Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill Lyster
FTL,
I noticed that since the start of Belmont in the spring, and following on through Saratoga, that a greater % of races at the main Eastern tracks are being carded as grass races. does that apparent observation point you towards any significant areas of your data base that might become more important?
Thanks,
|
Bill,
The short answer is NO.
I wish there was something I could point towards that would be beneficial. If I could, I certainly would.
I’m guessing that by “main” eastern tracks you are referring to the New York circuit.
Saratoga, which basically runs for a month (August), has always run more turf/grass races than the national average, so that is nothing new. But their meet is so short it is really meaningless. I mean, perhaps Saratoga gets 35 days of racing during their meet. At 9 races per day, that comes to 315 total races. Let’s say 30% are scheduled for the grass. How many are lost to weather? How many are maidens? How many just have horses with little to no grass experience? How many truly playable races remain? Naturally, the same trainers and horses that are at Saratoga are also at Belmont and/or Aqueduct during the summer and looking for grass races. They, too, have the same problems. As I noted in the quote you included in your post, grass racing is only viable at the highest levels, in my opinion, which really cuts down on the number of playable races. Also, it’s almost impossible to keep good models on grass racing... if you do it right.
I think it is obvious that I am not a fan of grass racing. It’s not that I don’t like grass racing, there just isn’t enough of it. But keep in mind, when I am answering your question I am also speaking to others who may be reading my reply to you. So although I am not attempting to change your mind, since I know you like grass racing, I am trying to enlighten the others reading this who may not be that well informed on the subject.