Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
Let me phrase it in another way...and please correct me if I am wrong:
Every speed horse in every single race that we see is trying to accomplish the exact same thing...and that is...to rush out of the gate and establish an uncontested lead...so the horse can then slow down the pace during the second fraction...and then reassert itself during the latter stages of the race. This is the "accelerate-decelerate-recelerate" scenario in action...and it's the most efficient way for the pace-setter to run. And the only reason that we DON'T see this sort of scenario play itself out more often is because the OTHER jockeys in the race RECOGNIZE how efficient this is as a race strategy...and they aren't so accommodating to the front-runner's wishes.
When we see that a certain race setup isn't as "common" as we think it should be...we have to ask ourselves: "Is this scenario rare because it is so taxing on the energy reserves of the horse...or is it rare because it's so BENEFICIAL for the horse that the OTHER jockeys in the race won't let the horse get away with it?"
|
Have to disagree with the statement that this accelerate - decelerate - re-accelerate pattern is more efficient for the front runner. Both my Belmont example and the Travers article show that this will adversely affect the final time and speed figure of any horse running this pattern. Leader or chaser. The laws of physics apply equally to all.
The only way for off the pace horses to avoid its effect is not to mimic the leader. Sometimes the leader is forced into this pattern if its pace to the 1st call is to fast to be maintained throughout the race and he has to take a break somewhere. That's what happened to Cartwheelin Lulu at Belmont. Fortunately for her, most of the other horses followed the same inefficient pattern so she got away with it.
