Graded Stakes and Polytrack

[TitanSooner]

how exactly was Sinister Minister's performance a good judge of his ability?

[repent]

Originally Posted by TitanSooner

how exactly was Sinister Minister's performance a good judge of his ability?

thats a speed horse getting a relatively easy lead on a speed favoring racetrack.
you can handicap for that.
Im not saying i cashed a ticket on SinMinister, but it was racing.

this is a totally foreign surface that can not be compared to dirt.
its closer to the surface inside the main track(turf) than the surface it replaced.

KEE has 2 turf courses now as far as I am concerned.


Repent

[TitanSooner]

Originally Posted by repent

thats a speed horse getting a relatively easy lead on a speed favoring racetrack.
you can handicap for that.
Im not saying i cashed a ticket on SinMinister, but it was racing.

this is a totally foreign surface that can not be compared to dirt.
its closer to the surface inside the main track(turf) than the surface it replaced.

KEE has 2 turf courses now as far as I am concerned.


Repent

point taken.. but just as you could handicap for a lone speed horse on a "speed favoring" racetrack, I can look for a horse that would rather sit back and come with one big run on a "closer favoring" race track.

[repent]

Originally Posted by TitanSooner

point taken.. but just as you could handicap for a lone speed horse on a "speed favoring" racetrack, I can look for a horse that would rather sit back and come with one big run on a "closer favoring" race track.

but do you think that is what KEE is now?

I dont see the one run late closers winning a lot.
I see the one paced runners being the most successful. the ones who sit off the pace but not way out out of it.
maybe I have not studdied the charts as well as some of you.
I just know what I have seen on TVG.

I cant cap it. it just frustrates me. its like you just try to find a turf horse who is one paced,and he usually makes the most sense.

sucks, b/c I loved playing KEE and Holypark in the past.



Repent

[blackthroatedwind]

Look, I hear what your saying, and won't argue that these polytrack Grade 1 races are not likely to be won by true Grade 1 dirt horses, whatever the hell those are anymore, but the major reason for grading of races is field quality so as long as the fields are still strong the gradings will most likely remain.

I also agree with the argument that Keeneland Grade 1s on the dirt have produced MANY past winners unqualified to be Grade 1 winners due to the absurd bias.

I just think they should paint polytrack green.

[Danzig]

interesting thread.
after all, turf races that are moved to dirt lose their graded status, yet the field comprises the same horses that entered for the original graded race--unless of course they are MTO.

[repent]

Originally Posted by Danzig188

interesting thread.
after all, turf races that are moved to dirt lose their graded status, yet the field comprises the same horses that entered for the original graded race--unless of course they are MTO.

yeah,
good point.
they move one grade down right?
G1 to G2(rarely happens)
G2 to G3
G3 to ungraded


Repent

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Look, I hear what your saying, and won't argue that these polytrack Grade 1 races are not likely to be won by true Grade 1 dirt horses, whatever the hell those are anymore, but the major reason for grading of races is field quality so as long as the fields are still strong the gradings will most likely remain.

I also agree with the argument that Keeneland Grade 1s on the dirt have produced MANY past winners unqualified to be Grade 1 winners due to the absurd bias.

I just think they should paint polytrack green.

Question. If field quality is the major reason for the grading of races, how can they justify grading races on Polytrack when nobody knows the quality of the horses running over the stuff? For instance, we know that if we get Cacique, English Channel, The Tin Man, Hurricane Run, Shirocco, Relaxed Gesture, etc, it's a top quality race on the grass. Do we know the same thing if it's on the dirt? If we get Hawk Wing, Oratorio, Galileo, Starcraft, and Rodrigo de Triano in a dirt race, should that still be considered a top quality race even though they've shown that the couldn't handle it? Danzig asked the best question here. If they downgrade turf races when they are switched to the dirt because of the question about the quality of the race due to the horse's not having shown their quality on a different surface, why not the same for Polytrack?

[SniperSB23]

I am more worried that we wind up seeing turf horses in the Derby. There are very few opportunities for 3yo turf horses before the Triple Crown which will make races like the Lane's End and the Blue Grass a lot more enticing for them. If turf horses go to those races and do well their connections might actually be stupid enough to suddenly think the horse belongs in the Derby (similar to them putting Asi Siempre in the Distaff). I guess there are 8-10 horses in the Derby that don't belong as it is so it probably won't be too much different.

[TitanSooner]

Originally Posted by repent

but do you think that is what KEE is now?

I dont see the one run late closers winning a lot.
I see the one paced runners being the most successful. the ones who sit off the pace but not way out out of it.
maybe I have not studdied the charts as well as some of you.
I just know what I have seen on TVG.

I cant cap it. it just frustrates me. its like you just try to find a turf horse who is one paced,and he usually makes the most sense.

sucks, b/c I loved playing KEE and Holypark in the past.



Repent

I suppose I am being more open to the idea of polytrack than others here since I live in SoCal and the majority of my play is on SA,HOL,and DMR.. I feel that if I want to continue playing the horses, which is my favorite thing to do, I need to study these races and look for and identify trends that are going to allow me to get a jump on the other handicappers that might be just too stubborn (and maybe rightfully so) about learning it. To me, as a player, I am more concerned with cashing a ticket than the grade of a race. I can score very similarly on a 25,000 Maiden Claimer as I could on a million dollar group 1 race.

[repent]

Originally Posted by TitanSooner

I suppose I am being more open to the idea of polytrack than others here since I live in SoCal and the majority of my play is on SA,HOL,and DMR.. I feel that if I want to continue playing the horses, which is my favorite thing to do, I need to study these races and look for and identify trends that are going to allow me to get a jump on the other handicappers that might be just too stubborn (and maybe rightfully so) about learning it. To me, as a player, I am more concerned with cashing a ticket than the grade of a race. I can score very similarly on a 25,000 Maiden Claimer as I could on a million dollar group 1 race.

yeah,
so am I.
but Im not going to wager a dime on that crap from this point forward.
too much of an unknown.


Repent

This is one of the most ridiculous thoughts I have ever read. You don't grade a race by what surface it is run on. You also don't grade a race based on your ability to handicap it. Also, PolyTrack is not to be compared to dirt at all. It is an alternative surface to dirt and turf racing. Basically it is a 3rd surface. Of course some horses will like it and some wont. Just like some horses love a sloppy track and some like a fast track. As far as handicapping PolyTrack there has been more winners that come from behind than horses that leads the entire way. Handicapping PolyTrack was very challenging to me. Like Oracle has pointed out several times dirt form doesnt always equate to the same form on PolyTrack. Like DaHoss has said that it is too early to make any suggestions when it comes to PolyTrack. At Turfway, tons of early speed won races in the Spring where in the Fall you didn't have too many. I like the synthetic surface and I like dirt and I like turf surface. All I can say is that the racing at Keeneland this year is by far the most exciting in terms of the finish of each race than at any other time I can remember. Almost every race you have 3-6 lead changes whereas in the past you would have a horse that wins going wire to wire or in the 2nd spot.

Again, PolyTrack is not for ever race venue and nor do I want it in every race venue. I want all 3 types of surfaces. We can have stars at every stage. The stars of dirt, the stars of turf and the stars of a synthetic surface. This is only going to be good for racing. It adds value and excitment when done right. I would be appaled to see Churchill, Gulfstream or Saratoga switch to a synthetic surface. Turfway, Woodbine and Keeneland needed it, not sure how I feel about Cali mandating it.

[repent]

Originally Posted by eurobounce

This is one of the most ridiculous thoughts I have ever read. You don't grade a race by what surface it is run on. You also don't grade a race based on your ability to handicap it. Also, PolyTrack is not to be compared to dirt at all. It is an alternative surface to dirt and turf racing. Basically it is a 3rd surface. Of course some horses will like it and some wont. Just like some horses love a sloppy track and some like a fast track. As far as handicapping PolyTrack there has been more winners that come from behind than horses that leads the entire way. Handicapping PolyTrack was very challenging to me. Like Oracle has pointed out several times dirt form doesnt always equate to the same form on PolyTrack. Like DaHoss has said that it is too early to make any suggestions when it comes to PolyTrack. At Turfway, tons of early speed won races in the Fall where in the Spring you didn't have too many. I like the synthetic surface and I like dirt and I like turf surface. All I can say is that the racing at Keeneland this year is by far the most exciting in terms of the finish of each race than at any other time I can remember. Almost every race you have 3-6 lead changes whereas in the past you would have a horse that wins going wire to wire or in the 2nd spot.

Again, PolyTrack is not for ever race venue and nor do I want it in every race venue. I want all 3 types of surfaces. We can have stars at every stage. The stars of dirt, the stars of turf and the stars of a synthetic surface. This is only going to be good for racing. It adds value and excitment when done right. I would be appaled to see Churchill, Gulfstream or Saratoga switch to a synthetic surface. Turfway, Woodbine and Keeneland needed it, not sure how I feel about Cali mandating it.

you can believe that if you want.
but the reality is that it has replaced the main track at several major racetracks.
its not like they replaced the turf course or they added a 3rd course to KEE.
they took away the dirt and its always going to be aligned with dirt.

Im not saying that you change the grading of the stakes b/c they are run on polytrack.
Im saying you do have to reavaluate the status of each race on an individual basis.
when you do that, several KEE races have lost some of their importance.
when and if this diminishes the quality of the fields, then I hope they are downgraded.
I would hate to see the Blue Grass remain a Grade 1 year after year when it loses its place as a key KY Derby prep.
and it will happen.
how many top 3YOs will prep in the Blue Grass by 2008?
Im guessing none. the purse will make it an attractive spot, but Im guessing you will see mostly a field of turf horses and failed dirt horses.


Repent

Originally Posted by repent

you can believe that if you want.
but the reality is that it has replaced the main track at several major racetracks.
its not like they replaced the turf course or they added a 3rd course to KEE.
they took away the dirt and its always going to be aligned with dirt.

Im not saying that you change the grading of the stakes b/c they are run on polytrack.
Im saying you do have to reavaluate the status of each race on an individual basis.
when you do that, several KEE races have lost some of their importance.
when and if this diminishes the quality of the fields, then I hope they are downgraded.
I would hate to see the Blue Grass remain a Grade 1 year after year when it loses its place as a key KY Derby prep.
and it will happen.
how many top 3YOs will prep in the Blue Grass by 2008?
Im guessing none. the purse will make it an attractive spot, but Im guessing you will see mostly a field of turf horses and failed dirt horses.


Repent

I see what you are saying but you cannot Grade races as preps to other Graded races. That doesn't make sense. You have to seperate the thought pattern that the Blue Grass is a Grade I only because it is considered a prep to the Derby. A race is Graded based on the field it gets. If you get the top 3 year old turf runners in the country to run in the Blue Grass should be graded less because these horses arent going to the Derby? That doesnt make sense.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by repent

you can believe that if you want.
but the reality is that it has replaced the main track at several major racetracks.
its not like they replaced the turf course or they added a 3rd course to KEE.
they took away the dirt and its always going to be aligned with dirt.

Im not saying that you change the grading of the stakes b/c they are run on polytrack.
Im saying you do have to reavaluate the status of each race on an individual basis.
when you do that, several KEE races have lost some of their importance.
when and if this diminishes the quality of the fields, then I hope they are downgraded.
I would hate to see the Blue Grass remain a Grade 1 year after year when it loses its place as a key KY Derby prep.
and it will happen.
how many top 3YOs will prep in the Blue Grass by 2008?
Im guessing none. the purse will make it an attractive spot, but Im guessing you will see mostly a field of turf horses and failed dirt horses.


Repent

if the level of horses entered drops, the grading will drop. all races are evaluated each year.
poly is a whole new ball game. it's a third surface. it's not dirt, so really how could a race keep it's grading if it's no longer the same race? guess we'll just have to wait and see how it all plays out.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by repent

you can believe that if you want.
but the reality is that it has replaced the main track at several major racetracks.
its not like they replaced the turf course or they added a 3rd course to KEE.
they took away the dirt and its always going to be aligned with dirt.

Im not saying that you change the grading of the stakes b/c they are run on polytrack.
Im saying you do have to reavaluate the status of each race on an individual basis.
when you do that, several KEE races have lost some of their importance.
when and if this diminishes the quality of the fields, then I hope they are downgraded.
I would hate to see the Blue Grass remain a Grade 1 year after year when it loses its place as a key KY Derby prep.
and it will happen.
how many top 3YOs will prep in the Blue Grass by 2008?
Im guessing none. the purse will make it an attractive spot, but Im guessing you will see mostly a field of turf horses and failed dirt horses.


Repent

As long as trainers think the surface is safe, I don't think they will have a problem prepping for big races on the polytrack. I don't think the field in the Bluegrass will suffer at all. One of the main things a trainer is looking for in a prep race is a race that they think their horse will come out of in one piece and be able to move forward from. Doug O' Neil was going to run Lava Man on the turf as a prep for the BC Classic. He ended up changing his mind because the Goodwood came up much easier than the grass race he was looking at.

I really don't see the quality of the field suffering in the Bluegrass at all. In fact, some guys may even be more likely to prep in the Bluegrass because of the polytrack. If they have a good horse who is starting to get a little sore come April, I think they would be more likely to run in the Bluegrass beacsue of the general belief that polytrack is a little more forgiving that dirt.

I don't see any disadvantage to prepping in the Bluegrass Stakes unless you have a horse coming from Southern California who has never run on regular dirt. A horse who has never run on regular dirt would be at disadvantge in the Ky Derby because there isn't much kickback on polytracks so the horse would be getting dirt in his face for the first time in the Ky Derby. I think that would be a big disadvantage. Not only that, if your horse has never run on regular dirt, you don't even know if he will like it.