|
Originally Posted by Kasept
Speaking of AQU, found this analysis pieceof the rail bias situation there at 'capping site and thought it was worth "appropriating".. Interesting thoughts on way the track is playing and how to play it, etc...
I pay very close attention the NY racing, and have done so particularly this year, and for the most part the inner dirt has been as rail biased as a surface could possibly be. As was previously pointed out, it isn't necessarily speed, but during the bias a rail trip was a virtual necessity for success. This has been especially prevalent in two turn races. Contrary to a widely held belief, this has rarely been the case over past inner track meets, and while ground loss obviously more acutely affects performances due to the tighter track, for the most part the surface has been even.
For a horseplayer this is not really as simple as it might seem on the surface of things. Trying to determine who will get the lead, while relatively simple in some races, is confusing in others. And, as the jockeys get more aware of the situation (think about how severe it must be for even them to know) the races get run in much more haphazard fashions. The most startling example of this was the seventh race on January 7th. However, the real profit center occurs when the bias leaves (as it did January 11th before resurfacing late last week). At that time, betting on horses who suffered through impossible journeys, while avoiding those with false performaces due to the bias, produced fairly easy and substantial windfalls for anyone who paid careful attention. Thus, I suppose if nothing is done about the current surface, we can look forward to more betting opportunities at least somewhere down the road.
To me it is clearly a track superintendant issue, and the relatively new one at NYRA certainly should be under scrutiny, as during his relatively new tenure we have seen a number of surface problems that simply never existed before. Last Fall, upon returning to Belmont from Saratoga, the turf course couldn't be used for a number of days. The Aqueduct turf course has also suffered similar problems. Perhaps these problems arose from neglect by previous maintenance crews but it does seem at least curious that they came up under this person's supposed watch. The Aqueduct main track, long considered on of the best in the business, suffered serious problems this fall, so much so that one week in the beginning of November the races were switched to the inner so that repairs could be made. And now we have this ridiculous, and extended, inner bias.
I find it curious that more horsemen aren't complaining.. maybe they are.. as these races are being run in such an unfair manner that many horses simply have no chance before they leave the gate. On the other hand, there are always beneficiaries of these situations as well, so perhaps there is some evening out factor. Regardless of how one looks at it, there are upsides and downsides, but this is one bias that supercedes all others.
|