Garrett At The Shore

[philcski]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

If you want people coming to the race track and seeing 'name' horses, trainers and jocks, then I'm sure that MTH will offer that, and successfully. If you want to repeat the AQU Inner (+ turf races) or GP experience, then MTH summer is the place to be. I can't see how anyone plays this track seriously -- with or without big purses. With all the 'fair' options out there (WO, being the best of them) and all the tracks that offer real money making opportunities (WO again at the top of the list given the large fields) why would anyone play this bull ring?

I wouldn't play this track over BEL/SAR. Tracks like this need to be developed.

Perception: Monmouth Park is speed-biased.
Reality: Monmouth Park is not more friendly to speed by a statistically significant margin, although it is mildly more friendly.

average winner's position (lengths behind at the 2nd call) by track:
CD 6F 1.46
MED 6F 1.26
AQU 6F 1.26
AQUI 6F 1.14
BEL 6F 1.13
SAR 6F 1.01
MTH 6F .96

CD 8F 3.43
MED 8F 3.06
AQU 8F 3.02
BEL 8F 2.94
AQUI 8F 2.93
MTH 8F 2.45
SAR 8F *** Not a distance run. (7F = 1.77)

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by philcski

Perception: Monmouth Park is speed-biased.
Reality: Monmouth Park is not more friendly to speed by a statistically significant margin, although it is mildly more friendly.

Let's do this. You take some serious bankroll and play closers at MTH this summer. I suppose 'reality' might set in then.

I have nothing against playing speed. I play speed all the time, even on POLY (even at WO). My problem is when horses running other than early don't have a fair chance to win. This is the case at MTH; it's the case at MED; and it's also, pretty much, the case at GP. Compare GP to TAM. You can win on the front end at TAM probably as easily as you can at GP. The important difference, however, is that you have significantly better chance of winning from off the pace at TAM than you do at GP. Maybe this why so many bettors have moved from GP to TAM.

I don't need stats to tell me the above. I play these tracks and I'm very aware of how they play.

They can pretty MTH up all they want; it's still UNFAIR.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Let's do this. You take some serious bankroll and play closers at MTH this summer. I suppose 'reality' might set in then.

I have nothing against playing speed. I play speed all the time, even on POLY (even at WO). My problem is when horses running other than early don't have a fair chance to win. This is the case at MTH; it's the case at MED; and it's also, pretty much, the case at GP. Compare GP to TAM. You can win on the front end at TAM probably as easily as you can at GP. The important difference, however, is that you have significantly better chance of winning from off the pace at TAM than you do at GP. Maybe this why so many bettors have moved from GP to TAM.

I don't need stats to tell me the above. I play these tracks and I'm very aware of how they play.

They can pretty MTH up all they want; it's still UNFAIR.

Listen, I'm not trying to convince you that it's a closer's paradise, because it isn't. All I'm suggesting is it's not as unfair as you (and most everyone) believe. Meadowlands is actually more kind to closers than Belmont or Saratoga. Here's the thing. This game isn't just an exercise in picking the most winners, it's picking winners that return more than the next guy does. So if the public seems to think that only wins, you can use that to your advantage. From 2004-2007, the average wire job at Monmouth paid $9.80 versus anything off the pace paid $12.80. If you can find a horse that makes sense coming from off the pace, you will get rewarded accordingly.

In comparison, Belmont, paid $11.60 for wire jobs and $10.80 for anything off the pace.