Dirt to Turf and/or Turf to Dirt
 

What are some theories as to why trainers do the switch?


I mainly follow dirt Stakes (+$100k) races for 3 and up and the turf to dirt switch is not used very much there, but it happens from time to time. Usually it is a lightly raced horse that has not had success in its last 2 or 3 dirt stakes races and then goes to an ALW on the Turf. When I see this move in the PPs for a dirt stakes, I always wonder what the trainer was thinking.

Since the majority of TURF winners deploy big moves from 2nd call to wire, and dirt runners do just the opposite, unless a horse has shown ability on both, I significantly DOWNGRADE switchers

Pedigree - some trainers waste time on dirt chasing the Triple Crown but ultimately have the turf in mind from the get-go (Hawkster, Lure, Strolling Along, Tight Spot, Startac, Bien Bien, Mr. Commons, Bolo, With Approval, Prized)

Seasonality - turf racing historically picks up in summer and the horses that don't make the cut for the Triple Crown often switch surfaces; (Da Hoss, Showing Up, Nobiz Like Showbiz, Cigar)

in the winter in CA the Strub and Big Cap series often was a time when the Euro imports from the Del Mar + Hollywood Derbies would take shot on the dirt (In Excess, Dare and Go, Opening Verse, Helmsman, Defensive Play, Mizzen Mast, Nasr El Arab)

Experiment - some Euro imports are imported to try the dirt or simply take to American racing and training and do well enough in the mornings to take a stab at the main track (Blushing John, Mineshaft, Jade Hunter, Criminal Type, Quiet American Greinton, Go and Go, Jovial, Urgent Request, Martial Law, Perrault)

Versatility - some top horses can handle both and don't make the necessarily switch because they are off form (Secretariat, Olympio, Majestic Light, Big Brown, Exceller, John Henry)

Speaking of Euro imports, Brad Cox is getting a horse from Europe called Darain, a full brother to 3 Group 1-caliber horses. Was trained by John Gosden but tailed off after winning his first two starts. Gosden thinks he'll handle American racing and mentioned he might handle the dirt, too.

Turf route to dirt extended sprint
 

This is an old trainer angle of Ed Bain, I think. A six furlong speed horse is "sent" on a turf route, and tires through the stretch , but builds up his stamina. Switch to an extended dirt sprint of 7 furlongs, and he should have the stamina to last the extra furlong. Sometimes works for 6-1/2 furlongs.

Don’t forget Dr. Fager who carried 134 lbs in the United Nations in 1968 and won by a neck over advocator who was carrying 112.

Allan

Can you rephrase this. I don't quite understand what you are saying

It was a word jumble.

Such horses don't necessarily switch surfaces because they are off form. For example, in 2006, when Lava Man ended winning all the major dirt stakes in CA, he also shoehorned in a win in the Grade 1 Charlie Whittingham on turf for good measure. Another is Allan's Dr. Fager example.

That's in contrast to what you were saying in the original post about seeing horses make the switch after a couple of poor performances.

on occasion
 

t'was a (dirt) race at Mountaineer (I'm thinking a route?, + for a condition of claimers?) recently, were seemingly 80% of the field had only turf or adw+turf recent form...

Mark explained many were stabled for turf races earlier in the season, but still had some earning and racing to do, after the season was finished.
Made for some interesting handicapping puzzles, much like an 'off-the-turf' race.

So, at least occasionally 'conditions' come into play, as much as things like pedigree and running style.

Andy has mentioned insights on the NYRA circuit, where their are financial incentives to having a horse that can run on the turf, and owners and trainers will go for it, at times.

Also, I like the angle of seeing a good 2yo run a route on the turf, because they are looking for a 'route race' and are willing to run on less preferred surface.Not a great bet that day to win, and not a great sign of sprint speed, but sometimes a sign that of things to come /8.5f, 9f dirt....

Not to disregard pedigree and trainer, and running style, which make up the heart of D/T angles.

Most of it is having connections that are shooting fish in a barrel trying to figure out why the horse isn’t winning

Then you get the unique situations where the main track is junk and the only suitable surface to run on is the turf, see AP and how it’s the home of turf sprints for dirt horses

A horse running today at GPW (R8 :5: Took a Cab)

0-for-18 maiden (mostly turf, mostly turf sprints), but seems custom made, for a high% barn to claim, and break maiden in a dirt mile or extended-sprint. Slow, Good early speed, solid fundamentals, some spots where he doesn't look the straightest, but he's run 13 times this year and is 'plug-n-play' for $10.5k...

must be something I don't see

Best finish in a route was 3rd, every race the same, tired. Distance is not this horse's friend. Always in claiming company, 8 money finishes. A lot of his sprint races are the same also, tired. To slow to get the lead in sprints without fading at the end. Fast enough to get the lead in routes, but can't hold on. Consistent speed, that is just to slow to win in Fla. Might be better in Louisiana or Delaware.

Surface switches are a major hole in my game. I've looked at general stats, but I've never been particularly good at figuring out which horses will make the switch well and which won't (or back).

Some horses are obviously meant for turf and the switch to turf is to get them where they belong.

Others are horses that are failing on dirt. So the switch to turf is an act of hope and desperation.

Some are horses that are similar on both surfaces and the connections are just looking for the best spot available on the schedule now.

The tough ones are the lightly raced horses that improved when they switched surfaces. You can't always tell if it was the surface switch or development that was the primary reason for the improvement. If you just toss them all when they switch back, you are going to find out it was development and not the surface switch a little too often for my taste.

i agree, + he's an 0/18 cheap mdn claimer...
"on paper" = too slow, no stamina, 'doesn't like to win'

key would be the high% trainer.
Would the horse thrive and finish a little better?
Then he could control a route.
One more win after maiden seems pretty likely.
Then you could get 'stuck' with a horse and have to go to LAD, DEL, FL, MTN...,
Or you never know, he get on a roll...
He could be the next CIGAR :jump:
lol, no.

it's funny how the game right now is so much about the trainer...
Not a huge fan of that aspect, but it is what it is.
If you play that game, these type of plug-n-play bargains are at least worth a look by someone who has some knowledge in that area.
Could be something (besides too slow, stamina), that makes it a bad deal.

Homebred for a fairly low% trainer. Got a little bit of early foot, and the fundamentals are solid enough. Dirt footing seems solid enough. Just needs to improve stamina (and the overall speed fig).

Braddy is doing better of late, be it form cycle, or a little bit softer of meet, currently.

Slight dange that Braddy and Prado could trip into a win today with him, but I am not too scared, and as a 'betting proposition', I think he's a cool horse to consider 3rd/4th in dime superfectas, w/ maybe a backup 2nd in exacta, if you can key another known contender or two 1st/2nd as well.

As I recall Majestic Light was a top horse on anything but an NYRA main track. Couldn't handle the sandy composition. On any other surface he was a Grade 1 horse.

A bit before my time but superficially looking at his available record you're right, although I think there's a couple of qualifications.

He took a while to progress to stakes quality (basically his first big race was the Belmont), going 2 for his first 13 as a juvenile and early 3yo (who knew horses could run so much?). So this may account for his losing efforts at Aqueduct early as a 3yo.

He was a distant 4th in the Belmont, but at 12 furlongs, the performance might be dismissed especially being his first major stakes start.

He also got buried in the Travers but soon after was on the shelf for nearly 10 months, so perhaps he was ailing out of that race.

He lost his first 2 starts of the year as a 4yo before going on a tear. Both of these were at Belmont Park about a week apart (who knew horses could run 2 races that close together?). Both were allowance races (who knew trainers had the option of using allowance conditions instead of targeting Grade 1s every start?). My guess is these were simply tune-up races to get him back to racing condition (who knew trainers did that instead of cranking their horses up for every start?). One or both were probably sprints.

He was actually entered in the 1977 Woodward (eventually won by the great Forego) but was scratched due to a wet track. So perhaps it was the off-tracks that he didn't handle. At any rate, he was assigned 128 lbs for that Woodward (Forego was at 130+), so the racing secretary wasn't doing him any favors if he had a problem with NYRA tracks in general.