1:06

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

I have zero problem calling a track speed-biased when I see it taking place.I look at that 3rd race..o.k.,and I see 50k claiming 3 year old fillies going pretty fast for 4 furlongs.That's simply(to me) not as important(the time) as how far back the raters in the race are.Fact is(even though the time says they scorched up front) the 2 raters are not overly far back.They have decent position going into the turn of that sprint.Matter of fact,one of those raters got up late for a deadheat.If you want to see who the track is favoring,look to see where raters are in the middle of sprint races.If it's speed-biased,they will be pretty badly out of position going into the turn.Instead of 5-7 lengths off, they will be like 10-12 lengths off.Cushion track produces fast times.It's odd,sure,but what matters is whether it's biased,or whether horses are safe running on it.50k claiming 3 year old fillies ran what? 108.38? on the old dirt track it would have been about 109 4/5-1:10.So,add about that much to the horse who ran the wicked 106 n' change.It would equate to about 1:08 in change.He is very fast.The guy doesn't have many horses.So,good for him.

You bring up an important point - a fast track does not automatically have to be a speed-favoring track . . .