Was there really a rail bias?

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by eurobounce

Well most of the lenghts were from the path each horse choose. Street Sense took the rail and Quat went about 8 wide. Now I dont know how many lengths that equates to but if prob contributes to the 10 lengths. In addition, look at the two horses making their moves down the backstreatch. Steet was moving much better than Quay. Plus, I think Street had a GREAT day. Giiving all these factors, it make sense that Street won by 10.

I really don't know why you f'n asked about this.You have your mind made up.So go that way.

[repent]

can someone directly involved in the industry or otherwise explain to me why the hell tracks dramitically change the running surface for big day race events?

why not just leave it alone?
we dont need to see high level claimers breaking track records on the KY Derby undercard and we dont need a distinct rail bias on BC day.
same thing that happened at Arlington in 2002.


Repent

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by repent

can someone directly involved in the industry or otherwise explain to me why the hell tracks dramitically change the running surface for big day race events?

why not just leave it alone?
we dont need to see high level claimers breaking track records on the KY Derby undercard and we dont need a distinct rail bias on BC day.
same thing that happened at Arlington in 2002.


Repent

This is something I'd like to know as well. But in this instance, my guess is that Churchill OD'ed on the rail because they have had problems with dead rails for the last two Derbys.. Kind of overcompensation I guess.

[repent]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

This is something I'd like to know as well. But in this instance, my guess is that Churchill OD'ed on the rail because they have had problems with dead rails for the last two Derbys.. Kind of overcompensation I guess.

fair point and something I had not thought of.
thanks.
did not really effect this year's winner of the Derby, but you have a point.


Repent

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by repent

can someone directly involved in the industry or otherwise explain to me why the hell tracks dramitically change the running surface for big day race events?

why not just leave it alone?
we dont need to see high level claimers breaking track records on the KY Derby undercard and we dont need a distinct rail bias on BC day.
same thing that happened at Arlington in 2002.


Repent

We all know why they did it in '01. They thought they had the super horse in Point Given and wanted him to break 2:00 for that race. Instead they broke horses down later who ran on that day. Also had allowance fillies breaking decades long records. A disgrace.

[repent]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

We all know why they did it in '01. They thought they had the super horse in Point Given and wanted him to break 2:00 for that race. Instead they broke horses down later who ran on that day. Also had allowance fillies breaking decades long records. A disgrace.

lol, yeah I know.
I just dont know why they would think anyone would really care if PGiven, or FuPeg, or whatever KY Derby fav broke 2 minutes.

nobody that I know of cares what the final time is since it can be manipulated so easily.


Repent

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by repent

same thing that happened at Arlington in 2002.

rail bias on Arlington BC day? Are you kidding me? With 3 and 4-wide horses winning, and azeri going wire to wire?

i'm not sure what you're looking at. does a 4-wide move around the turn and into the stretch constitute the "rail?" If so then there's a rail bias everywhere, and that is called geometry. horses running 9-wide do not regularly win anything, let alone their biggest race of the year.

you've basically just shown that your judgment of a rail bias is terrible, so your thoughts on CD Saturday are basically irrelevant.

[repent]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

rail bias on Arlington BC day? Are you kidding me? With 3 and 4-wide horses winning, and azeri going wire to wire?

i'm not sure what you're looking at. does a 4-wide move around the turn and into the stretch constitute the "rail?" If so then there's a rail bias everywhere, and that is called geometry. horses running 9-wide do not regularly win anything, let alone their biggest race of the year.

you've basically just shown that your judgment of a rail bias is terrible, so your thoughts on CD Saturday are basically irrelevant.

calm down weirdo.

I did not say there was a rail bias at Arlington.
said they changed the running surface.
was favoring speed all day on the dirt track at Arlington.
all winners were close or on the lead.

did not even mention the terms "rail" and "Arlington" in the same sentence.

the relevance of what I type is up to each individual poster.
please feel free to ignore my words in the future you freak.


Repent

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by repent

calm down weirdo.

I did not say there was a rail bias at Arlington.
said they changed the running surface.
was favoring speed all day on the dirt track at Arlington.
all winners were close or on the lead.

did not even mention the terms "rail" and "Arlington" in the same sentence.

the relevance of what I type is up to each individual poster.
please feel free to ignore my words in the future you freak.


Repent

"distinct rail bias on BC day.
same thing that happened at Arlington in 2002."

one sentence follows the other, and says "same thing" -- the english language and syntactical structures dictate that that sentence has to reference the one before it, with very few exceptions -- especially not something that you said much much much earlier.

good to see that nothing has changed though in the last few years you "freak" -- that you're still convinced that only your logic works and as long as you can convince yourself of something, that it has to be true. that is why you're an idiot.

ps that sentence that said "that is why you're an idiot" references a post that i made yesterday to someone else, lest you get confused because it is clearly placed as if it references you. see, that's how the language works my friend.

[repent]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

"distinct rail bias on BC day.
same thing that happened at Arlington in 2002."

one sentence follows the other, and says "same thing" -- the english language and syntactical structures dictate that that sentence has to reference the one before it, with very few exceptions -- especially not something that you said much much much earlier.

good to see that nothing has changed though in the last few years you "freak" -- that you're still convinced that only your logic works and as long as you can convince yourself of something, that it has to be true. that is why you're an idiot.

ps that sentence that said "that is why you're an idiot" references a post that i made yesterday to someone else, lest you get confused because it is clearly placed as if it references you. see, that's how the language works my friend.

reread the original post you are referencing.
you are wrong man.
was commenting on tracks changing the racing surface for big day race events.
you want to interpret something else, then go ahead slick.
have fun whoever the hell you are(act as if we somehow have conversed in the past).
are you ap park kid?

whatever, dont care.


Repent