace would be quicker, especially in the 3rd quarter. This made it more likley that the race would fall apart and the 4th quarter would be slow enough to allow the closers to get into range. With the added distance, the 3rd quarter is generally slower making it very difficult for horses to get into range against a decent back half/final quarter.

So I think ultimately we will see similiar amounts of wire to wire winners, more first over winners, more horses that sit in on the pylons win, but fewer, maybe far fewer real closers win from the back of the field.

[The Bit]

Botster's thoughts after watching/wagering on Thursday nights card at Yonkers. I guess last night was par for the course since the change in distance. And no I'm not making this up, I couldn't make this up.

Uncovered is a better place to be than being covered up so far with this distance change.My pick had his shot, but just could not reach.


Dead night again for closers.Second over continues to be worse off than the uncovered trip.

:bang:

[botster]

Botster's thoughts after watching/wagering on Thursday nights card at Yonkers. I guess last night was par for the course since the change in distance. And no I'm not making this up, I couldn't make this up.





:bang:

You still continue this childish drab.

You should be careful.The Administrator seemed pretty serious about showing his wrath on those who cannot.

[botster]

I urge all to take heed of pandy's sage advice...or suffer my wrath...

I too tire of these personal clashes....ENOUGH

Like a frustrated parent, I don't care who started it....just END IT

Just in case you missed it, here it is again for you.;)

[The Bit]

I pointed out your observations about the racing at Yonkers last night. Your observations are relevant considering that you are a serious supporter of the change and have claimed that it has to be better. So, for you to make those statements speak volumes in my opinion.

If I need to be banned or suspended for my part in this thread, than that is ashame, but so be it. I'll let the discussions I've had with others, the information I have provided, and how I have presented it speak for why I am here.

[PaceAdvantage]

Just in case you missed it, here it is again for you.;)The last thing you want to be doing is reminding me of what I wrote earlier.

[botster]

The last thing you want to be doing is reminding me of what I wrote earlier.

I wasn't reminding you Mr. Administrator.It was directed to the other guy for not dropping it.

[The Bit]

The "other guy" posted comments you made about the racing at Yonkers post distance change. Just because those comments contradicted everything you posted in this thread, doesn't make it wrong or childish. :D