Polytrack devils advocates please respond

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Ok, one of the worst things I know of, is the sickening redboarding that goes on after races here lately.
You just can't haveit both ways folks.
I'd like the polytrack proponents to respond now if they would graciously take the time to do so, but I have a strong feeling that none will answer this without covering all the bases.
Tomorrow in the 2Yo race at Keeneland we have a colt who looks truly good. Circular Quay has handled all three of his starts very impressively and with his running style and pedigree looks to be a sure fire candidate to strtech out well.
If he wins tomorrow are you guys gonna say, see they all can run on Poly?
And if he loses will you admit that many don't run on it, or will you play devils advocate and say well he wasnt proven, it was two turns, 2Yo's are inconsistent, blah blah blah.
I'd love to see some of you guys go on the record before a race, just one time. It would really be a refreshing change. Do you or do you not feel that CQ lays over that field in terms of ability and will a loss on the tires prove anything or not.
I'm not holding my breath here waiting for anyone to say anything concrete.
Its my opinion if this race was on dirt that he would win by 10 lengths. And I'm almost hoping he loses so thathe can come back in the BC and roast them. Then we can ask all those who claim that this is a suitable dirt alternative why his only loss came on the tires.

I like Great Hunter more than Quay but the short stretch at a mile and a sixteenth is a big concern to me to take any closer. I'll fully cap it later but I'm going to need to see tons of pace before I will back Quay.

The Spinster will be a better gauge of how established horses handle the stuff. Happy Ticket is a pretty consistent horse. If she runs a sub 95 Beyer and doesn't hit the top three here I'll give credence to the idea that there will be good dirt horses that can't handle the poly.

Originally Posted by oracle80

You haven't shown you agree or disagree with anything yet.
I've yet to see your thoughts on the race. Or can't you be bothered with things like PP's and handicapping races?
What do you think of the race Pillow? WHo do you like in the race and why?
Is it really that hard to answer this?

I'm going to the OTB today and i'll pick up a form and let you know. Chances are i'll be siding with CQ for the simple fact he likes to close. BUT if the track favors speed due to horses losing footing i'll probably look elsewhere.

Really this new surface is no different than the new turf at the Superdome. Even the greatest athletes fail at something they have no experience over. Just look at Michael Vick and Warrick Dunn that game. It looked like they were playing on a skating rink.

Advantage nawlins.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Thats three.
Ok so now that we have those thoughts.
Explain what level of animal(age, distance, class) has to run in it in order for us to get a read on it. Seriously. because you've now cut two year olds out of the mix.
Grass doesn't apply.
So are you saying its gotta be an older horse? because history is littered with older horses who go in and out of form as well.
Near as I can tell you are saying something like an unbeaten olderhorse or mare has to run on it in order to get a read on it.

How about at least a horse thats run the distance and gone two turns for starters? How about a horse that has run and won at two turns and in a route at more than one track?

Wouldnt that make some sense? Nah...of course not. If doesnt fit your agenda.

Originally Posted by dalakhani

I answered you in who i like and you told me that i didnt give an answer. What gives?

Ok heres the thing Dalakhani.
If he wins the deils advocates will say it proves good horses will run on it right?
So if he loses doesn't that prove the inverse?
What I'm saying is that if you don't say before the race that you think he will win, you realy can't say afterwards that it proves anything.
You seeing my point?
Sorry to throw a wet blanket on the redboarding parade here lately, but thats my point.

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

I like Great Hunter more than Quay but the short stretch at a mile and a sixteenth is a big concern to me to take any closer. I'll fully cap it later but I'm going to need to see tons of pace before I will back Quay.

The Spinster will be a better gauge of how established horses handle the stuff. Happy Ticket is a pretty consistent horse. If she runs a sub 95 Beyer and doesn't hit the top three here I'll give credence to the idea that there will be good dirt horses that can't handle the poly.

Congrats and my respect to you Sniper, sincerely.
You just laid on the line your thoughts and and reasons.
You have my respect, and are truly a gentleman with courage and honor.

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

I'm going to the OTB today and i'll pick up a form and let you know. Chances are i'll be siding with CQ for the simple fact he likes to close. BUT if the track favors speed due to horses losing footing i'll probably look elsewhere.

Really this new surface is no different than the new turf at the Superdome. Even the greatest athletes fail at something they have no experience over. Just look at Michael Vick and Warrick Dunn that game. It looked like they were playing on a skating rink.

Advantage nawlins.

I saw that game and I think the emotion really carried nawlins as you say moreso than the surface.
They played like a team posessed.

Originally Posted by dalakhani

How about at least a horse thats run the distance and gone two turns for starters? How about a horse that has run and won at two turns and in a route at more than one track?

Wouldnt that make some sense? Nah...of course not. If doesnt fit your agenda.

My "agenda" is to root out the redboarders. Its just that in this case Poly debate is an effective tool to do so.
Granted I can see your point and its a valid one. Horses untested at two turns may not be the best example to use in this case.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Ok heres the thing Dalakhani.
If he wins the deils advocates will say it proves good horses will run on it right?
So if he loses doesn't that prove the inverse?
What I'm saying is that if you don't say before the race that you think he will win, you realy can't say afterwards that it proves anything.
You seeing my point?
Sorry to throw a wet blanket on the redboarding parade here lately, but thats my point.

I do understand your point. And if there were more history behind the horse i would agree with you. But a two year old? I bet against chalky two year olds all the time.

I bet for value. I just dont see a horse unproven on a surface or two turns at even odds value.

Originally Posted by oracle80

I saw that game and I think the emotion really carried nawlins as you say moreso than the surface.
They played like a team posessed.

See? There simply isn't enough data to say whether the new turf is bad or good!!

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by oracle80

Thats three.
Ok so now that we have those thoughts.
Explain what level of animal(age, distance, class) has to run in it in order for us to get a read on it. Seriously. because you've now cut two year olds out of the mix.
Grass doesn't apply.
So are you saying its gotta be an older horse? because history is littered with older horses who go in and out of form as well.
Near as I can tell you are saying something like an unbeaten olderhorse or mare has to run on it in order to get a read on it.

Like I said, I'll post my thoughts later, but I'll also be sitting down w/ the PP's with the same thoughts that Dalakani said. Sniper has an excellent point about Happy Ticket by the way, and that is what I was looking for in a race. I'll post my thoughts on most of the card since I'm capping it anyway.

Originally Posted by dalakhani

I do understand your point. And if there were more history behind the horse i would agree with you. But a two year old? I bet against chalky two year olds all the time.

I bet for value. I just dont see a horse unproven on a surface or two turns at even odds value.

I agree, and wouldn't bet him with chinese money tomorrow because of the surface.
Since I'm not playing any races on Poly there this meet, grass only, why would I play that race anyway?
I'll handicap and watch intently, and not have to suffer through watching a horse who looks like With A City win a race I have bet. Its much less stress.

[lemoncrush]

Originally Posted by oracle80

I'm not holding my breath here waiting for anyone to say anything concrete.
Its my opinion if this race was on dirt that he would win by 10 lengths. And I'm almost hoping he loses so thathe can come back in the BC and roast them. Then we can ask all those who claim that this is a suitable dirt alternative why his only loss came on the tires.

I'm with you Oracle.
If CQ doesn't take to poly, he'll be a better price on Juvy day and be back at Churchill where he's 2 for 2 and will mow down the field.
As I said in another thread, I wouldn't be shocked if he didn't take to poly this weekend, but I just think class is going to be enough to beat these tomorrow.

[jpops757]

Originally Posted by Nostradamus

Poly saves horses lives. That is all we need to know. It also lets horses run more often and it will bring bigger betting fields. It also will save the average owner thousands in vet costs. Horse safety is the number one priority.

Who should we trust? Michael Tabor or Oracle. LOL.

Your lies about trainers hating poly is getting old.

Is Tabor a good example?

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

I do understand your point. And if there were more history behind the horse i would agree with you. But a two year old? I bet against chalky two year olds all the time.

I bet for value. I just dont see a horse unproven on a surface or two turns at even odds value.

Bingo!!

[SniperSB23]

Originally Posted by oracle80

I just wanna get this out in the open now Point.
Redboarders are the equivalent of pond scum in the racing world. People who hang it out there before a race with thoughts and statements and picks, even if completely wrong, always get more credit than a redboarder who attempts to act oh so intellectual and knowledgable after the race with big words and oh so well written posts smacking of condescension.
We've been invaded with a hoard of redboarders lately who never once post thoughts or selections before races, yet have "all the answers" afterwards.
Just yesterday a few guys attempted to ridicule my contention that With A City was an impossible horse to bet on earlier this year. They made cases for how he could be played. I then asked them how much money they made on him and I heard crickets chirping. Thing is the ones they ridiculed were themselves, because if I ever could make any kind of case for a horse who is 50-1 or higher, you can damn well bet I'm gonna get some money down on the horse if I have to walk 10 miles to do so.
I, like you, feel he lays over the field by ten lengths. Yet I have zero confidence that he will win. What I'm trying to do is have one of these redboarders tell me who they think will beat him if he does lose, and if they think he will win or lose and why or why not.
Anyone who posts today and ignores this thread and then tries to redboard after the race, will be put into the "you are officially a cowardly redboarding scum" category and deemed a complete bull****ter and useless.

Looking at a race afterwards and seeing how someone could have picked a horse is not redboarding, that is just good handicapping, see what you missed and learn from your mistakes. If I came on here and said I picked With a City and had no post to back it up then that would be redboarding.

I post my picks on another forum all the time out there for everyone to see and judge me on, not my fault you don't read it. I'll start posting them more often on here as well if that will make you feel better but I hate double posting since I know a lot of people read both forums.

I don't know where you got crickets chirping since I told you I bet Silent Times in that race. As far as my not betting With a City I capped the race in the morning so I could watch the NCAA Tournament which is a million times more important to me than some second rate Derby prep over a surface that was totally unknown at the time. I thought the whole field sucked but that at 5-1 Silent Times had the best chance of actually being a quality horse. Had I known Silent Times would have gone from 5-1 to 7-2 and With a City from 30-1 to 49-1 then maybe I would have looked harder at With a City. Fact is I totally missed the fact that it was his second race off the layoff and tossed him on his form in his first race back. Unlike you though I can go back and look at it and see what I missed rather than swearing off the surface for life and making all sorts of unfounded claims that dirt horses won't be able to run on it.

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

See? There simply isn't enough data to say whether the new turf is bad or good!!

I agree with that to a lesser extent than you do. But agree somewhat. I'm not irrational.
But we had a firm policy at the old ESPN board where many of us came from that if you didn't post the thoughts before the race and tried to chirp afterwards, you were scorned and ridiculed and lambasted by the entire board. It kept redboarding to a minimum.
People who don't have DRF's or PP's who haven't seen a race thats being discussed(if its over already) have no business telling those who watched a race what they saw.
People who don't post thoughts before a race have no business crowing about how easy and obvious something is afterwards.
Maybe its a NY thing. You do that here at the track afterwards and are liable to get strangled. Its a beautiful thing.

[Pointg5]

Originally Posted by GPK

Why are they morons Mwind?

I hate it, because it's rediculous to me, to look at a horse on paper and based on breeding he will do this or do that. There's no telling what he'll do and don't tell me that he will do such and such, because of who he's bred out of. I don't care if a horse is by Car Dealer or Froggywentacourt'n(2 Ohio Breds) if they are a good horse, they are good horse. When we get these posts of check out this hip or that hip in a sale, I want to vomit. Granted, not everyone wants to read what I have to say, I know that, but these people really no nothing other than some boring inbreeding or something like that. I got news for them, every AP Indy is not Bernardini...Give me a hard trying, fast, poorly bred horse any day of the week...

Originally Posted by SniperSB23

Looking at a race afterwards and seeing how someone could have picked a horse is not redboarding, that is just good handicapping, see what you missed and learn from your mistakes. If I came on here and said I picked With a City and had no post to back it up then that would be redboarding.

I post my picks on another forum all the time out there for everyone to see and judge me on, not my fault you don't read it. I'll start posting them more often on here as well if that will make you feel better but I hate double posting since I know a lot of people read both forums.

I don't know where you got crickets chirping since I told you I bet Silent Times in that race. As far as my not betting With a City I capped the race in the morning so I could watch the NCAA Tournament which is a million times more important to me than some second rate Derby prep over a surface that was totally unknown at the time. I thought the whole field sucked but that at 5-1 Silent Times had the best chance of actually being a quality horse. Had I known Silent Times would have gone from 5-1 to 7-2 and With a City from 30-1 to 49-1 then maybe I would have looked harder at With a City. Fact is I totally missed the fact that it was his second race off the layoff and tossed him on his form in his first race back. Unlike you though I can go back and look at it and see what I missed rather than swearing off the surface for life and making all sorts of unfounded claims that dirt horses won't be able to run on it.

No I understand, I really do. The same reason you bet Silent Times is the same reason I bet Lemons Forever. I didn't like her so much as I HATED the huge fave sabatini. I was just looking for value and like you was not at all angry or stunned when I got beat.
Its just that redboarding is my pet peeve.

[tycharles01]

Guys I say give it until tonight to talk about the poly. We will know most of the answers to our questions(Can good horses run over it, Do dirt horses like it, Do turf horses like it, does it matter if they ran over it before)

Give it a few hours and every question will be answered

[todko]

I live about 45-50 minutes north of Polyway (Turfway), and I've played the poly probably as much as anyone.

One of the problems for the handicapper is that Polyway keeps changing the poly. Some here probably don't know, but back in March they scraped the top 3 inches off and really didn't publicize the move. I found out through some contacts in Louisville who ran horses there. This "insider" info (if you want to call it that) literally saved my posterior from possibly a losing season. The scraped it to lower the kickback and make the surface faster going into Lanes End Day. Eventually the news hit the press in a limited manner.

This was before the recent changes (scraping it again and adding a new top layer with spandex, wire/cable coverings, and heavier wax coating for the sand) during the off season this summer.

It's a tough surface to play and it's even tougher because they keep changing it. It's like trying to hit a moving target. If it was supposedly that great from the start (as Polyway and Keeneland said) then why all the changes?

I'll tell you clearly, trainers don't necessarily hate it but they also say that they have horses that just don't run on it. I've even heard the term "non-poly" horse being used.

No, I'm not going to name names. And the reason for that is, around here, if a trainer or jockey speaks poorly about a track then that same trainer or jockey is likely to be escorted off the premises and told to never return. Just ask Rodney Prescott (or even Shane Sellers [where ever he is these days]),

Circular Quay is obviously the best horse in the race. Do I have faith enough to take a plunge at those odds. Not a chance. Circular Quay might be a "non-poly" horse and to take that risk at those odds is truly foolish. Yeah, throw him in your 50 cent P4s and at the top of your dime supers, but don't bet the house on him. It's not worth it at those odds.