yonkers handle mile and a sixteenth

[baconswitchfarm]

I would love to know how yonkers handle is doing. We had a discussion on here in the spring and people said the distance would begin to catch on. I bet seven figures a year and haven't bet a dime there. I know four other pros in the same boat. Last night i turned it on and saw 9k in the exacta and tri pools. How long will they let this ridiculous experiment go on. It failed before and now has their handle in freefall again. I bet a half a million last year at their track and would bet again. They are heading quickly toward Monticello status.

[Tom]

Why can't you bet 1m16 races?

[Sea Biscuit]

Why can't you bet 1m16 races?

Because the added distance can really screw up your handicapping.

[baconswitchfarm]

I find it hard to win there at a mile. I find it impossible to win at a mile and 1-16. That is with a pretty good rebate.All the other pros I know had the same experience.So some of the biggest customers won't play.

[SchagFactorToWin]

Lat night's low pools were weather related.

[pandy]

The handle is up since they switched to a mile and a sixteenth. Bottom line is, you can't please everyone. As mentioned here many times the mile races at Yonkers are terrible because the race starts right in front of the first turn. Years ago it was different when the stretch was shorter.

If you can't win at 8.5f you won't be able to win at a mile there, just play another track.

I doubt very much that they will ever go back to a mile. The races are much better now, as shown here by Ray's post position stats, posts 6 7 and 8 are all winning at a higher percentage than they were so the races are more competitive, more exciting, more entertaining, and for most people, better to wager on.

[RaceTrackDaddy]

I also think the 1 1/16 races are better now than before. Ouside post position is no longer a death sentence on that oval. In prior times, the outside horses leaving would never get to the top and were hug the mile. Now, it is more of a level playing field.

I personally would rather play Yonkers where all the horses are live to be on the ticket instead of having the inside posts get all the money and resulting in short payouts.

Handicapping on a half mile track should be the same as any other track size. Speed and endurance show up in the lines no matter the track size. Guess there are three ways to handicap a race. Speed ratings, Trip handicapping and Classification racing. All three play an important role in my handicapping over the years. Sometimes you just get a feel in your gut about a certain horse when reading the pp's. Follow that feeling is the best advice I can give anyone looking to improve their handicapping.

[LottaKash]

I also think the 1 1/16 races are better now than before. ...........................I personally would rather play Yonkers where all the horses are live to be on the ticket instead of having the inside posts get all the money and resulting in short payouts.
.

I play YR, these days, and more than I have in quite some time.....Since using the last 5/16ths of a mile in my pace numbers, I have been improving somewhat.....I mean I always could do ok at that place, I just couldn't set the house on fire pricewise, as I can now....If I am very patient and remain focused, I can get better value at YR, more than before, I believe...

At YR my biggest gripe is the sameness of it all...Too many claimers for me....I am just not a claimer guy, I never really was, and frankly I really stink at them, value wise that is.....Plus, I liked the way that the WEG-circuit, or should I say the whole Ontario Harness in general, went to NW of $$ in last 3-races vs. the more traditional NW-$$ in L5 or L6......I think the NW $ L3 is more accurate in getting horses classified in the conditiions....I wouldn't know the math about the why of it, but I feel that the conditioned-races are "much more" competitive at those tracks these days....Unfortunately, for the way I handicap, I now have fewer opportunities than I used to, but, what I do have is of better quality....Maybe a change to this line of classifying conditioned horses could be implemented at YR as well, and perhaps it would add some new and different interest to it all....Who knows ?..

best,

[baconswitchfarm]

Congratulations to Yonkers on returning all races to a mile when they reopen.

[The Bit]

Congratulations to Yonkers on returning all races to a mile when they reopen.


I thought this was going to happen last year after 2 or 3 months of tracking the racing after the switch ( and I did say it much to the chagrin of some ). The average 1st and 2nd call position of the winners had gone down, or closer to the front and the average number of wire to wire winners had actually increased. Combine that with the fact that the 2nd and 3rd fractions had slowed down significantly and you had racing that was made even worse and even less chance for off the pace types to get involved.

The only improvement was that the outside post had a better chance to get position. And I guess it made the horses more reliable since they didn't have to leave as hard heading into a turn which in turn made the racing safer, which may have been reason enough to leave it at 1 1/16th but it certainly wasn't because the racing was anymore exciting or because you had more winners from off the pace.

I used to bet Yonkers every Friday, Saturday and Monday nights, but I haven't placed a bet there since a few weeks or a month after the distance change. Part of the reason was Pena and the other part was the distance switch.

[pandy]

With the races at a mile and starting first in front of the first turn, there will be a lot more breakers, especially on the first turn. Post 1 will win over 20% and the win percentage for posts 5 through 8 will decline significantly. Post 8 will most likely produce less than 3% winners.

Horses that get away with a soft first quarter will be very tough to catch. If you see a fit horse get to the top in :29 and change the race is over, no need to watch the race, and if you don't have a bet on the leader you are out of the race, wow, exciting.

I'll be able to win, picking my spots carefully, but my problem with the one mile distance isn't about winning, it's about the quality of racing. Racing is a form of entertainment, and the bottom line is, when Yonkers races at a mile the races are boring and cheap looking because the outside horses can't leave, a lot of horses break leaving, the first quarter is slow, the races are slower, and many horses that do not actually figure get lucky trips and win from inside posts. Overall, it's just bad racing and bad for the sport.

Now if they went back to the old one mile configuration, with the shorter stretch, that wouldn't be as bad, but it looks like they're going to start the race in front of the turn.

I understand that there are some people who can't figure out how to equate the final time or fraction (subtract 7) but you can't please everyone. Two of the biggest professional bettors in NY/NJ area have already told me that they will cut or eliminate their action at Yonkers. Most serious harness bettors will not like this. The people who prefer the one mile are most likely the smaller bettors so I don't see how this helps the handle.

On a positive note, Harness Eye past performance will soon be available for sale online at www.drf.com.

[The Bit]

Bob,

It seems we can agree on the fact that the distance changed helped the outer post leave and get position. That fact alone probably adds a contender or two to each affair that maybe would not have had a shot at all at the 1 mile distance. However, all it is really doing is giving another horse or two a chance to wire to the field. Eight wire to wire winners are eight wire to wire winners whether they started from the 1 hole or the 8 hole. Just because Brennan wins from the 7 hole doesn't make the running of the race more exciting or entertaining, it just means you can get to the front from the 7 hole.

For the months I tracked after the change, which was about half the year until I completely gave up any hope there, the wire to wire winners had increased at the 1 1/16 distance when compared to the mile races.

Bacon said he knew four pros who stopped betting because of the change. You say you know two who will stop now. The feeling I get from the serious harness players I know from around Chester racetrack and the Parx Turf Clubs is they are split. The trip handicappers seemed to like the distance change, most likely because the horse they are following may get the 7 hole next week but at least they still have a shot. The pen and paper and time/pace handicappers didn't like it. And the guys going on trainers, drivers, post and class changes didn't care one way or another.

The other conversation I remember having with Ray was that while the perception was the 7 and 8 hole were winning at a higher clip, that actually wasn't the reality. Now that may have changed as the year wore on, but I remember people swearing that those two post were winning more soon after the change, when in reality the increase was very insignificant if there was any at all. I remember the 6 hole had the biggest increase for the first month or two.

[pandy]

At first the 6 post had the sharpest improvement but as time went on posts 7 and 8 did improve significantly. As far as I'm concerned, any race that starts close to a turn is not good horse racing. The reason why Aqueduct went to 1 70 yards on the inner track was because the one mile races were dominated by the top 4 posts when they ran a mile.

One of the biggest problems with moving back to a one mile, this basically eliminates the possibility of any new blood getting interested in Yonkers racing and is a turn off to harness racing in general.

By returning to the one mile, you are placating the old time regulars who hate change but alienating not only professional and serious bettors, but any young person who comes to track (or watches the races on tv or simulcast). The races are so bad at a mile that anyone who is new to the game could not possibly get excited about harness racing. Take a look at the replays for the Yonkers Trot the past few years, it was sad.

[LottaKash]

I can't say that I am thrilled either way....Because, I just dislike 1/2 mile racing in general....I mean I like the symmetry to it, the sameness you know, but the prices are just too low to make it worth the wait time for me....I do OK at YR, but finding something that is bigger than it is being played, is just too big a wait for me....And, most would agree, you just can't bet and get the results later, you can't....You've got to see the odds....Whereas, at the other and bigger tracks that I play, I can resonably expect a certain payout to be in near spec at the close of the betting...

A funny story about YR: Not too long ago, I "nodded out" at my desk one nite while watching and playing, and my wife told me the next morning about it, we laughed, and she said, "I glanced at the frozen screen, and inadvertently noticed that it was Yonkers"....haha ! :sleeping:

What I will miss tho, is the Yonker's horses, that have been racing at the added distance, that ship in and out to elsewhere....I have (had) some numbers that get hidden from the public, and I make (made) some money using the same....Now that is lost, and I will miss that, but only that from YR...

Heck, I will always have a warm and sentimental soft spot in my "racing heart" for YR, as it was the place that I watched and won my first horse race ever....And, I won and lost there for many years thereafter....

Once M1 opened, I quickly switched allegiance, but I always dreamed of YR going to a bigger layout and becoming a "sister-track" to M1.....Oh well...

best,

[pandy]

I had kept a copy of Ray's post position stats showing Yonkers before (one mile) and after (mile and a sixteenth).

ONE MILE PP STATS

1-24, 2-18, 3-16, 4-17, 5-15, 6-7, 7-5, 8-4.

MILE AND A SIXTEENTH PP STATS

1-19, 2-16, 3-13, 4-17, 5-17, 6-10, 7-8, 8-6.

Posts 6, 7, and 8, collectively, won 16% of the races at a mile, and 24% of the races at the longer distance, an increase of 50%. Obviously this makes the racing better.

At a mile, post 1 won 24% of the races, which should be unacceptable for any racetrack, it's absurd.

Another note, many of those post 7 and 8 wins at the mile distance were recorded during Lou Pena's hot run and if you eliminate the Pena wins from posts 7 and 8, the percentage drops even further.

[The Bit]

Posts 6, 7, and 8, collectively, won 16% of the races at a mile, and 24% of the races at the longer distance, an increase of 50%. Obviously this makes the racing better

You say better racing, I say different horse wiring the field. :) Better betting? Probably, but same old race, perhaps made worse after the first 1/4 mile.

[The Bit]

Another note, many of those post 7 and 8 wins at the mile distance were recorded during Lou Pena's hot run and if you eliminate the Pena wins from posts 7 and 8, the percentage drops even further.

Pena wasn't suspended until August 4th, so that doesn't really make much sense. He had just as much to do with the 7 and 8 hole stats this season as he did the mile stats last, and maybe more with his stable growing in size and his first call driver being Brennan. He was getting more respect than ever, no matter if he was leaving from the grandstand.

I would argue that the addition of Brennan to that colony helped the stats of those outer post, regardless of distance.

[pandy]

I follow Yonkers closely, when they raced at a mile, Pena's horses scored a lot of winners from posts 7 and 8. And the pace, on average, is definitely faster at the longer distance.

[The Bit]

I follow Yonkers closely, when they raced at a mile, Pena's horses scored a lot of winners from posts 7 and 8. And the pace, on average, is definitely faster at the longer distance.

Yeah, your right. What do I know? I only followed it with an Excel program that had macros that would turn results charts into spread sheets for each night of racing and break it down by class/post/driver/winners running line/entire fraction line/each internal fraction/final fraction/avg pay out/first over/2nd over/pocket etc ... Guess that wasn't close enough.

[pandy]

I would tend to agree with you about the wire to wire winners, probably about the same, but a big problem with the one mile racing is you get a lot of off the pace winners from posts 1 through 4 that don't actually look like solid contenders. Say the 6 leaves and breaks on the first turn and the 7 leaves but gets parked, then the one sets the pace but spits the bit, the three horse that is seemingly too slow or out of form clunks up the pylons and gets a lucky win. That happens a lot at Yonkers when they run a mile, horses that make no sense win when the obvious favorite gets a tough trip or comes up short. That doesn't happen as much as a mile and a sixteenth because the horses that deserve to win, the contenders, can leave the gate.

Basically, when a track is biased, which Yonkers is because the race starts on the first turn, horses that don't deserve to win win, bad racing.

I can understand why people like it better because they are confused about the fractions, or they like betting chalk 1-2 lineup exactas, but I don't see how anyone can make a legitimate argument about the quality of the race itself.

First of all, any track that has a post that wins 24% of the time, bad racing.

[LottaKash]

First of all, any track that has a post that wins 24% of the time, bad racing.

Pandy, I know you, as well as I, have a warm spot for YR...We cut our teeth on it....And I admire and respect your work, as when you say something, I always chew on it and I still learn someting from you, despite my years of experience at this game....

One must love it or leave it (1/2mile-track racing, that is), I'd say, because it is what it has always been, a post position biased affair....Me, I have left it, and I can't say that I regret it much....My bottom line, which is $$$, has picked up ever since......I am so glad to have seenthelight...Only God knows how hard I tried to make a go of it for so many years at the 1/2's....

best,

[LottaKash]

While cleaning out some of my archives of old posts, I ran into this one....

It was back in 2008, that we had this thread going....I had fun going over some of the things that I posted, as well as what others had to say when it came to what tracks that they liked, favored and played at....

Me, I haven't changed my opinions much since....I still favor the same tracks today...

YR had it's likers and detractors, just as it is today....:cool:

Has anyone changed their minds since ?....



http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49748&page=3&pp=15

[SchagFactorToWin]

Basically, when a track is biased, which Yonkers is because the race starts on the first turn, horses that don't deserve to win win, bad racing.


I would think a good test of this would be to compare average payouts. For me, playing exacta spot plays (avg. 2 races/night), the avg. payout from 2/11-12/11 dropped 30% compared to previous periods. If horses were winning that didn't 'deserve' to win, payouts would increase, wouldn't they? Maybe my spot plays aren't a good sample. Does anyone have any average payouts for all the races broken out by one mile/1 1/16th?

[Ray2000]

SFTW
I can give a quick reply with this.
Some races (My pick1 2 or 3 was scatched) are not included.
Year 2011 is Feb 1 to Nov 30 and may include a few 1 mile races (Stakes)
However the averages won't change much if all races were in the population.

Year.....................Win........Exacta........ Trifecta
2007........Races........2544........2544......... ....2544
............ave........$12.06........$72.78....... .$426.39

2008........Races........2588........2588......... ....2588
............ave........$11.31........$70.38....... .$428.39

2009........Races........2715........2715......... ....2715
............ave........$11.24........$67.70....... .$392.59

2010........Races........2621........2621......... ....2621
............ave........$11.06........$67.25....... .$423.52

2011........Races........2399........2399......... ....2399
............ave........$11.16........$68.66....... .$392.03


.

[badcompany]

While cleaning out some of my archives of old posts, I ran into this one....

It was back in 2008, that we had this thread going....I had fun going over some of the things that I posted, as well as what others had to say when it came to what tracks that they liked, favored and played at....

Me, I haven't changed my opinions much since....I still favor the same tracks today...

YR had it's likers and detractors, just as it is today....:cool:

Has anyone changed their minds since ?....



http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=49748&page=3&pp=15

Well, besides our being 3 1/2 years older [sigh] the biggest difference has to be the fall of the Meadowlands, and the demise of NYOTB.

Personally, I've been playing much less. In fact, I've pretty much confined my betting to the month or so a year I spend in Saratoga.

The racing product at the tracks I play, YR, BTV, SAR, HAR, certainly hasn't improved and if anything has gotten worse.

All in all, not a whole lot to be optimistic about.

[pandy]

Using averages probably won't tell the story. For instance, my theory is that running one mile at Yonkers, with the races starting close to the first turn, produces quite a few inscrutable longshot winners from inside posts. But, the average prices wouldn't necessarily be higher from inside posts at a mile as compared to 1 and 1/16 because the winning favorites from inside posts at the one mile distance will be shorter prices. Post 1 in particular will be consistently bet much heavier than it is going the longer distance and will produce far more odds on winners, lower the average win price.

[SchagFactorToWin]

Using averages probably won't tell the story. For instance, my theory is that running one mile at Yonkers, with the races starting close to the first turn, produces quite a few inscrutable longshot winners from inside posts. But, the average prices wouldn't necessarily be higher from inside posts at a mile as compared to 1 and 1/16 because the winning favorites from inside posts at the one mile distance will be shorter prices. Post 1 in particular will be consistently bet much heavier than it is going the longer distance and will produce far more odds on winners, lower the average win price.

Average is just the first step. There has to be a way to test theories. So maybe the variance would be different. Use ANOVA instead of average?

Does anyone have a list of YR Win payouts from 2/10-12/10 and 2/11-12/11? I could run an analysis of variance, t-test it to see if the two samples are statistically different.

[Ray2000]

Shag

Too large to post, find it here

http://members.localnet.com/~emschell/


I updated Yonkers Win roi stats for 2011, shown in blue below.
Win % stayed the same as the 1st half of '11 within margin of error, rois settled down.





Post PP1 PP2 PP3 PP4 PP5 PP6 PP7 PP8

Yonkers Nov 2009 - Jan 2011

Win% 24% 18% 16% 17% 15% 7% 5% 4%
ROI% -11% -18% -16% -15% -3% -42% -49% -50%

Yonkers Feb 03/2011-Jun 30/2011 (after a thousand starts)

Win% 19% 16% 13% 17% 17% 10% 8% 6%
ROI% -30% -15% -29% -28% -5% -30% -30% -26%

Yonkers Feb 03/2011-Dec 2/2011 (after 2000 starts)

Win% 18% 16% 14% 17% 16% 11% 8% 5%
ROI% -30% -17% -31% -25% -18% -23% -25% -35%



Pandy

It's a bit confusing but unless my 1st Happy Hour martini is kicking in :)
the average odds of post 1 changed like so

2011...post 1 average Odds Win or Lose...8.50....2033 starts 2/2/11 12/1/11
2010...post 1 average Odds Win or Lose...6.20....2785 starts full year




.

[pandy]

Posts 1, 3, 4, and 5 had much worse ROI's at the longer distance, posts 6, 7, 8 had much better ROI's at the longer distance. I guess that makes sense. So it seems that the occasional wild longshots that get luck trips from inside posts really don't add up to much in the long run.

[LottaKash]

Here's an interesting comment from John Campbell, it pertains somewhat to what this thread is trying to say...

JC goes on to say: "The game is changing, as always, on the track.

"It's more aggressive," Campbell said. "If we asked horses back then (in the '70s and '80s) to do what we ask them to do now, they wouldn't have been able to. The breeding has changed. It used to be you could get a bad draw and still be OK and come on at the end. Not anymore. It's more and more driving from the front."

But as a hired gun, opportunities to get to know the horse you're driving are few.

"I miss the relationships with the horses," Campbell said. "Now, you show up and drive. You get the information from the trainer and you go, then get ready for the next race."

The above is from this piece...:http://www.lfpress.com/sports/othersports/2012/01/16/19252691.html


So my comment to this is; It is what it is...So, either you like YR and/or 1/2 mile track racing, or you don't...It's never going to change back, never, imo....

Me, I don't do the 1/2's anymore and JC said it best for me, why....

best,

[pandy]

Using averages probably won't tell the story. For instance, my theory is that running one mile at Yonkers, with the races starting close to the first turn, produces quite a few inscrutable longshot winners from inside posts. But, the average prices wouldn't necessarily be higher from inside posts at a mile as compared to 1 and 1/16 because the winning favorites from inside posts at the one mile distance will be shorter prices. Post 1 in particular will be consistently bet much heavier than it is going the longer distance and will produce far more odds on winners, lower the average win price.

Tonight has been a classic example of what I am referring to. After 9 races at Yonkers tonight there have been 4 monster longshot winners from inside posts. One of them, C J Marshall from post 2 paid $36.50 and was a legitimate overlay (3-1 on the morning line). That was the only one that could be handicapped. The others, $94.50 from post 2, $62.50 from post 2, and $80.50 from post 4, were ridiculous and they won because of the poor configuration of the one mile races at Yonkers which often screws up the race so badly that a horse from an inside post just lucks out. This is not good racing.

If these same races had been raced at a mile and a sixteenth, I guarantee you that the results tonight would have been completely different and I doubt that most if not all of these longshots would have won. As I've said, it's just not good racing when they start the races right in front of the first turn. I actually think you would probably have a higher ROI just boxing longshots from inside posts then you would with any legitimate handicapping methods. But that's not the way the game is supposed to be played.

[LottaKash]

Tonight has been a classic example of what I am referring to. After 9 races at Yonkers tonight there have been 4 monster longshot winners from inside posts. One of them, C J Marshall from post 2 paid $36.50 and was a legitimate overlay (3-1 on the morning line). That was the only one that could be handicapped. The others, $94.50 from post 2, $62.50 from post 2, and $80.50 from post 4, were ridiculous and they won because of the poor configuration of the one mile races at Yonkers which often screws up the race so badly that a horse from an inside post just lucks out. This is not good racing.

If these same races had been raced at a mile and a sixteenth, I guarantee you that the results tonight would have been completely different and I doubt that most if not all of these longshots would have won. As I've said, it's just not good racing when they start the races right in front of the first turn. I actually think you would probably have a higher ROI just boxing longshots from inside posts then you would with any legitimate handicapping methods. But that's not the way the game is supposed to be played.

But Pandy, you have to admit it tho....It "IS" winter racing, and many of the horses haven't raced that short a distance in awhile, and of course there is the recent but brief hiatus @YR to consider as well....

I have seen many a new meet (and I know you have too) that was just as clueless as this nites's running was.....

And maybe too, the track groomers are asleep at the wheel as well...

Heck, who knows Bob, but with all the factors that I listed, I at least, usually wait a week or two until things get settled a bit at a new meet before I step out based on my assumptions and conclusions...

Anyone playing there right now is pretty much in the same boat as the new M1 meet.....A "crapshoot" on oh so many races...

Jmo, tho...

P.S. you sound so pissed off Bob, about YR, I mean.....There are other options you know...You don't owe YR anything, it is their game, and we can simply choose not to play it the way that they made it....That's me tho..

best,

[pandy]

I'm not pissed off. I actually bet one race tonight and hit and showed a profit. I'm just saying that when they start the race in front of the turn it is not good racing. I can still pick my spots and show a profit betting, that's not the point. It just is crappy racing with good horses, which is a shame. It is not because of the layoffs or any of that stuff. The class doesn't always show and "lucky trip" horses win more often than they should when they race a mile at Yonkers. Regardless of the track, there are always going to be longshots that win because they get lucky, but it happens more here.

[LottaKash]

I'm not pissed off. ......................... there are always going to be longshots that win because they get lucky, but it happens more here.

That's why I quit YR .....Same thing at Maywood some time ago....Too many mysterious outcomes for me, so I quit...How about Cal-Expo, the mystery capital of the harness-world...haha...

I understand your point(s),I surely do, and I couldn't agree more....But you do sound a wee bit grumpy about it, or perhaps even a tad cynical, when it comes to YR racing, that is.....Well the bottom line as I hear it from you, you just don't sound quite happy about the racing at YR these days...

Cheer Up Bob, Spring is coming....:jump: ...And winter racing is getting harder, or is it ?....heehee....

best,

[Ray2000]

I had one possible play at Yonkers last night, Cry For Cash-12/1 with a switch to Bartlett then I noticed he hadn't raced for 35 days and thought ...'a judges scratch' ..so I'll watch hockey instead.

I see they let him race. Is this because the 30 day rule for qualifiers is being ignored? or is it applied at the time of dropping in the box?

In any event, like you said John, it's best to avoid a new meet for a couple of weeks.

[pandy]

Since Yonkers was closed for a few weeks they must have waived the 30 day rule.

Personally I expect that they will return to a mile and a sixteenth racing eventually because several big gamblers have already notified the track about their displeasure and so have several journalists. One of the biggest crimes is when they run the Yonkers Trot, which has been horrible the past few seasons.

[mrroyboy]

You guys are absolutely right about "Bonkers" but I had trouble with them even before they went back to one mile. When they were dark for a couple of weeks I tried Dover for a while. I was amazed at how much better I did. It just seemed like horses at Dover do what they are supposed to do. Maybe just my imagination but maybe not.
I only bet Yonkers when Meadowlands is closed like Tuesdays. Only if I am really bored!!!

[badcompany]

Tonight has been a classic example of what I am referring to. After 9 races at Yonkers tonight there have been 4 monster longshot winners from inside posts. One of them, C J Marshall from post 2 paid $36.50 and was a legitimate overlay (3-1 on the morning line). That was the only one that could be handicapped. The others, $94.50 from post 2, $62.50 from post 2, and $80.50 from post 4, were ridiculous and they won because of the poor configuration of the one mile races at Yonkers which often screws up the race so badly that a horse from an inside post just lucks out. This is not good racing.


The reason it's not good racing is because the horses were cheap Filly & Mare claimers.

This type of horse is inconsistant, especially on an off track, as was the case on that night. Betting under these conditions will leave you frustrated regardless of the configuration.

[LottaKash]

The reason it's not good racing is because the horses were cheap Filly & Mare claimers.

This type of horse is inconsistant, especially on an off track, as was the case on that night. Betting under these conditions will leave you frustrated regardless of the configuration.

Plus, and I mean a big-plus,(for me)....Just look at the dates of the last races for just about all of the horses on that nite....They are running with very "Stale-Dates"....

Who's to say how those horses came out of those races nearly 3-weeks ago....I like a horse to keep his regular running cycle....I can tell better whether I think he will race well if he comes back a week later, rather than all that time lost....That is one of my big no-no's early in a meet....As I need every dime that I have, I no longer speculate with stale-dates at a new meet, as I did when I was a younger gun...

And, I don't like girl horses in the winter either, generally of course...:confused:

best,

[badcompany]

Plus, and I mean a big-plus,(for me)....Just look at the dates of the last races for just about all of the horses on that nite....They are running with very "Stale-Dates"....

Who's to say how those horses came out of those races nearly 3-weeks ago....I like a horse to keep his regular running cycle....I can tell better whether I think he will race well if he comes back a week later, rather than all that time lost....That is one of my big no-no's early in a meet....As I need every dime that I have, I no longer speculate with stale-dates at a new meet, as I did when I was a younger gun...

And, I don't like girl horses in the winter either, generally of course...:confused:

best,

Another good point.

One of those bomb races, which Stratton won on the $90 horse was a standard line up number, 4-1-2 around the track. They've been running those at Yonkers for the last 100 years.

Two horses in the race went offstride. The first over horse had nothing and clogged the rim.

The "luck" which allowed the 2 to win the race was the 4 quitting for no apparent reason and 1 allowing herself to be caught from behind by the horse third on the rail. I don't see what the configuration had to do with anything.

[SchagFactorToWin]

Shag

Too large to post, find it here

http://members.localnet.com/~emschell/



Thank you. I'll work on it.

[mrroyboy]

Plus, and I mean a big-plus,(for me)....Just look at the dates of the last races for just about all of the horses on that nite....They are running with very "Stale-Dates"....

Who's to say how those horses came out of those races nearly 3-weeks ago....I like a horse to keep his regular running cycle....I can tell better whether I think he will race well if he comes back a week later, rather than all that time lost....That is one of my big no-no's early in a meet....As I need every dime that I have, I no longer speculate with stale-dates at a new meet, as I did when I was a younger gun...

And, I don't like girl horses in the winter either, generally of course...:confused:

best,

Male Chauvunist LOL

[LottaKash]

Male Chauvunist LOL

That's me all over Roy....:jump:.... nah...
best,

[mrroyboy]

Thank you John. Time for you to write some new articles. EVERYONE on this site would appreciate it

[SchagFactorToWin]

Sorry for the delay- death in the family.

Thanks for the data, Ray.

Using Ray's data, I compared Win Pays from 2/1/10-1/31/11 (n=2578) to the Win Pays from 2/1/11-11/30/11 (n=2399).

The research hypothesis is that the two samples are from the same population (no statistical difference). The null hypothesis is that they vary to a statistically significant degree.

The average for both samples was the same ($11.16).

The median for the mile results was $6.40.
The median for the 1 1/16 mile results was $6.60.

The standard deviation for the mile results was 14.56.
The standard deviation for the 1 1/16 mile results was 13.84.

The Z score is .003922, thus rejecting the null hypothesis.

Conclusion: no significant difference between the win payouts for a mile and those for 1 1/16 mile.

[LottaKash]

Since the subject came back up, I just thought that I would say a little about my perceptions since YR had gone back to straight 1-mile racing from the 1-1/16th format...

I had only looked and played on 3 occasions since the change, but I noticed that, at least on those nites that I attended, despite the shorter sprint space to the lead, at the start of the race, there seems to be more of an effort put forth by some of the drivers, for that lead spot....This has caused some of the paces to more hotly contested, than might be early, and as a consequence, the closers "seem" to be doing somewhat better....That is, the ones that figured to have a "closers-chance" from a form and pace point of view...

I like the one mile distance better....And, I did better that I thought I would on those 3-occasions....The races "seemed" to be more competitive to me....Nowadays with so many Good to Excellent Drivers competing on a regular basis at YR, in general, I think that the game has improved from the not too distant past, at that place.,..

Maybe just wishful thinking on my part tho...

best,

[The Bit]

This has caused some of the paces to more hotly contested, than might be early, and as a consequence, the closers "seem" to be doing somewhat better....That is, the ones that figured to have a "closers-chance" from a form and pace point of view...

Can't be ... :rolleyes:

[The Bit]

Conclusion: no significant difference between the win payouts for a mile and those for 1 1/16 mile.

:bang:

[LottaKash]

Can't be ... :rolleyes:

Bit, you are probably right, still, those nites that I played, it seemed so...

An "illusion" of sorts, most likely....

Oh well....Of course I haven't looked in this past week, at least....

Tracks, over time, don't change all that much, right ?...

best,

[The Bit]

Bit, you are probably right, still, those nites that I played, it seemed so...

An "illusion" of sorts, most likely....

Oh well....Of course I haven't looked in this past week, at least....

Tracks, over time, don't change all that much, right ?...

best,

I was being sarcastic ... I've been saying closers do better at a mile than they do at 1m 16th at Yonkers for a year now ... or after about three weeks of racing at 1.16th.

So ... I agree with you. And have data from pre and post distance change that backed it.

[SchagFactorToWin]

:bang:
What an articulate and reasoned response. I salute you, sir.