Was there a Closers bias this week at Aqu?
 

I'm the first to admit that I don't believe that the inner at Aqueduct is the merry - go - round that most people think it is. I think it usually plays fair, at least on most days.

I have not watched the replays for this week, having dvr issues, and time constraints. Anyway I handicaped today's (races 8 - 11) card assuming that it is playing fair. After I finish looking at the late pick 4 I pick up the sports page for the Star Ledger and look at Rippeys selections (mistake #1) to see how I compare, I'll also look at Andy's selections on Talkin' horses later before finalizing my pick 4 play.

Any way Rippey makes the following comment:

"Race 11: Thundering Roar (closing style fits track's bias this week.) Spicy Steve, Adirondack Warrior, Vlast"

After that I go to DRF and look at the charts for this week and to be honest I didn't really notice that there was a bias either way. It seemed at first glance that the logical horses were winning no matter what their running style is. In otehr words the track was playing fair.


Did I miss something when I looked at the charts, granted I did just scan them I didn't read each write up of the races?

Or alternatively if not all the winners are on the front end does the public immediately think that there is a closer's bias in effect? It seems that "they" want to automaticaly label the track as a merry-go-round and then when it doesn't actually play that way it is a closer's bias instead of actually being a fair race track.

Any comments?

The rail was very good on Wednesday and the track was even the other two days.

There is a lot of misinformation being printed/written lately by handicappers who are either imaging something indefensible or using some ridiculous number system to determine biases.....a very dangerous thing for a great many reasons.

Thanks Andy. I was hoping you would chime in.

Dead opposite to what was wrote by Rippey in the Star Ledger claiming a closers bias was in play at AQU ... ESPN's triple crown columnist had this odd view of things when he did his selections for the Gotham in his column.

He got the lead anyway - but ended up finishing 8th beaten 15 lengths at 9/2. Did the Lukas bounce.

Nothing like generalizations and oversimplifications. Sure are easier than hard analysis.