Kentucky racing

[pmayjr]

I love Turfway... just for the fact of the crap that races there. I'm a longshot bettor, and longshots pop with crappier, more inconsistent horses (at least from my own personal success) than with nice horses. That's probably I win a lot more $$$ playing Mountaineer than a NY track lol. I've still done pretty good there (at least last year. and earlier this year) with the polytrack bein in there.

But I'm not sure I like this polytrack stuff either. Playing a wet track is where I get some of my best results. I don't always want a fast track, because betting "off" track conditions can be a great angle to make $$$ on. Turfway takes this angle out of play unfortunately (and Keeneland now too... damn).

But guys, remember this- The reason I think Polytrack was ultimately installed at Turfway, was due to 2 or 3 years ago. The track had gotten battered by repeated winter storms. And I think those storms beat up the main track so bad, that they didn't race for literally a week or two. They weren't racing for at least a week. Someone wanna give official clarification of how long it was please?

So what I'm getting at- to us bettors it definately does suck. But I think this ultimately was put in to both safety of horses and riders. I'm willing to believe that this is their true motivation for installing it... not to screw the bettors.

BTW, welcome to the board Repent. Where've you been? How's life?

[JJP]

Pmayjr-

Yeah I understand why TP put it in. And of any place, they needed it due to that winter meet. I don't play their winter meet much but usually play the Sept. meet, which is usually a bit higher in quality. But I loathe the fact Keeneland put Polytrack in. They didn't need it. No arctic weather conditions to worry about. The conveyor belt rail was fantastic to bet. Can you believe Bushfire paid $33 to win over that track? That was probably the overlay of the year.

I think handicapping Turfway is much easier that it was before they installed PolyTrack.

[JJP]

I totally disagree. The old surface was often biased, although the biases would change. It is a myth that the old track was ALWAYS inside speed. There was quite a few days when wide closers were the trip one wanted. But if you kept notes on the daily biases, there were many betback horses.

Now, randomness seems to trump talent and/or form. Many times, when one looks over a race after a losing bet, they can find several clues why the winner won. I've never seen a track where I couldn't make a case for the winner after the fact as often as at the current Turfway meet. If it works for you, fine. I just will take my wagering dollars elsewhere.

[pmayjr]

JJ, you're right. Keeneland doesn't need it. It's too bad.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pmayjr

JJ, you're right. Keeneland doesn't need it. It's too bad.

Keeneland really needed it. Just ask some of the horses that had to run over the old highway.

[JJP]

Considering how many maiden and NW1X races they card, not to mention the small number of claiming races, I doubt many of the horses running there are very sore. Besides, its six weeks a year. We aren't talking about a 4 month during the winter meet like Turfway.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by JJP

I totally disagree. The old surface was often biased, although the biases would change. It is a myth that the old track was ALWAYS inside speed. There was quite a few days when wide closers were the trip one wanted. But if you kept notes on the daily biases, there were many betback horses.

Now, randomness seems to trump talent and/or form. Many times, when one looks over a race after a losing bet, they can find several clues why the winner won. I've never seen a track where I couldn't make a case for the winner after the fact as often as at the current Turfway meet. If it works for you, fine. I just will take my wagering dollars elsewhere.

Listen as bad as some of the cards have been at Turfway its hard to blame randomness on track surface.