Was there really a rail bias?
 

I was watching all the dirt Breeders Cup races and I sort of convinced myself that there wasnt a rail bias. Lets go through the races here.

Dreaming Of Anna - She raced in the 3-4 path the entire time until they turned for home and then she went into the 1 path and kicked clear from Octave. Octave actually raced on the inside of DOA the entire race until they turned for home.

Round Pond - Well she raced on the rail the entire time. However, she actually went to the outside of the 3 horse around the turn. Then she sort of got boxed in. Then when they turned for home, the only spot for her to go was the rail. The 9 went wide and Prado sent Round Pond through the rail. Asi Siempre, prob would have won the race with a better trip. In this case, I dont think you can say it was a rail bias.

Thors Echo - Well he was no where near the rail. He went 3-4 wide around two horses and turned for home and just kicked clear. He actually moved over the 2 hole late in the race when he was well clear and there were no challengers. I will say that there was no rail bias in this race.

Street Sense - Well the 1st two finsihers were last and 2nd to last. The pace was freaking fast for these horses and Street Sense was closing ground all the way down the back stretch. Borel didnt even switch leads or whip the horse. Stormello had the rail but he didnt help him at all. So why would it help Street Sense and not Stormello?? I think that we saw a freak performance to a horse won lost by a nose to Quay and who was training like a monster at Churchill. I will say that there was not a rail bias in this race either. If there was, how do you explain Stormello?

Invasor - Well we all know he went extremely wide. But if there was a rail bias then why did Brother Derek do better than he did. Why would the 1st and 2nd place horse go wide around the turn to win. Again, I dont think there was a rail bias in this race.

I think that it was just a freak day where we saw the 1 horse win. Dreaming Of Anna was the best horse in her race. Street Sense was a huge underlay based on his last race and they way he loves Churchill. Thors Echo just lost to Bornordaro and had a 116 beyer. Round Pond is a Grade I winner in a race where the 2 favs broke down. So I am not buying the rail bias.

I was there, and there was an obvious rail bias early in the day. Not sure if the cooler weather that came on later in the day made any difference in the bias or just the way the track is harrowed.

It was very much a factor in some of the races held that day... but when is there no bias ever to be ran against?

Did anyone see the article about how they scraped the inside rail after training on race day and spread that dirt all over the middle part of the track? If that's the case (which, I'm told, is) then yes, there was an advantage to being on the rail. I think common sense dictates that, but you're right... good horses won all day, regardless of being inside. But were the ones on the outside compromised? That is the question. Good horses out there didn't run to par, for whatever reason. Could they all have had off days?

My friend's horse ran in the first race and broke from the outside at, um, odds of 7-2 I think (gotta look at the chart) and was told, by the jockey, that the rail would be the place to be that day.

Maybe because Stormello was close to that fast pace you mentioned and Street Sense wasn't?

Nakatani said that he had to take Thor's Echo off the rail for fear of running over horses in front of him.

Round Pond exploded when she was moved to the rail.

Octave was moving strongly until Gomez switched her out, then she just flattened out.

Yes, there was a rail bias. How much more evidence do you need? The trainers say so, the jockeys say so, pretty much anyone who was at the track or watched the races says so, and four of the five dirt races were won by the inside horse.

its still the place to be ..calvin b ran up it 4 times today ...he s the only one that gets it..

I cant tell you how much money I have made on Calvin this fall meet. This prob the best meet I have ever had at Churchill.

let's not forget that the simple geometry of being on the rail never hurts either.

Euro,
Scuds had this figured out after the 3rd race, so I'll let him tell you.
Steve also made mention of the scraping that was done the night before.
Go a few pages back and read the comments that Scuds made as the races were happening. Good insights.
As far as me and rail bias? Heck, I never met a rail I didn't like...I'm not biased at all.;)

Thanks DTS. I will check them out. You the man.

Calvin knows where the lilly pads are. Give him a live mount and he will threaten. I cant understand why some of the big timr trainers dont utilize him more often.. Do any of you think he will keep Street Sense? As far as a rail bias, when the best horses run on the rail it will look like a rail bias. I agree with euro. Can you name one of the horses that won that wasnt the best horse Sat.

In the Juvi race Borel just barely made it through.The hole was closing up on him. He actually gt bumped squeezing through. If the tiring horses would have blocked him all we would be talking about was the bad ride or we wouldnt even realized what a live horse Street Sense was.

How are we supposed to know who the best horse is if there's such a blatant bias? It's the chicken and the egg.

You have to go by margin of victory. Street Sense was probably best no matter what, but I can't confidently say that Round Pond was the best horse in her race or that Thor's Echo was the best horse in his. I think Dreaming of Anna was the best horse in her race, but that's just because I'm a fan of hers and think she has superior ability to any other 2-year-old filly.

Who would you say was the best horse in the Distaff? Pine Island and Fleet Indian didnt finish. Who does that leave. There were 13 Grade I winners in that field. And Thor's Echo had one of the best beyers and ran a good 2nd to Bordornaro.

Boy then Invasor was the best horse in the BCC by much more than 1 length. I know they had Berni measured and shut down late stretch, but if there was a big bias in that race, Invasor ran a more than fantastic race. In fact, one might say no horse was even close to him.

If there was such a rail bias , why did the jockeys keep giving up the rail to the winners comming through? If the jockeys knew there was a bias does it mean some of them are just too dumb to block it .

How can you block the rail from the rail horse?

When they are many lengths nbehind you. Street Sense didnt win on the lead.

No track offers the wagering opportunities that Churchill does when using track conditions and configuration.

A few days prior to the cup we posted: www.dmtc.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=6933

Also posted yesterday at Thorograph regarding the turf course. Good cappin. BBB

Stupid me had the top horse in the last four races, but couldn't get the underneath for the exacta. Except in the last, of course, but that was too easy. Better Talk Now just kills betters.

Anyway, obviously there was a rail bias.

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

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.

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....

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.

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.

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.

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."

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.

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.

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.

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.

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