Favorites Gone Wild in 2017. Hostility of Dirt Racing.

[CincyHorseplayer]

One of my new year's resolutions as a horseplayer was to improve my dirt game. A surface often neglected by me with a preoccupation on turf. But a closer look at the stats, the hostility of the odds reality on dirt revealed that the neglect was well warranted.

These numbers I want you to understand are from the races I have made my version of an oddsline on. The significance of the sub 2-1 % is heightened by the fact that in many races where I see an overwhelming and legitimate favorite I don't bother to make a line at all. Plus in fields when there are 6 or less entrants with 2 sub 2-1 favorites I skip altogether also. So you can imagine my frustration when I am targeting larger fields and skipping oppressive odds race when winners are still being dominated by sub 2-1 horses.

Assuming a relatively standard proficiency, the second set of numbers are derived from the winners that come from my top contenders on each surface. On dirt they represent 23% of the entrants and win 53% of the races. On turf they represent 20% of the entrants and win 56% of the races. I'm sure these numbers are familiar to you from your own play. Measuring the odds layout is the only reason I track these numbers other than to make sure my judgement is not out of whack.

In 291 dirt races 93(32%) are won by sub 2-1 horses(from my top contenders). Comparable to the standard winning% of favorites but that doesn't include favorites that are 2-1 or higher. I only track odds in this manner because I believe in single races this odds bracket is overall unopportunistic. I don't consider any play from the $6-8 to be a great shakes either, especially with so many races where 2 of these types, of roughly equal abilities are entered in the same race. But that said the winners from the 2-1 and up bracket are all of 60 of 291. 21% of the races. There is no margin for error on dirt racing. The passing attack is a smart one. I have proudly rooted all my bets, straight and exotic in 28% wins and a 10.50 avg mutual. But I am well aware of the hostility of conditions this surface brings and I am glad I am not landlocked to it!

Now by stark contrast we have turf. On dirt from my top contenders the sub 2-1 bracket won an oppressive 61% of the races. Yet on turf that number drops to a very friendly 23%. Of 213 turf races only 27 winners have come from the sub 2-1 bracket(13%) overall. The 2-1 and up bracket fielded 44% of the winners(93 winners) overall and of my top contenders represented 78% contrasted with the 39% on dirt. The difference in average mutuel is 7.44(dirt) and 9.43(turf). Day and night just a friendlier surface to play.

Anyway striving to achieve balance in this game the goal has been to be a better player on dirt and to forge a method of operation for the surface. Basically to give it it's just due which I admit has been lacking. What I realized is that we are playing 2 different games within this game. Just wanted to get your take on favorites so far this year and your insights on the different surfaces?

[CincyHorseplayer]

Well just sat down and looked at the races from this week. Only looked at 42 races this week from 8 different racetracks. Dominantly Gulfstream and Tampa.

In 24 dirt races 13 winners(54%) paid sub 2-1. Exotics putrid. Of my top contenders at 2-1 and up, 5 of 24 won(21%)

In 18 turf races only 4 winners(22%) were sub 2-1. Of my top contenders at 2-1 and up, 7 of 18 won(39%).

54% $5 or less winners? Is this why so many players are scoff at even the possibility of winning? Because they are stuck in this hostile dirt world? There have been a lot of weeks like this already in the young year(my calendar starts in December). I don't think it has ever been this extreme. Is anybody feeling this at all out there?

[menifee]

I find that favorites dominate winter racing because speed is so dominant at GP and SA. When the surfaces get fairer in the spring/summer, I find it easier to find prices on the dirt.

[JustRalph]

I'm surprised there aren't more comments. Great stuff Cincy 👍

[ultracapper]

Originally Posted by CincyHorseplayer

Well just sat down and looked at the races from this week. Only looked at 42 races this week from 8 different racetracks. Dominantly Gulfstream and Tampa.

In 24 dirt races 13 winners(54%) paid sub 2-1. Exotics putrid. Of my top contenders at 2-1 and up, 5 of 24 won(21%)

In 18 turf races only 4 winners(22%) were sub 2-1. Of my top contenders at 2-1 and up, 7 of 18 won(39%).

54% $5 or less winners? Is this why so many players are scoff at even the possibility of winning? Because they are stuck in this hostile dirt world? There have been a lot of weeks like this already in the young year(my calendar starts in December). I don't think it has ever been this extreme. Is anybody feeling this at all out there?

Handicapped 4 races at SA today. Didn't make a bet, and didn't miss a thing. Best payoff of the 4 was an $8 "upset" of a 1/5 bridgejumper. The other 3 paid $3.20, $5.something, and either $4 or $4.20, didn't see, but saw he left the gate at even money. That last one was on the turf, but the other 3 were dirt.

Short story long, yeah, prices on the dirt, at SA anyway, have been chalkie this winter.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

I'm surprised there aren't more comments. Great stuff Cincy 👍

Thanks Ralph. I think after reading this again I need to clarify it. Probably why few comments.

While the odds distribution is based on my bettable contenders I have 2 sets of numbers.

1)overall % wins by surface

Dirt

-sub 2-1=32%

-2-1 and up=21%

Turf

-sub 2-1=13%

-2-1 and up=44%

Then the % distribution of winners among my win totals. It has to add up to 100% even if they only win 53% and 56% of the races. Just use this to gauge the landscape of betting opportunities.

Dirt

-sub 2-1=61%

-2-1 up=39%

Turf

-sub 2-1=23%

-2-1 up=78%

I think the implications are clear.

[LemonSoupKid]

Originally Posted by menifee

I find that favorites dominate winter racing because speed is so dominant at GP and SA. When the surfaces get fairer in the spring/summer, I find it easier to find prices on the dirt.

I've posted in other forums that the last few times I've bet simulcast at SA and GP, I've killed it. I have a much greater ROI at these two tracks, with mainly WPS bets and multiple crossover exacta boxes of 3 horses.

Do you think it's the speed that suits my handicapping? I'm overall a much better Turf bettor historically, and the last times (January and March) I've gone, especially at Gulfstream with big field for 7.5 furlong or longer turf routes even with big fields I tend to hit winners and exacta combos for decent prices (I'll bet bigger on both).

[LemonSoupKid]

You guys are complaining about a fact you recognize yet don't take advantage of. Think about how problematic that is: You admit that you don't have, or don't want to have, adaptability.

If the favorites are hitting and you spot it, take the higher win percentage and win more with a smaller margin per bet.

It always comes down to this, sports or otherwise:

High volume and small margin OR
Low volume and large margin

Know your market and adapt. It won't stay that way forever, so always be on your toes. Easy to say, harder to do.

[ultracapper]

Originally Posted by LemonSoupKid

I've posted in other forums that the last few times I've bet simulcast at SA and GP, I've killed it. I have a much greater ROI at these two tracks, with mainly WPS bets and multiple crossover exacta boxes of 3 horses.

Do you think it's the speed that suits my handicapping? I'm overall a much better Turf bettor historically, and the last times (January and March) I've gone, especially at Gulfstream with big field for 7.5 furlong or longer turf routes even with big fields I tend to hit winners and exacta combos for decent prices (I'll bet bigger on both).

We could start a 1000 post thread on this subject, but yes, that's what I think. If you keep records of your bets, you'll find that there are certain "looks" or "profiles" that will dominate your winning selections. A real key to becoming a successful bettor is to know what your winners look like.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by LemonSoupKid

You guys are complaining about a fact you recognize yet don't take advantage of. Think about how problematic that is: You admit that you don't have, or don't want to have, adaptability.

If the favorites are hitting and you spot it, take the higher win percentage and win more with a smaller margin per bet.

It always comes down to this, sports or otherwise:

High volume and small margin OR
Low volume and large margin

Know your market and adapt. It won't stay that way forever, so always be on your toes. Easy to say, harder to do.

Like the screen name! On dirt I have taken the tact to accept lower price winners. I had become so accustomed to higher odds with turf that my decision making process had to be altered for dirt because my dirt hit % suffered greatly last season due to applying the same decision logic to the surface. On turf if I had 2 horses of roughly equal ability and horse A is 2-1 and horse B is 5-1 reflex would take the latter because the lower odds horse is actually less likely to win on the surface(13% vs 44%). It is completely different on dirt. Passing is the greatest reflexive attribute. And routinely betting the higher odds horses with a 21% win probability is not friendly to a bettor. I think the answer is just more precision in judgement. And not having slumped shoulders getting 5/2 LOL!

What you are talking about is a phase I went through and I think all bettors do. We flirt with hit % and can make it go up and down depending on the focus of either the low or longshot odds group. I find both extremes for me losing propositions. I have a 3.96 IV on sub 2-1 with a marginal ROI but on 9-1 and up it represents a mere 12% win rate. Neither are cornerstones for beating this game. The $9-18 mutuel range is the most profitable on either surface. But on dirt the focus on the $5-8 range is where you control your destiny for beating the surface.

[CincyHorseplayer]

A few things I wanted to add.

All these ideas on odds to me are just foundational concerns for what to build your game upon. I think if these basic premises are met all the other bets which put you into a position to crush races will be inevitably discovered. When I started to track odds ranges instead of exact odds the whole concept was merely to have a measurement of the race in front of me to gauge a races exotic potential. Feel is important and odds are obvious but I wanted a concrete method of tracking a race's potential. Where I could look back a day or even a year later and say "Hey you made a mistake pursuing exotics in this race with such a bleak odds landscape on the contenders. Longstory short beings fundamentally sound on finding friendly race scapes is good for all bets not just win bets.

Which leads me to dirt's real value. For all the odds friendliness on turf there is a higher chaos factor in who finishes in the money slots. Solid dirt contenders usually fire and make it into the money slots whereas solid turf horses misfire often and finish back. Wide trip from outside, pinned in on rial for an extended period, wild variations in pace scenario, pedigree and multiple surface changes within a race, all wreak havoc on talent=in money finishes theory. It doesn't. That's where dirt really makes it's impact because the chaos factor is negligible. At least IMO. How many years have you been playing 2 horses in the top 2 slots back and forth or anchoring those spots in tris and supers etc? And doing it comfortably. For all the satisfaction I get from getting 8-1 and $100 exactas on turf it comes at about the same frequency as I play 1 way exacta at $30 on dirt and crush the shit out of it. And it's comfortable.

Anyway being a more precise dirt player is a goal this year. Feel like I have a good handle on it.

[CincyHorseplayer]

Originally Posted by LemonSoupKid

I've posted in other forums that the last few times I've bet simulcast at SA and GP, I've killed it. I have a much greater ROI at these two tracks, with mainly WPS bets and multiple crossover exacta boxes of 3 horses.

Do you think it's the speed that suits my handicapping? I'm overall a much better Turf bettor historically, and the last times (January and March) I've gone, especially at Gulfstream with big field for 7.5 furlong or longer turf routes even with big fields I tend to hit winners and exacta combos for decent prices (I'll bet bigger on both).

Living in Cincinnati with extreme weather conditions winter racing can still be beat but I find form sporadic whereas summer racing is more formful which IMO usually means a tradeoff in price. Being selective as it sounds like you are you are getting the best of both worlds!

[LemonSoupKid]

Thanks for the replies.

In aggregate, the similar running styles and relative difficulty to get a lead and hold it in turf racing (as compared to dirt) is great. Because of front running advantage by definition in a game of no lanes and obvious , multiple examples of trip problems, leaders will always have a statistical advantage in dirt, and that translates to lower prices per winner = greater predictability.

But you knew that. For the purposes of this conversation I think it's particularly borne out at Santa Anita and Gulfstream, and that's why we see what we are seeing.