Idea for Post Position

[MaTH716]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I don't like the idea and wouldn't support changing anything. Its a horse race and I think it is best to just select the post positions as they do in every other race.

But, that being said, the reaction to the suggestion here seems a bit over the top. Let's say they did make the change suggested....who cares? It wouldn't affect much. How often does post position really play a big role in the Preakness? We aren't talking about a 9f race at GP, or the 20-horse field of the Derby, where post position is often determinative.So, there's no real point in doing it, but there's no real harm either.

[Ogygian]

The only change in post psoition draws I would support would be draw the Derby from highest points down...the horse that finishes with the most points leading up to the Derby has first draw, the 20th horse has last. IMO, it shouldnt be "luck of the draw" in the Derby...
Leave the Preakness and Belmont alone...post draw there isnt as significant...

[jms62]

There is quite a bit of chatter about post having little to do with the Preakness. Would a .018 winning pct from the 1 hole in the last 53 runnings (That is 1 out of 53) indicate that only horses that werent good enough have drawn that number? That is mathematically astounding.

[dprtulsa]

exactly my point, why not have random sites for playoff games then in basketball if the lead up games mean nothing....why have seeds in the NCAA tournament? Just have a random draw, everyone is equal and past performance means nothing for the big dance.

Just a suggestion folks, this is the problem with racing...new thoughts are attacked as stupid or mocked......
I recall the dime superfecta being mocked as well, until tracks figured out people liked the idea

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by dprtulsa

exactly my point, why not have random sites for playoff games then in basketball if the lead up games mean nothing....why have seeds in the NCAA tournament? Just have a random draw, everyone is equal and past performance means nothing for the big dance.

Just a suggestion folks, this is the problem with racing...new thoughts are attacked as stupid or mocked......
I recall the dime superfecta being mocked as well, until tracks figured out people liked the idea

The problem with many new idea's are they aren't necessarily good idea's, just new ones.
This is horse racing, not basketball. For most of its history (you know the glory days everyone seems to pine for) the better horses were given pretty significant handicaps as opposed to trying to give them a bigger advantage. The reward for winning the Derby is 1+ million dollars and a lifetime of glory. IMO that's enough reward. Not to mention that the post position should always be drawn randomly as everyone on the race has paid the same nomination and entry fee and should have an equal opportunity to draw whatever post they draw. Despite the idea of a Derby trail or even Triple Crown, the races themselves are individual events.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

The problem with many new idea's are they aren't necessarily good idea's, just new ones.
This is horse racing, not basketball. For most of its history (you know the glory days everyone seems to pine for) the better horses were given pretty significant handicaps as opposed to trying to give them a bigger advantage. The reward for winning the Derby is 1+ million dollars and a lifetime of glory. IMO that's enough reward. Not to mention that the post position should always be drawn randomly as everyone on the race has paid the same nomination and entry fee and should have an equal opportunity to draw whatever post they draw. Despite the idea of a Derby trail or even Triple Crown, the races themselves are individual events.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by jms62

There is quite a bit of chatter about post having little to do with the Preakness. Would a .018 winning pct from the 1 hole in the last 53 runnings (That is 1 out of 53) indicate that only horses that werent good enough have drawn that number? That is mathematically astounding.

hmm...53 years. Without looking this up, and I promise I haven't, I can be pretty sure that 54 years ago a horse won from the 1 hole. If true, it makes it 2 in 54 years, which is roughly only half as astounding as 1 in 53.

If there was a significant change in track configuration 53 years ago that warrants using 53 years as a cutoff, then that would justify using an odd number like 53.

--Dunbar

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

hmm...53 years. Without looking this up, and I promise I haven't, I can be pretty sure that 54 years ago a horse won from the 1 hole. If true, it makes it 2 in 54 years, which is roughly only half as astounding as 1 in 53.

If there was a significant change in track configuration 53 years ago that warrants using 53 years as a cutoff, then that would justify using an odd number like 53.

--Dunbar

Well you got me. 2 for 54 completly changes things.

[Dunbar]

Originally Posted by jms62

Well you got me. 2 for 54 completly changes things.

I'm glad you agree. Otherwise I'd have to point out that there were 8 winners from the 1 hole in the past 84 years. I think we can safely say that 8 in 84 does not fall into the 'mathematically astounding' type of stats. Neither, for that matter, does 2 for 54.

--Dunbar

[The Bart]

Originally Posted by Dunbar

I'm glad you agree. Otherwise I'd have to point out that there were 8 winners from the 1 hole in the past 84 years. I think we can safely say that 8 in 84 does not fall into the 'mathematically astounding' type of stats. Neither, for that matter, does 2 for 54.

--Dunbar

[hi_im_god]

tabasco cat had an open stall to the left of him at the start of the preakness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_8ElpNT7l8

so if you really want to make a point you could say bally ache in 1960 was the last winner to start from the #1 hole.

[miraja2]

Let's just look at the last ten years. Obviously there is no way to know for sure, but how many of the following Preakness winners do people think would have failed to win the race had they drawn post #1 instead of wherever they actually ended up:

Funny Cide
Smarty Jones
Afleet Alex
Bernardini
Big Brown
Rachel Alexandra


My answer is....zero. They all would have won. Did being stuck down inside have a negative effect on Orb? Yeah. But that doesn't mean the #1 post is some kiss of death in the Preakness.