6/8 (BEL): 151st Belmont Stakes Day ~ 8 G1's

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

But there wasn’t a speed bias. The rail was golden. That’s not the same as a speed bias. You could close yesterday. But the longer you were glued to the rail, the better you did.

A speed bias doesn't mean you can't close. It just means it's much tougher to close. If there is a suicidal pace, someone will probably close. That doesn't mean there's not a speed bias.

I will take your word for it that there was a rail bias. It's not something I focus on.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

A speed bias doesn't mean you can't close. It just means it's much tougher to close. If there is a suicidal pace, someone will probably close. That doesn't mean there's not a speed bias.

I will take your word for it that there was a rail bias. It's not something I focus on.

You weren’t aware of the inside bias but want to educate me on what a speed bias is. Tremendous. Cherry on top is using Watchmaker as proof.

Don’t change ever.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

You weren’t aware of the inside bias but want to educate me on what a speed bias is. Tremendous. Cherry on top is using Watchmaker as proof.

Don’t change ever.

You're totally contradicting yourself. An inside bias will automatically create a speed bias. Any horse that gets a clear lead will be on the rail. A horse with a clear lead is not going to be out in the 4 path. So the horse on the lead is going to have the rail. Many of the come-from-behinders are going to be rallying wide. So an inside bias is going to favor speed horses. That is automatic. You can't have an inside bias that doesn't favor speed.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You're totally contradicting yourself. An inside bias will automatically create a speed bias. Any horse that gets a clear lead will be on the rail. A horse with a clear lead is not going to be out in the 4 path. So the horse on the lead is going to have the rail. Many of the come-from-behinders are going to be rallying wide. So an inside bias is going to favor speed horses. That is automatic. You can't have an inside bias that doesn't favor speed.

Are you related to Dilanesp from PaceAdvantage? He’s the only other person I can think of that would rather cut their head off than admit they are wrong.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Are you related to Dilanesp from PaceAdvantage? He’s the only other person I can think of that would rather cut their head off than admit they are wrong.

If you know anyone who knows me (which you probably don't), you would know that it's just the opposite. I never have a problem admitting when I am wrong.

Anyway, back to the argument, I still think there was a speed bias (independent of any possible rail bias). At almost all of the big tracks, when they make the track really fast for a big stakes day, it creates a speed bias most of the time.

But hypothetically if there was a day where there was not going to be a speed bias but the track was going to be faster on the rail (a rail bias), that would create a speed bias. An inside bias will manifest itself as a speed bias every time. There is no way around it. There is no such thing as an inside bias that doesn't favor speed.

It's not that complicated.

In addition, if there is a speed bias (with no rail bias), it will make it appear like there is a rail bias, because there will be a ton of winners who were on the lead and in the 1 or 2 path turning into the stretch and coming down the stretch. A speed bias can easily be mistaken for a rail bias.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

If you know anyone who knows me (which you probably don't), you would know that it's just the opposite. I never have a problem admitting when I am wrong.

Anyway, back to the argument, I still think there was a speed bias (independent of any possible rail bias). At almost all of the big tracks, when they make the track really fast for a big stakes day, it creates a speed bias most of the time.

But hypothetically if there was a day where there was not going to be a speed bias but the track was going to be faster on the rail (a rail bias), that would create a speed bias. An inside bias will manifest itself as a speed bias every time. There is no way around it. There is no such thing as an inside bias that doesn't favor speed.

It's not that complicated.

In addition, if there is a speed bias (with no rail bias), it will make it appear like there is a rail bias, because there will be a ton of winners who were on the lead and in the 1 or 2 path turning into the stretch and coming down the stretch. A speed bias can easily be mistaken for a rail bias.

Frankly, you have no idea what you’re talking about. It doesn’t happen much anymore, but when the Belmont main used to get really wet and speed favoring, the inside was the worst place to be. You wanted to be away from the rail. Jorge Chavez was always one of the first riders to pick up on this.

I understand the point you’re trying to make. A speed bias will look like an inside bias because a majority of speed horses gravitate towards the rail. But that isn’t a true rail bias. A true rail bias is what we saw at Belmont Thursday, Friday and Saturday. Speed and closers who spent a good amount of time on the rail did well. Look at the H Man race on Friday and where the winner and runner up spent a good portion of their time running.

You’re trying to oversimplify it and you’re incorrect. If you spent any time following the Aqueduct inner when we used to really get some gold rails you’d know the difference.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

Frankly, you have no idea what you’re talking about. It doesn’t happen much anymore, but when the Belmont main used to get really wet and speed favoring, the inside was the worst place to be. You wanted to be away from the rail. Jorge Chavez was always one of the first riders to pick up on this.

I understand the point you’re trying to make. A speed bias will look like an inside bias because a majority of speed horses gravitate towards the rail. But that isn’t a true rail bias. A true rail bias is what we saw at Belmont Thursday, Friday and Saturday. Speed and closers who spent a good amount of time on the rail did well. Look at the H Man race on Friday and where the winner and runner up spent a good portion of their time running.

You’re trying to oversimplify it and you’re incorrect. If you spent any time following the Aqueduct inner when we used to really get some gold rails you’d know the difference.

Read this article about track maintenance at Belmont. Look at all the science and equipment they use to monitor the track closely every day at Belmont. They measure all parts of the track and test all parts of the track. They didn't use to do this years ago, but they do it now. There is practically no way for there to be a rail bias. If there was, they would see it and fix it.

I am not a big believer in inside or outside biases. I'm not saying they it has never happened before. I'm sure it has happened in the past, especially after a lot of rain. But right now I think inside/outside biases are mainly a figment of the imagination of handicappers who are trying to come up with a way to explain a certain result. If I am wrong and these biases exist and are common, then I guess I'm missing out on a great handicapping angle.

If playing inside/outside biases is making you money, then keep doing it and I wish you continued success.

Here is an article that talks about all the science that goes into maintaining the track at Belmont. By the way, if they want to speed up or slow the down the track, it is easy for them to do. They can make the harrows go a little deeper if the track is getting too fast. Don't let anyone tell you that if the track is lightening fast that it wasn't something they wanted. If they didn't want it that fast, they would slow it down. As the article says, they have all this stuff down to a science.

https://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-rac...t-belmont-park

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You're totally contradicting yourself. An inside bias will automatically create a speed bias. Any horse that gets a clear lead will be on the rail. A horse with a clear lead is not going to be out in the 4 path. So the horse on the lead is going to have the rail. Many of the come-from-behinders are going to be rallying wide. So an inside bias is going to favor speed horses. That is automatic. You can't have an inside bias that doesn't favor speed.

There is so much wrong about this it's hard to know where to start. Let's see, there are plenty of situations where speed horses do NOT go the rail. When the rail is good, most do, but anyone that bet Rockin Jo back at Aqueduct on a gold rail day wishes his rider had gone to the rail with him as opposed to staying two or three wide and allowing another up the inside. But I digress. Many closers do go wide, but some ( I assume you remember Sir Winston? ) spend a significant portion of the race on the rail, so they haven't expended an unnecessary amount of energy on the deeper part of the track, and are still about to close outside during the small part of the race they are outside. Think Good Samaritan in the Jim Dandy two years ago as well ( also a deep closer ridden by Joel Rosario on a gold rail track ).


Here's what you're missing, many people ( apparently yourself included ) mistake gold rail tracks for speed tracks because, as you said ( when you got oh so close to getting it, only to let your vanity get in the way ) most speed horses go inside. I hope this helps.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

There is so much wrong about this it's hard to know where to start. Let's see, there are plenty of situations where speed horses do NOT go the rail. When the rail is good, most do, but anyone that bet Rockin Jo back at Aqueduct on a gold rail day wishes his rider had gone to the rail with him as opposed to staying two or three wide and allowing another up the inside. But I digress. Many closers do go wide, but some ( I assume you remember Sir Winston? ) spend a significant portion of the race on the rail, so they haven't expended an unnecessary amount of energy on the deeper part of the track, and are still about to close outside during the small part of the race they are outside. Think Good Samaritan in the Jim Dandy two years ago as well ( also a deep closer ridden by Joel Rosario on a gold rail track ).


Here's what you're missing, many people ( apparently yourself included ) mistake gold rail tracks for speed tracks because, as you said ( when you got oh so close to getting it, only to let your vanity get in the way ) most speed horses go inside. I hope this helps.

The vast majority of speed horses go to the rail. That is all that matters. I'm not claiming 100% of them do. It doesn't have to be 100%. None of these things are 100%. Most speed horses (who get clear) will stay relatively close to the rail. Even if only 80% of them do this, that would be high enough to create a significant correlation between a rail bias and a speed bias. You obviously understand correlations.

Coming up with individual cases doesn't prove anything. Sure there will be horses who save ground around the turn and swing out at the top of the lane. But most come-from-behinders will not get that trip. And even the ones that do will still be on a worse part of the track coming down the stretch. So they will still have a small disadvantage.

If there is a rail bias, overall that will help speed horses. It doesn't mean all speed horses will be helped. It won't help outside speed that can't get a clear lead and is 4 wide all the way around the track. But it means that every horse that goes to the lead (and races relatively close to the rail, like most horses with a clear lead run), will have a better chance that day than they would have on a day with no rail bias.