Question for racing office workers

[Valuist]

I know there's at least one on here (Stu) but I know he doesn't work for Churchill.

In looking over today's CD card, there are two 2 year old races. One is, not surprisingly, made up entirely of first time starters. The other is a mix of first timers and a few who've raced at 4 1/2 furlongs. I'm sure there will be a few isolated souls who love betting these races but I would have to believe the handle on these two races will be significantly less than the other races. I know I have absolutely no advantage here and I'm sure many others feel the same way.

So in a 10 race card, by placing these two betless races in the middle, they have effectively wrecked 4 of the possible 8 Pic 3s. Why would they not make these the first two races of the day? I guess its just too logical.

[LA Racing Lady]

I am not a current racing office employee, but have been in the past. I am going to take an educated guess at answering your question.

After looking at today's Churchill entire card, I see where the first two races have six horse fields. When I was the person choosing which race would go as what race in the card, I had specific guidelines given to me by management. One being the race numbers with lots of exotics like superfectas, pick 3, pick 4 and the like had to have at least 7 horse fields if at all possible. If we HAD to use a 6 horse field, I was limited as to what race it could be. In my case, it could not have been the first or second race because of daily doulbe wagering. But my guess is that Churchill management has set their guidelines, based on wagering patterns and that is why the card is as it is today. No racing secretary wants to have 4 of the first 5 races on the card be maiden races, but if those were the only races that held enough entries to be carded, then that is what is running today.

So, you see, it's not as if they wanted to put those two races in the middle of the card; they had to put them there because they had larger fields than the first two races. I know it doesn't help your handicapping today, but maybe you will get lucky with a longshot and win a huge pick 3.

[Linny]

Not an answer, but another question:

If you have split divisions of MSW's (say for 2yo's but they could be olders) why does it always seem that all those with prior starts get into one division and the other is all firsters?

I seem to see this pattern often at tracks like CD or KEE in the fall when there are alot of babies as well as Saratoga.

[sonnyp]

Originally Posted by Linny

Not an answer, but another question:

If you have split divisions of MSW's (say for 2yo's but they could be olders) why does it always seem that all those with prior starts get into one division and the other is all firsters?

I seem to see this pattern often at tracks like CD or KEE in the fall when there are alot of babies as well as Saratoga.

very insightful question. when a race must be split, divisions are SUPPOSED to be formed by a blind draw. im not convinced that's the way it happens.

when i raced harness at the meadowlands, they had a condition that, generally, would get 25 to 30 entries. they would make 3 seperate races, but each division was competetive, and even though they were the same class and purse, there was lightyears difference from the toughest to the easiest of the 3 divisions.

if you had a horse that was 7 or 8 best in that class, you would always end up in that tough division and you couldn't make 10 cents. meanwhile, lesser quality horse were winning the other 2 divisions and getting good money.

very aggrevating

[toddbowker]

Setting a card is part math, part science and part art ....

As LA Racing Lady pointed out, there are certain racing rules that will dictate where some of the races have to go. There are normally minimum number of starters for exotic pools that come into play, and sometimes even parts of entries can't be carded in races where certain exotics are planned.

There are also preferences from management. Sometimes they want the first half of the daily double or the last race of the day to be easy to hit, or they want the Pick 6 to carry over so the toughest races on the card go there.

Typically a racing secretary will place the highest quality race they can fill for that day as the 'feature' which is the next to last race on the card. Stakes races get carded there, unless there is a TV window that needs to be fit into. Assuming the racing secretary is relatively sharp, everything else is placed to try to maximize the wagering.

Which isn't to say it always works that way. I've even carded a race in a certain spot because a trainer did me a favor in giving me a horse and asked that it not be the last race of the day.

Races that are split have always been done with a blind draw everywhere I've been an official. Only exception is that coupled entries will always be split separately so they don't end up in the same half.

[stu]

First off, I can't speak for every track but at the 15 tracks in 5 jurisdictions where I have either been a racing official or a jockey agent every split race was done blindly at the counter with multiple witnesses. The draws are usually witnessed but at least two racing officials and some combination of stewards, commission employees, horsemen, and jockey agents.

Split races must also follow commission and house rules with respect to seperating common interests (trainers and owners). These entries are paper-clipped together when they hit the counter. The coupled entries are put into a box and blindly split away to seperate division. After all of the coupled entries are split away, the remaining single interests are shuffled and blindly partitioned into each heats.

If the subsequent splits are still overfilled, the house and commission rules are used to determine who gets to draw in and who stays in the box as an alternate.

This process can get complicated and time consuming in the case of a futurity and derby trials where there can be as many twenty some heats. After a race is split, they are checked to make sure that all doubles/multiples were split away appropriately. In the case where a owner/trainer ends up with two horses in one heat and not one in the other, the races are re-drawn.

All draws are publically done and any of y'all can probably witness it occuring at your local track space permitting. I believe that it is still true that in the state of Texas overnights must list the horseman and steward who were present at the draw.

If at any time one heat looks tougher than the other it is purely coincidental.

I have witnessed or officiated a minimum of a 1000 drawn races a year since 2003.

Stu

[stu]

Originally Posted by Valuist

I know there's at least one on here (Stu) but I know he doesn't work for Churchill.

In looking over today's CD card, there are two 2 year old races. One is, not surprisingly, made up entirely of first time starters. The other is a mix of first timers and a few who've raced at 4 1/2 furlongs.

I just reviewed the overnight for CD's May 30th card. These races were not split. One was C1 from the condition book and the other was X6 from the previous race day's overnight. One race was for maiden special weights and the other for maiden claimers - you should expect two different groups on horses in this case.

[LA Racing Lady]

Regarding the splitting of races: Trust me, if there is even a HINT that the blind splitting of horses is in someway unfair, there will be at least 10 jockey agents, trainers and even officials calling for a redraw!

I have been the person that has had to split many races, especially in futurity trials, where there can be 200 horses entered. If common ownership exists in any of the entries, they have to be coupled at the time of entry. As previously stated, a simple paper clip is used to keep those that must be split together. In plain sight, on the counter of the racing office, the coupled entries are seperated first and then the rest of the entry cards go into a box. Either a Steward, trainer or jockey agent will then randomly pull those cards from the box and they are placed face down into a race. After all the races are together, the cards for one race at a time go back into the box for the post position draw.

Things have been done this way for years and years, and even in these days of computers, the entries are still printed and the draw is done manually.

[Some_One]

Thanks for the insight behind the scenes in the racing office.

[sandpit]

Originally Posted by Valuist

So in a 10 race card, by placing these two betless races in the middle, they have effectively wrecked 4 of the possible 8 Pic 3s. Why would they not make these the first two races of the day? I guess its just too logical.

There's been some really good replies on here, but I'll add my 2 cents worth since I used to be a CD official for quite a while.

The racing secretary (who is very, very good by the way) has to deal with several things from a betting perspective as well as track management. First of all, the first 2 races on the card used to always attract the smallest $ handle-wise, so they have historically carded short fields there. Second, when the races are set, he has to consider the number of maiden races, not running more than 2 turf races (unless the dirt races don't fill, and I see there were 3 turf races today) and not running on the grass back to back; not running 2-year-olds as the last race of the day; and having full fields for the super high 5 and kickoff of the pick 5; and finally whenever there is a stake, you generally lose flexibility to arrange the races because the stake has a pre-determined spot.

So, looking at the card, he didn't have a ton of options and it looks like he did a great job setting them and backloading the card with full fields.

[Valuist]

There has been some very good replies and I understand those points but I do believe track management should card races with all first time starters as the first race of the day. No advantages to "insiders" for the opening race of the double, P3 or P4 in those instances. Hopefully they will eventually agree with me.

[Kelso]

Originally Posted by sandpit

First of all, the first 2 races on the card used to always attract the smallest $ handle-wise, so they have historically carded short fields there

Sandpit,
I understand assigning handle a very high priority. That makes a lot of sense. But, do you think that an 8-10 horse field of firsters and lightly-run babies will generally attract more handle than a short field of cheap claimers. (I have no idea which pulls in more betting ... but my guess is with the claimers.)

And, beyond the matter of handle for individual races, there remains Valuist's issue of horizontals that are skipped by bettors as a direct result of the presence of (I expect) minimally-bet baby races. In your opinion, is horizontal handle adequately considered in seperating the juvie races and sprinkling them among the other, more attractive races?

Thank you.

[Stillriledup]

Originally Posted by Valuist

I know there's at least one on here (Stu) but I know he doesn't work for Churchill.

In looking over today's CD card, there are two 2 year old races. One is, not surprisingly, made up entirely of first time starters. The other is a mix of first timers and a few who've raced at 4 1/2 furlongs. I'm sure there will be a few isolated souls who love betting these races but I would have to believe the handle on these two races will be significantly less than the other races. I know I have absolutely no advantage here and I'm sure many others feel the same way.

So in a 10 race card, by placing these two betless races in the middle, they have effectively wrecked 4 of the possible 8 Pic 3s. Why would they not make these the first two races of the day? I guess its just too logical.

I guess they do it to possibly create carryovers, i don't think there's any other reason they might do it.

Also, Churchill does the horseplayer no favors, instead of carding small fields into the post derby card pick 6, they cluttered the card with large fields of bad horses. I guess they wanted the pick 6 to pay a lot, so a few rich syndicates could win all the millions and take them out of circulation for the most part. I know if i was carding races over there, i would want that pick 6 to pay a few grand, i would want a lot of people to hit it because i would know that if f few hundred people win a few grand each, its better for churn than if a few people win a few hundred grand each.

Im with you, when i see races with 10 first time starters, i just skip over it and go to the next race. Unless you're a clocker who's at the track every morning, betting those races is sheer guess work. If i wanted sheer guess work, i think i would play the lottery instead.

Fair Grounds used to have 'trial' races where a firster would have to compete in one of these events in order to show up on the betting card. These races were available to view online (i think) and handicappers can watch them on tape. What happened to that tradition was it was squashed by the owners who wanted to hide their runners.

[Southieboy]

Originally Posted by LA Racing Lady

Things have been done this way for years and years, and even in these days of computers, the entries are still printed and the draw is done manually.

Why don't tracks just put the names in the computer and with a click of a mouse have the posts set?

[stu]

Originally Posted by Southieboy

Why don't tracks just put the names in the computer and with a click of a mouse have the posts set?

Probably the same reason why ping pong balls are still used in powerball or the nba draft.

Although I believe that it would be equally as fair as paper out of a box, computerized random number generators would have trouble getting the 'innumerates' to believe that it is fair.

The tote foobar that left Big Brown out of the random 'quick pick' has a lingering effect on some horsemen and horseplayers.

I am willing to try it but imagine that in most jurisdictions racing commission rules would have to be amended to allow it.