Turfway Polytrack
 

From DRF:

Anyone know who ran in these races?

New Track Surface
 

http://news.bloodhorse.com/viewstory.asp?id=29660

see above link for some riders' views of those test races

Interesting quote from Achilles article:

Rhonda Collins, who rode in a couple of the trial races, said the way the races played out had nothing to do with bias and everything to do with the way the races were a hodgepodge of 2-year-old first-time starters or older horses from widely different class levels.




Was this at Finger Lakes????;)

I have a little knowledge of the Wolverhampton track (polytrack) in the UK, and I haven't heard of a bias at that track. Maybe if there are any UK lurkers they could fill us in. As an aside, Rhonda's back after the TVG gig. I had wondered what happened to her. I thought she tried hard--too bad.

Have they been able to put together a Thursday card yet? Hard to believe it if they have not but I can't find the overnight.

Anyone inspired to bet race 2?

What happened? I didn't get a chance to see the card.....

Welcome to the world of Polytrack guys.

In the UK we have three tracks which are described as "All Weather".

Southwell uses a Fibresand surface
Wolverhampton uses Polytrack (Fibresand prior to Oct 2004)
Lingfield uses Polytrack (Equitrack prior to Nov 2001)

Just for those who don't know. Here's a quick summary of draw biases at the two Polytrack courses.

Lingfield
Prior to November 2001 Lingfield had an Equitrack surface. This was a particularily bad kick back surface which resulted in races where winners would be the ones leading from start to finish. No horse or jockey could cope with the kick back and thus races would be run at a fast pace. Due to the sharp triangle shape of the course low drawn runners had a natural draw bias.

When polytrack was installed the pace of the race slowed right down. There is very little kickback with polytrack. Jockeys realised that they didn't have to hit the turbo button at the start and ran races at more of a false pace. This had the effect of negating all the draw biases.

That was one reason for the demise of the extreme draw bias Lingfield used to have. Another is because of the way the track is worked on the final run in.

Polytrack is a versatile substance which can be worked to negate draw biases. One of the sales pitch comments is that "Polytrack can be worked to change the going accross the width of the track". In otherwords, if the course manager wanted the far rail to be slow, the middle of the track to be medium, and the stands side to be faster he can make it so.

At Lingfield I strongly believe that the far side of the final stretch is running much slower than the rest of the track. You never see horses scooting through up the rail there, and any front runners crumble quicker nearer the rail than say in the middle.

Wolverhampton
On the old Fibresand surface low was slow. Any horse drawn low (and staying low around the track) had virtually no chance of winning. Due to the drainage and deeper sand surface close to the rail the surface was very slow.

When polyrack was installed the low draw bias dissapeared and low numbers now have a big advantage in sprints.

..

What will US punters make of the Polytrack? I think they will get used to it pretty quickly. Those who don't like track biases may warm to the fact that biases can be negated (but then surely there are as many who'd be against it).

Whilst their historic speed figures will be next to useless they should be able to make much more accurate and consistent records now due to the fact that Polytrack is rarely slow (unless the course is worked to be slow). In fact, polytrack is nearly always described as fast.

Gender Biases
I don't know about dirt races in the US but overhere our 'all weather' tracks have some pretty extreme gender biases.

For some reason, females don't perform so well on the polytrack and fibresand.

Obviously, this is because females are the weaker sex, and that allowances are in place to help counteract this. But the gender bias is stronger on all weather than on the turf track.

Here's a few examples of favourites in mixed gender races on turf and polytrack:

Turf
Colts 1.16 I.V. -6.7% ROI
Fillies 1.01, -11.4%
Geldings 0.88, -5.6%
Entires 0.84, -15.5%
Mares 0.79, -4.4%

Polytrack
Colts 1.33 I.V. +7.6% ROI
Geldings 0.94, -4.8%
Fillies 0.91, -7.2%
Entires 0.68, -34.9%
Mares 0.58, -46.3%

(Note only 2251 races analysed. You guys may not be used to the lower sample sizes here :) )

Some say that the gender bias is due to the fact that all weather racing is of lower quality, and that males will dominate in this situation.

Others say that the gender bias exists because the female structure is not able to accelerate on this surface as well as males. The hind quarters, the shape of the hooves, or whatever, is different between the genders.

Whatever the reason, there is a distinct gender bias on this surface which is not as apparent on turf.

Just something for you guys to watch out for!

Here's some draw bias stats for Wolverhampton to show the big change in bias when the Polytrack was installed.

The stats are for 5f and 6f. Draw range split into thirds:

Wolverhampton Old Fibresand Surface
Low: 0.86, I.V. -29.8% ROI
Mid: 1.07, -23.7%
Hi: 1.05,-24.2%

and now the stats with the new Polytrack surface.

Wolverhampton Polytrack Surface
Low: 1.62, I.V. +29.7% ROI
Mid: 0.80, -50.4%
Hi: 0.67,-53.4%

You can see we are making hay here ;) .

Note that Despite this much more extreme draw bias the media pundits and jockeys took a lot of time to adapt to it. They had it so ingrained that 'low was slow' that the pundits would tip up high drawn horses, and jockeys would not run near the rail. With nearly a year gone since the change some are still doing it!

Now this may, or may not happen at Turfway.

What was the bias at Turfway before? Were there drainage problems? That's what you need to find out.

The reason why the old Fibresand was so negative to those drawn low was because of the drainage of the track, and the surface underneath by the far rail. The fibresand had to run deeper and the inside rail drained much better (the drier the track, the slower it is).

When the Polytrack was installed the complete track was refurbished so that the drainage is more level and the layering of the polytrack more level.

And don't forget that the maintenance crew can work the track any way they want. If a strong draw bias is apparent and enough connections of horses complain about it then the track can be worked to negate the bias.

It happened at Lingfield but not at Wolverhampton for some reason.

My concern does not relate to bias but as to whether you can handicap these races as you normally would handicap dirt races or whether that would lead to losing. What I saw in the races I watched last night looked different enough from the typical dirt race that I will be cautious about betting the races; I will keep watching to see if my impression changes.

I bet dirt races off of dirt form only (ignoring turf starts) and do not play turf races at all. This may be the lazy way to do things but since only a small perentage of dirt starters have recent turf starts and since the turf starts may not be representative of their dirt form it has always worked out.

If this is a third type of surface, there is no same surface form to handicap from, the programs used to evaluate form on the dirt probably will not work (as they do not work on turf) and there is going to be a real problem making pars and variants if there are no same surface races to project from.

The bigger problem is what to do with these starters when they run back on a normal dirt surface after the Turfway meet is over. If I wait for them to reestablish some post-TP dirt form I will pass a lot of races in the meantime but as of now I see no alternative.

That is going to be a big problem for you guys.

What happens here is that most turf horses stick to turf, and most all weather horses stick to the all weather.

When a horse switches code the form rarely works out and usually it identifies horses which can be laid on the betting exchanges.

I don't know how your dirt track will compare with polytrack. All I can assume is that you should now never get slow, sloppy races. All the races should be run on a more consistent faster surface.

In the UK punters are much more reliant on form that stats and the change in surface caused a big headache for form punters.

The vast majority of punters and media pundits here rely on beaten lengths and weights to arrive at their selections. The usual thing is Horse A beat Horse B by 2 lengths but has a 3lb pull etc.

When the Polytracks arrived this really screwed things up for them. Here's the average winning distance for Wolverhampton and Lingfield post / prior to to Polytrack.

Wolverhampton
Average winning distance of the winner on Fibresand: 2.2 lengths
Average winning distance of the winner on Polytrack: 1.2 lengths

Lingfield
Average winning distance of the winner on Fibresand: 2.1 lengths
Average winning distance of the winner on Polytrack: 1.2 lengths

In both cases the winning margin has gone down from around 2.1 lengths to 1.2 lengths.

What happens now is that there are more closers in the home straight. Whilst this makes for exciting, great to watch racing it often leads to a lot of hard luck stories. Many races now end up as 'one for the judge' photo finishes.

Not only that but many more races are ending up in the stewards as races ending in a bunch finish often have bumping and barging. If you can bet on disqualifications over there then increase your bank ready :)

BTW, I don't mean to sound critical of the Polytrack. I think it's great as it has saved many racing days here in the cold, wet, miserable winters we get.

Great posts Flatstats. Very interesting.