Are poles adjusted in turf races when the rail is shifted?

Dunbar · #1 06-16-2007, 08:32 AM

A friend asked me this question, and I don't know the answer, even though I should:

"Are the poles movable? Depending on where the rails are set (zero, fifteen or thirty feet at SA, may be different at other tracks), the 1/4, 1/2, etc. poles should be moved forward as the rails move out. The quarter pole should have a very slight adjustment as it is usually near the end of the turn, but the half pole, when the rail is set at 30 feet, should be positioned 94 feet ahead of where it is when the rails are at zero. Is this the way it's done?

I'm sure the start of the race is moved forward, but I was wondering about the poles, too. Anyone know? "

--Dunbar

2Hot4TV · #2 06-16-2007, 08:57 AM

Nope. I am not sure that they move the starting gate position.

Storm Cadet · #3 06-16-2007, 11:12 AM

We had this very discussion 2 years ago on our yearly Saratoga trip. We asked the track super and he said rails out or in, the gate is kept within a 10-15 distance each time.

We then tried to calibrate how much extra distance there is added to the race with rails out at different distances from the hedge. It's not that much because its only added distance on the turns they said.

pba1817 · #4 06-17-2007, 02:28 AM

The theory of moving the rails out is making the runners run a longer distance is true. This is one reason as to why turf Beyer speed figures are very inaccurate, especially at tracks that do not run a large number of turf races.

In California, we have very few turf races each day, usually 1 or 2, sometimes 3 on weekend cards. One is usually a turf sprint, and the other is a route. The Beyer system is not very effective unless you have a large sample of races to compare. The sample is never high enough in my opinion when the rails are consistently being moved, and you are running one route race and one spring race in a day.

Storm Cadet · #5 06-17-2007, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pba1817

The theory of moving the rails out is making the runners run a longer distance is true.

The reason they move the rails in and out is to SAVE THE TURF from getting beaten up. Just like a golf course moves the tees up and back on the tee box. It has nothing to do with MAKING horses run father or shorter.

Just as in golf, the golfer has to figure out the added distance if tees are back, so does the horseplayer figure out the added distance when rails are out.

pba1817 · #6 06-17-2007, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Storm Cadet

[/b]

The reason they move the rails in and out is to SAVE THE TURF from getting beaten up. Just like a golf course moves the tees up and back on the tee box. It has nothing to do with MAKING horses run father or shorter.

Just as in golf, the golfer has to figure out the added distance if tees are back, so does the horseplayer figure out the added distance when rails are out.

We all know why they move the rails, his theory is that when moving the rails out, the horses run a longer distance than they do if the rails are in. If they are running a 1 1/16th with the rails out its a longer race than 1 1/6th with the rails at the normal or hedge.

todko · #7 06-17-2007, 08:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pba1817

The theory of moving the rails out is making the runners run a longer distance is true. This is one reason as to why turf Beyer speed figures are very inaccurate, especially at tracks that do not run a large number of turf races.

In California, we have very few turf races each day, usually 1 or 2, sometimes 3 on weekend cards. One is usually a turf sprint, and the other is a route. The Beyer system is not very effective unless you have a large sample of races to compare. The sample is never high enough in my opinion when the rails are consistently being moved, and you are running one route race and one spring race in a day.

Ideally the gate is moved to compensate for the rails being out. That is, ideally.

I agree that PPs should say where the rail was.

Rails out increases the radius of the turn and narrows the course. Any time the radius of a turn is increased it helps speed. The more the radius is increased the more the turn approaches a straight (simple geometry).

Travis Stone · #8 06-17-2007, 08:51 AM

The gate is not moved to compensate for the rails, it's moved to give the horses run-up time to the timing beam.

Those Spa turns are so tight as is, rails plus a wide trip certainly cannot help. To me, the additional distance isn't as bad as the inner horses getting a momentum burst by slingshoting off the turn while wide horses lose that ground.

If you think of a race visually, how often does a horse look awesome 4 wide and then once he loses those few feet he quits?

Storm Cadet · #9 06-17-2007, 09:26 AM

BTW...whats your take on the topic of added ground with rails out?

Thanks in advance!

BillW · #10 06-17-2007, 03:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Storm Cadet

We had this very discussion 2 years ago on our yearly Saratoga trip. We asked the track super and he said rails out or in, the gate is kept within a 10-15 distance each time.

We then tried to calibrate how much extra distance there is added to the race with rails out at different distances from the hedge. It's not that much because its only added distance on the turns they said.

Basically you are adding:

D * 6.283 to the distance

where D = the distance the rail is out ( 12 or 18 feet in the case of the Mellon course)

so with the rail out 12 feet we add 75 feet to the race or 113 feet for the rail at 18 feet.

Storm Cadet · #11 06-17-2007, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillW

Basically you are adding:

D * 6.283 to the distance

where D = the distance the rail is out ( 12 or 18 feet in the case of the Mellon course)

so with the rail out 12 feet we add 75 feet to the race or 113 feet for the rail at 18 feet.

Bill we spoke about this 2 years ago with CJ and the track super at Sar, remember? Does your equation figure in for the whole trip, one turn turf, two turns? Is your equation for a circle...which a race track is NOT. The straight aways can't figure in to the added distance, ONLY the turns.

I'd love to drive a car or walk the course one day in the one path with the rails out at 12 feet and check the actual distance with a distance calibrator like road engeneers use. Then do the one path with rails out at 18 feet and so on.

Also, doesn't the distance out differ from inner and outer turf courses on your equation? The added distance HAS to be greater on the outer Belmont course than the inner with it's huge area and sweeping turns?

ArlJim78 · #12 06-17-2007, 08:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Storm Cadet

Bill we spoke about this 2 years ago with CJ and the track super at Sar, remember? Does your equation figure in for the whole trip, one turn turf, two turns? Is your equation for a circle...which a race track is NOT. The straight aways can't figure in to the added distance, ONLY the turns.

I'd love to drive a car or walk the course one day in the one path with the rails out at 12 feet and check the actual distance with a distance calibrator like road engeneers use. Then do the one path with rails out at 18 feet and so on.

Also, doesn't the distance out differ from inner and outer turf courses on your equation? The added distance HAS to be greater on the outer Belmont course than the inner with it's huge area and sweeping turns?

his equation accounts for a two turn race, the equation is for a circle but that is the only part of the track that needs to be considered when determining the extra distance due to the rails being out. the straights shouldn't matter.

you could say that the amount the rails being out adds to the distance is
3.141 * D * #t, where #T equals number of turns (1,2,3)

would you agree billw?

BillW · #13 06-17-2007, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Storm Cadet

Bill we spoke about this 2 years ago with CJ and the track super at Sar, remember? Does your equation figure in for the whole trip, one turn turf, two turns? Is your equation for a circle...which a race track is NOT. The straight aways can't figure in to the added distance, ONLY the turns.

Picture a circle split into 2 semi-circles. Now, separate the 2 semi-circles by a distance of 2 furlongs and connect them by straight lines, which is the approximate configuration of a race track. The equation holds in either case and the straight segment does not add anything (a 2 furlong straight segment is 2 furlongs no matter where it is relative to the hedge). As ArlJim78 mentions, the equation is 3.14159 (Pi) times the "rail out" distance for each turn.

Quote:

Also, doesn't the distance out differ from inner and outer turf courses on your equation? The added distance HAS to be greater on the outer Belmont course than the inner with it's huge area and sweeping turns?

Nope - the change in circumference is linear. Also note that the same equations apply for a horse running off the rail.

Cannon Shell · #14 06-17-2007, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Storm Cadet

The added distance HAS to be greater on the outer Belmont course than the inner with it's huge area and sweeping turns?

Have Belmonts turns ever been addressed without the word 'sweeping' in front of them?

todko · #15 06-17-2007, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillW

Basically you are adding:

D * 6.283 to the distance

where D = the distance the rail is out ( 12 or 18 feet in the case of the Mellon course)

so with the rail out 12 feet we add 75 feet to the race or 113 feet for the rail at 18 feet.

Well done. If they move the gate to compensate and the moves are inconsistent then it's tough to tell the actual distance of the race.