Track bias and big days
 

While I realize its common place to juice the track and fast times make people ohh and ahh, its really become ridiculous. Not sure how others feel but it makes me want to reduce my plays because of unpredictable race flows. I mean 7f races that run in 43.4. 8.5 furlong races that 45.2 and the horse that is 2wide the whole fn trip holds on to win.

From what I watched so far at Santa Anita, the track was fair with reasonable times, and I just don't understand why they have to have it so tight, to a point where you have these jocks riding two turn races like they are 400 yard dashs.

Since when do fast times mean there was a bias? I've seen plenty of scorching fast tracks that were fair.

I thought the track was anything but fair all weekend.

I don't think it was fair either, I'm just saying that raw times aren't always the best indicator.

As far as biases go, I don't think it was that much of a speed bias over the two days.

The South American horse in the Dirt Marathon came from more than 20 lengths out of it to blow them all away in the stretch.

Pace battles never materialized in a lot of spots where they figured to. The Dirt Mile looked loaded with speed on paper -- and that pace was an absolute crawl.

Rail Trip and John Scott really got screwed badly when Shackleford blew the start. The dirt mile field was so bunched up, John Scott's dead last and just 5 behind that crawl ... and he's pulling Espinoza so much that he feels the need to try and circle six wide.

Other than Mike Smith on Atigun and Royal Delta I didn't see unexpected overly aggressive tactics from any riders.

I think the performances of Tapizar and Fort Larned have A LOT more to do with Shackleford and Game on Dude both blowing the break, and no one else wanting any part of being anywhere near the lead than they have to do with that track.

In what way did Game on Dude blow the break? Looked to me like he got away fine.

I haven't had time to watch all the replays yet, but he was beat out of the gate by Brilliant Speed and they crossed and cleared on him.

Maybe he didn't have a visual excuse at the start, but he clearly did not perform well in the first few strides and he got crossed and cleared on because of it, in a race where NO ONE else wanted any part of the lead. Smith had Mucho Macho Man under a hamerlock down the backstretch.

He got checked going into the first turn and never looked comfortable after that, but the actual break was clean, unlike Shackleford's.

Tapizar was an underlay at 15-1 to me. I'd love to hear McLaughlin start answering for why his horses run so disparately in and out of NY.

Yeah -- Emcee ran an atrocious race all things considered. A bigger X than even Game On Dude's performance.

Mclaughlin and Baffert both had terrible days.

He broke flatfooted.The 4 and 6 clearly outbreak him if you watch the overhead view.

http://www.breederscup.com/results/2012/classic

He didnt stumble but he did not break alertly. Where Bejerano screwed up was not trying to send game on dude between Alpha and Ft L passing the 1/8th pole the 1st time. He grabbed him and tried to look to get outside rather than try to get around Alpha.

Brilliant Speed did a fine job enhancing his stallion credentials.

I stumbled repeatedly over the two days only to recoup everything on the 10th at Santa Anita Sunday.

Lifes ups and downs!

You make some good points but even BC races aside, particularly on Thursday, I felt like horses on the lead in the stretch just kept staying on and closers were spinning their wheels. Every dirt race felt like a parade from the quarter pole to the wire. Meaningful moves from off the pace were mitigated regardless of the pace. Sure, a few closers clunked-up for a share, but on a fair racetrack, I think we see a lot of different results. Too many horses just didn't quit down the lane all weekend.