Keeneland
 

Ill never bet another race at Keeneland after the 5th today. Done.

I'll bet races at Keeneland the first weekend in December. It just won't be on Keeneland races.

So... vent for me. What hap[pened? Did the pace stop again? Did a horse knock the **** out of another, but the inquiry was denied? What?

Just **** horses winning because of running style. Best horses arent winning, you either like the track and come from way off, or you get a ham sandwich.

on rye , LOL ?

not
 

I was of similar opine early on, but, I have learned what to look for each day I play there. It's quite different and I adjust to it.It's a learning process and I figure I better learn it because it is the future. CAn't live in the past my friend. I don't try for homeruns. How can you not like the lower takeout and large fields and payouts in kentucky ?

Extra mayo please.

Thank God the Frizette wasn't run on polytrack today because I can't even imagine the whining that would be going on here if it was.

The complaining everytime someone gets beat on polytrack reminds me of all the people who complain when they get a bad beat in poker on-line and claim it is fixed - extremely lame. Guess what, if we all knew how every race was going to turn out we'd all be rich. They throw in stinkers on every surface (as evidenced by the Frizette) and there are always going to be horses that dominate allowances and suck when they step up to stakes races like Latent Heat.

If you want to discuss how it isn't playing to speed then fine, that is a legitimate capping angle. If you just want to bash the surface then go troll somewhere else so those of us who actually want to play polytrack can discuss the races on it.

I cannot use horses that I know are inferior to others regardless of surface. Many of these horses are horses I know personally, its just not the best horses winning races. I cant get my mind to play such an extreme bias, therefore Im done playing.

As for online poker being rigged, there is noway it isnt. Ive played a lot of poker, very rarely at a casino table game will you have 5 guys in a hand until the end all playing for different draws. Its so obviously set up for maximum rake. That argument is worse than poly being a fair racing surface

Sniper its not that its rigged.
But once again, we've bred and trained horse for speed for God knows how long.
A surface in which there are 3 wire jobs in 7 days of racing, well I mean, do you really feel the most talented horse is winning?

I understand where you are coming from. I just think it is ridiculous that everyone is blaming the surface everytime they lose a bet or a race goes slow and I think it is funny that the Frizette barely gets mentioned on here because it was on dirt but if it was on poly it would be used by everyone as an example of how terrible the surface is. I think the most talented horse is winning at a higher rate now than on the old dirt track at Keeneland, not that that is saying much. Should they tweak it before the April meet so it is more favorable to closers? Absolutely. Are the horses winning the races really that unusual? I sure don't think so, especially not in the stakes races.

I agree with Sniper.
What's the difference if they're running on Poly or black top? Every track, regardless of surface is going to favor different horses. Some horses need a race over it before they take to the surface, others never do. I think I would still prefer the Poly at Keeneland vs. the old "break-em'-down" dirt surface.

The surface at Keeneland in the past gave a major advantage to horses who use front-running speed to win races. Several other tracks give the advantage to the same sorts of horses, so they win more races there and look like better animals.

However the new surface at Keeneland allows horses with stamina to win races, too. In the race you cite, I had picked out 5 horses as contenders - the 'duh!' horse Extreme Supreme plus Special Event, Sidcup, Drilling for Oil and Save Big Money. Sidcup made the cut because a) he had run well in a 12f race at the level over the testing surface at KD, b) he had hit the board in the majority of his recent starts, including on dirt, and c) he had shown comfort with the Keeneland surface with a 48.00 work (3/39) since his last race. You probably thought that Extreme Supreme was the 'best' horse because he broke his maiden at Saratoga and got some sort of 'big number'; but when you look at it, he sat up near the pace in a very slowly run race. They ran faster fractions at Keeneland and ES couldn't keep up when the real running started. He had done the same thing in his first try at the allowance level at Belmont. Let go of your preconceived notions and you will improve your handicapping.

Preconceived notions that come from decades of analysis and conclusions and analysis are the only way to accurately determine form and ability.
PA, are you in the business? Do you advise clients on purchases?
I was wondering that because it seems that YOU certainly have "preconceived notions" about what to look for in a pedigree.
How many grade one winners have you bought for your clients this year using your "preceived notions"?

P.S.
Note to BB, shes pissed me off now as well, I'll carry forward the battle while you are on the bench. I'll just make sure not to use any bad words or call any names.

Sniper

Basically what you have here are handicappers bitching am moaning about bad handicapping.

1) You can't bet every race and you can't win every race you bet.
2) Every track regardless of type- has their own idiosyncracies (Such as Old Inside Speed @ Kee was the bias)
3) With todays Simulcast era, pick the races per day that fit your handicapping style best.
4) Speed figures have been holding pretty good at KEE therefore the fastest horse is winning more often than not but you wont see it in the DRF or Beyer figs
5) If you are familiar with Brohammer type speed figures the best winning percentage is one with the best FX rating has been winning at KEE 36% with value- what does that mean-- its the combination of the first fraction and last fraction averaged. What is that telling you< you need some early pace (not front runner) but also need a good closing kick.
6) Horses who recently ran at KD seems to have their stamina up so that appears what you need at KEE. Quite a few KD to KEE Poly have won. Turf and Dirt horses are equals going into a race unlike what you might get on regular dirt.
7) Larger fields tend to have better payouts but also make it harder to find one longshot in a race, you may have 2 or 3 shots with a shot.
8) Good handicappers always adjust _ This poly surface seems to be tiring to many horses.
9)What will happen next when Poly horses go back to dirt? Are they legged up in better shape?
10) Horses with high leg action seems to do well on the surface.
11) Sires like Gone West-Ellusive Quality, the Storm Cat Line (Catenius, etc) have all done Well. So what you should look for are sires that have produced winners on muliple surfaces Dirt,turf, & wet will probably adapt to poly quicker than others.

Once you have enough of a sample, all the crying and moaning will go away as the early adapters will have made their scores while the stubborn whiners will be needing some cheese to go with all that Whine

NC Tony

You don't always need to be a jerk Oracle. I like her posts. They are full of good information. Every post can't be about you telling us about the one grade 1 you purchased.

Tony I haven't bet one single race there on poly, so I have yet to whine about any lost bets.
Betting isn't the end all and be all of this game or issue. Some folks like to see talent rewarded, even without money on a race.
If you think that 3 wire jobs in 7 days indicates anything less than a ridiculous bias against the fastest horses in a race, then you and i have a strong difference of opinion.
Steven Crist wrote a column in today's DRF about Kee and poly.
Love his quote at the end(inferring that Kee's form won't translate to anywhere else), like the Vegas ads, its highly likely that what happens at Keeneland, stays at Keeneland.

I'm simply asking for credibility from her before she explains to the rest of us in the business that only HER preconceived notions are correct, and ours aren't. Speaking like that is far more arrogant and obnoxious than anything anyone has said to her.

'Fastest' according to what? How well they do on speed biased tracks that give no chance to closers? Poly is much fairer than the type of sand-based tracks one often sees at many major tracks. A properly cushioned and maintained dirt track could be made fair, but most track managements don't want to do it.

So you figure in 50 races or so, that only 3 of the horses fast enough to beat their rivals to lead at the 1/4 pole, were good enough to win?
This is, so far, a bias that has lasted over 8 days, and is absurdly biased against anyone with early speed.
I think thats pretty obvious.

Oracle

I may not be in the business like you are, but I am considered a good judge of horse flesh. Your entitled to your opinions as am I. I as a handicapper believe that horse players are missing out on a period where a lot of money can be made due to predjudices and bad handicappers aut their participating in the KEE Mutual pools.

Do I love Poly? It's a surface which seems viable. It has it's own idiosyncracies. Kee Turf races has been win by favorites over 40%.They usually card 3 a day.

I completely disagree with you that the best horse is not winning the races simply because of the surface. We shall see when it happens, we already have evidence of horses coming off of the surface and winning at Oak Tree or Ellis & Saratoga from Turfway. Steve Crist's opinion does not mean much to me.

NC Tony

Umm.. I've got a question..
 

For all the enlightened pro and con commentary here regarding the KEE surface prior and present, I don't think I've seen anyone bring the CHANGE IN BANKING AND CONFIGURATION into the discussion.

While the surface is certainly exerting an enormous influence on the results, couldn't the new shape of the turns and MUCH long homestretch be responsible for the demise of the speedsters?

I think we're making too much of the surface and not enough of a stretch now longer than Churchill's.. (At least according to Rogers Beasley...)

Steve Crist's opinion always matters to me.
I consider him to be the most astute writer/media guy in the business in my lifetime.
Hes been involved with all aspects of the game from writing to management, and has made nice scores on the track, and in propelling the DRF to the heights it as at today, chock full of info and stats that noone would ever have dreamed possible 10 years ago.
I don't always agree with everything he says, but when he talks I wanna listen and consider what hes saying.

Come on Steve, have you been watching? The speed doesn't EVEN MAKE IT TO THE STRETCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I am an observer and a statistician by training. When one designs an experiment for testing, one must do so without assuming a particular outcome; you are experimenting in order to find the outcome. As the data accumulates, you can begin to form theories about it. Racing on polytrack is an experiment, and we are accumulating data from racing at Turfway, Woodbine, and Keeneland. The preconceived notions I wrote of are those in which you assume that races on Poly should be run exactly as they are on speed-biased dirt. One adjusts one's handicapping for mud, or slop, soft or yielding turf, does one not?

Tony, who considers you a good judge of horseflesh. Ann, are you a consultant for Keenelands public relations department?

Fact is fact fellas, the best horses simply arent winning races at Keeneland.

but people used to say that anyway because of the extreme speed bias (UM...sinister minister?) so how is dismissing poly form at Keeneland any different?

I agree that is definitely a major factor but at the same time I think 3 for 50 is a little low. I do see a lot of pacesetters holding on for second though, and a lot of stalkers winning so I don't think the problem is as bad as the 3 for 50 makes it sound.

I guess the real question is how many times has the best horse in the race been alone on the lead and able to set reasonable fractions and lost the race? I'd guess not many, if any. I hate cheap speed winning races so I love the racing on the polytrack so far even though I was extremely skeptical going into the meet. I'll take a good polytrack race over a snoozer like the Meadowlands race the other day where they all ran the same order the whole way.

Bid

People I know, or who know me. I don't know you. You don't know me.

And Steve's point is quite valid on how the configuration probably more so than the distance (in my opinion) has made it a less biased track towards early speed. The prior configuration was egg shaped and had a very tight and sharp turns. Jockeys were saying that they used to cut the corner (ie 2-3 path on the turn back to the rail itself - horses on the outside paths had quite a bit to overcome) coming down the homestretch in if you had the inside path the old configuration you were pretty much won the race.

Finally a few of you know it all guys should lighten up and consider that there are people out there who just might know at least as much as you, although you just can't accept it. Anyone who is so closed minded never learns anything new.

NC Tony

AND the stretch is no longer DOWNHILL...

Well the old track was ridiculous and 50% frontrunners was just plain wrong. I think if we are truly looking for an unbiased surface then frontrunners winning at a 15% (maybe 20%) clip should be about right. 3 for 50 is probably significant enough to say it is biased against frontrunners, at least to a small degree.

Excellent Point!! The track itself didn't realize that you were running uphill on the backside and downhill down the stretch until they used GPS and regraded the surface.

NC Tony

I was there the first three days, and I would say that the jockeys rode a little tentatively on the surface the first few races trying to get a feel. In the very first race no one wanted the lead. Was run like a turf race.

NC Tony

I agree that the bias has switched to closers but I stilll think that as the track gets used and the maitenance crew works it the numbers will even out.
plus tony makes a good point that the jocks may have been playing it differently trying to figure it out.

Not to mention as word of the bias gets out there may be trainers shipping their good frontrunners out rather than running them on a track with a perceived bias.