Was there really a rail bias?

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Who said anything about being on the lead? The point is he had the rail for much of the race, and that was a distinct advantage.

Another was on the rail in front of him and let him through.

Does a bear sh!!t in the woods? Does a horse sh!!t on the track?

CD scraped the track Sat am before the BC (check the races on Friday before BC ... no inside bias then). Why they scraped it, I have no idea.

Overall results on Sat make everything very obvious. LR

Originally Posted by Lbigdog77

Does a bear sh!!t in the woods? Does a horse sh!!t on the track?

CD scraped the track Sat am before the BC (check the races on Friday before BC ... no inside bias then). Why they scraped it, I have no idea.

Overall results on Sat make everything very obvious. LR

Sorry, I have to disagree. Horses won on the lead - Dreaming of Anna who raced 2-3 wide the entire time - Horses won from stalking - Thors Echo who won going 3-4 wide - Horses won from far far back - Street Sense shot up the rail after being 2nd to last by 20 - Invasor won from mid pack going about 7 wide - Round Pound won by racing 2-3 wide mic pack. The only thing in common is that most took the rail which any good jock would do. Round Pound had no place else to go. Dreaming Of Anna led wire to wire and Street Sense had a clear path the entire trip.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Lbigdog77

Does a bear sh!!t in the woods? Does a horse sh!!t on the track?

CD scraped the track Sat am before the BC (check the races on Friday before BC ... no inside bias then). Why they scraped it, I have no idea.

Overall results on Sat make everything very obvious. LR

You would think so. I think the track by the rail was actually moving forward when Street went thru there.He seemed to just jump on.......Euro,we will see if these horses coming out of the 1 hole can repeat any of this. I don't think "Street" will be drawing off by 10,but maybe you guys are right,and he will do it again.I think he was best,but not best by 10 lengths.If C.Q. had taken the rail(and "Street" had gone outside,) I think C.Q. wins that race.Not by 10,but I think he would have won it.Look at C.Q. stop out there.Trevor thought he was moving like the winner,and then he goes to the outside(in the stretch)and can't get thru that cuppy crap(while Street is basically running on concrete at the rail.)A 10 length difference.Is it really that hard for you to see this? You would really have to have a closed mind to not see the difference between what C.Q. and "Street" were running on (in that stretch.)

Yes....the rail was a VERY advantageous place to be last Saturday - no question.....it was disappointing to watch....

IMO:

If Happy Ticket gets Round Pond's trip down the stretch, it is very easy to see her running away in the stretch....Asi Siempre beats them all if she gets through though....

Street Sense, while a nice colt, is NOT 10-lengths better than those horses and Calvin didn't even have to ride him from the sixteenth pole to the wire and he was running away. Not sure what Calvin is doing these days but it seems like he has been a little TOO productive at CD last spring to now....

[Cajungator26]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

You would think so. I think the track by the rail was actually moving forward when Street went thru there.He seemed to just jump on.......Euro,we will see if these horses coming out of the 1 hole can repeat any of this. I don't think "Street" will be drawing off by 10,but maybe you guys are right,and he will do it again.I think he was best,but not best by 10 lengths.If C.Q. had taken the rail(and "Street" had gone outside,) I think C.Q. wins that race.Not by 10,but I think he would have won it.Look at C.Q. stop out there.Trevor thought he was moving like the winner,and then he goes to the outside(in the stretch)and can't get thru that cuppy crap(while Street is basically running on concrete at the rail.)A 10 length difference.Is it really that hard for you to see this? You would really have to have a closed mind to not see the difference between what C.Q. and "Street" were running on (in that stretch.)

I agree, Scuds. I just don't see Street Sense as being a horse 10 lengths better than CQ or Scat Daddy... it appeared to me that Street Sense was running on a super speedway.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

BTW,I am much more upset about the way some very consistent horses couldn't handle that track.There was a rail bias,but the biggest problem(to me) was a track that was especially tough to get ahold of.Henny Hughes,Siren Lure,Bordonaro.......have all been very consistent horses,but the jocks on them all said the horses couldn't handle the track at all.TM Bling never got a call either(this horse was 9 for 9 itm in sprints.) I have never seen 2 co-favorites break down in unrelated incidents in a race. There was a rail bias,but it was given even more significance when much of the other parts of the track were evidently very difficult to get ahold of.Be nice if they didn't have 2 problems with the track at the same time.I don't feel badly for bettors(who could adapt somewhat to this.)I feel bad for the connections of horses who worked hard to get to the B.C.,and then had to deal with a crappy track.It happened.It's over.I just wish people would give a pass to those that didn't do well on that dirt track.That's all.The races on the dirt that day are(to me)a complete toss.

[2Hot4TV]

Originally Posted by Cunningham Racing

Yes....the rail was a VERY advantageous place to be last Saturday - no question.....it was disappointing to watch....

IMO:

If Happy Ticket gets Round Pond's trip down the stretch, it is very easy to see her running away in the stretch....Asi Siempre beats them all if she gets through though....

Street Sense, while a nice colt, is NOT 10-lengths better than those horses and Calvin didn't even have to ride him from the sixteenth pole to the wire and he was running away. Not sure what Calvin is doing these days but it seems like he has been a little TOO productive at CD last spring to now....

If Asi Siempre just waited 2 seconds longer the middle of the race track opened up and she wins going away and the rail bias would be a non issue.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by Cardus

On every major race day, we hear from trainers and jockeys that their horses didn't handle the track. This is not a new phenomenon.

As for not handling Churchill Downs, again, this is not a new concept.

Hello, Skip Away?

Well,when the country's top 3 or 4 sprinters all can't handle the track,you might want to raise your standards of what's an acceptable surface.When you have all 5 of the previous grade 1 sprint winners not hitting the board,you might want to question that.I think a lot of people would not care if they raced on broken glass..."They all had to run on the same broken glass.........Don't whine........You can't get a perfectly fair track...doesn't exist."

[SCUDSBROTHER]

The fact is that there are some horses that can be used as "controls" in determining whether a track is suitable for racing.When you have enough highly consistent horses("controls") all failing to handle a surface(and you did have these types entered on Saturday) then the results are a toss.As I've said already,horses that ran poorly on that dirt track Saturday get a total pass from me.No way I am gunna hold it against any of them.You have to have some standards,or you're just no better than those that bet dogs.

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

You would think so. I think the track by the rail was actually moving forward when Street went thru there.He seemed to just jump on.......Euro,we will see if these horses coming out of the 1 hole can repeat any of this. I don't think "Street" will be drawing off by 10,but maybe you guys are right,and he will do it again.I think he was best,but not best by 10 lengths.If C.Q. had taken the rail(and "Street" had gone outside,) I think C.Q. wins that race.Not by 10,but I think he would have won it.Look at C.Q. stop out there.Trevor thought he was moving like the winner,and then he goes to the outside(in the stretch)and can't get thru that cuppy crap(while Street is basically running on concrete at the rail.)A 10 length difference.Is it really that hard for you to see this? You would really have to have a closed mind to not see the difference between what C.Q. and "Street" were running on (in that stretch.)

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.

[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.

[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 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

[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.