Major vs. Minor tracks

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by gl45

what is the difference between major and minor tracks, beside better horses and larger purses.

Your post kind of got lost in the shuffle, but it was "on topic" and deserves an answer so that new members start to learn if they have not been involved with racing previously. My answer to the question is "none" and "a lot". Now I'll qualify my answer.

If one chooses a minor track as one of a couple of tracks that they are going to dedicate themselves to for regular play, they will learn everything about that track. They will become as familiar with that minor track as they would be with any major track they may dedicate their play to. Granted there will be differences in how one goes about their handicapping process from a major track to a minor track, but in the end they will succeed at both tracks.

One of the problems most people have with minor tracks is that they don't play them regularly. They really don't have "a handle" on them and they tend to approach the races at the minor track in the same way they approach the races at a major track. When it doesn't work out for them, they place the blame on the minor track.

Let's take the every day, run of the mill claiming race. At most major tracks these are what are called "open" claiming races. In other words there is no "restriction" as to what horse can enter the race. The race is "open" to all who care to enter their horse for the price indicated.
At a minor track,however, these same claiming races have many different "restrictions", also known as "conditions". These conditions are varied and have an impact on how the horse will perform. As trifle as these conditions may seem to you, they do make a difference.

Let's start at the beginning. First there are maiden races. The better maiden races are those from which a horse can not be claimed. Then there are those from which a horse can be claimed. Naturally, one type of maiden race is better than the other. Once a horse wins its' maiden race it can no longer run against maidens. The most logical next step is to run against "non winners of two races lifetime" (NW2L). Every horse in the race has beat a field of maidens and that is it. This is not the same as a maiden race, it is just a little harder because all the horses in the race have demonstrated the ability to beat a field of horses. Having beat a field of "NW2L" the next logical step would be a race for "non winners of three races lifetime" (NW3L). Again, this race is just slightly harder because now the horse is facing other horses that have demonstrated the ability to beat horses that have all won two races. The next logical progression is to "non winners of 4 races lifetime (NW4L). Once a horse beats the "NW4L" condition there is no place to go other than "open" races.

Many times these horse have a problem trying to beat "open" races and after many attempts they just are not successful. So what do they do? Well, once 6 months has past they becomes eligible for a condition called "non winners of a race in 6 months" (NW16M). In this condition a horse is no longer competing against successful "open" condition horses. Now it is facing a field of horses that, like it, have not been able to win a race in the last 6 months.
So as you can see, there are various aspects of racing at a minor track that are not present at a major track and my advice is to learn about all the various conditions and what they mean.

People talk about "erratic" form when discussing minor tracks. I'm not that sure the form is "erratic". What I have observed is that horses that win a race in the NW2L condition will many times run poorly when they go against the NW3L condition the next time out and then will come right back against the same NW3L condition and win. It is doubtful to me that this horse, within a period of one month, went out of and back into form. I do not know the answer to this scenario, but I do know that I have seen it over and over again. So when choosing a pace line, I have no problem with going past this horses last poor performance and using its' winning performance as long as the situation I just described exists.

I prefer "some" minor tracks over major tracks simply because the nuances of a minor track are not understood by most players. This results in opportunities. The reason I say "some" minor tracks is because I don't prefer to play "bull ring" tracks, which are minor tracks. Don't take this the wrong way. I'm sure that if you dedicated yourself to playing these tracks you would come to understand them and would be successful. Also, I would not "trust" any line from any shipper that has been running at a track that is NOT a bull ring track. An example would be playing Charles Town (CT), a bull ring, where a 6 1/2 furlong race is run around two turns and having a horse ship in from PEN and using a 6 furlong line from PEN where 6 furlongs is run around one turn. That's too much conflict for me and with all the choices there are, why get involved. I mean, if you watch a 1 1/16th race at CT, it's like watching a "merry-go-round". I'm simply not going to try and compare a line from CT at 1 1/16th miles to a line from PEN at the same distance.

I do play PEN and horses do ship in there from CT, but what I have come to realize is, horses that ship in from CT do not win very often and if they do not have a recent line from a track other than a bull ring, I simply eliminate them from consideration. Do I get burned? Sure, "EVERYTHING" happens at one time or another! But it isn't enough to be concerned about. (for me)

Hopefully this has given some insight to new players.

Good Luck!

[gl45]

FTL,
good advice. Know you track, make an effort in knowing trainers and jocks and most important don't follow the public . Example:
last night at MNR race 2 ...5f. My contenders are 6-8-3-10, kepping looking my charts and see that horse#9 is an "A" angle horse riden by Deshawn P...going off at 9-1. Nah I said to myself, even knowing the Q public was wrong and Deshawn would at least steal a piece of the pie, but noooooo I had to follow the crowd and let Deshawn steal the place. I bet 6-8/3-10 and 3-10/6-8.
So, rather than having a 33% winners with a ROI of 2.44, I had to settle with a 25% winners and a ROI of .73

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Charlie D

If you think you get more out of a result chart, why not make use of video replays and take notes.

No disrespect intended here Charlie, but you just don't get it.
You have latched onto the match up and for you, it's like a horse wearing blinkers, you can only see what is directly in front of you. Nobody is saying what you do is bad or worthless.
"gl45", Ted and I are just talking about going "where no man has gone before"!

[Charlie D]

What i get is most lose at this game and if they listened to people like Jim Bradshaw, Dr H Sartin, used their brain and showed discipline, they probably would not.

This game is not rocket science, despite what some will have you believe.

[Charlie D]

This post is not directed at any other posts it is my comments for any one interest and i will not be replying to anything quoted from it as i'm not wasting time and energy repeating myself.




The horse can not read, it does not know how much it is worth, the trainers are in the main trainers and not handicappers, owners are in the mian owners and not handicappers. This why they rely on people like Jim Brown, Timeform, CJ, Andy Beye, Sheets etc, etc.

So therefore the man made class designation like NW2L, NW3L are of little use in telling YOU the horses ability and how it will Match Up against others.


If they were any use in telling ME ability, i would USE them, i don't, i use the Dynamics of Incremental Velocity and Energy Exertion and figures derived from overall time.


Jockey ability, usefull tool as there is a masive gulf in that, just like there are in horse ability, however it is one of the last things you need to be looking at not one of the the first

Ramon is not winning on horse that does not Match Up. It's that simple.


Now, you can either listen to my advice, J Bradshaw's , Doc Sartin 's etc or listen to those whose expertise keeps YOU losing your money.


The ball ,as they say , is now in your court.


Good Skill.

[Charlie D]

Just thing on figures dervided from overall time

THEY have thier limitations, how do i know this, i make them for my own use.

On my figures Schoolyard was top, but because i understand the Dynamics of Incremental Velocity and Energy Exertion and because i am a Match Up Apprentice, i knew he may be in trouble in Wood

I still went with him as my analysis said he was the main danger to the chalk. Eskendereya was of no appeal at odds and Awesome Act needed to improve. a lot and of no interest at his odds.

The rest were NON contenders

Events showed that this was the wrong decision this time. Next time, i may make the right decision.


Making the right decisions as shown by Lou in his posts, is what wins you the MONEY.


Garbage in, garbage out is what cost you your stakes.

[Charlie D]

Just one more thing


Track bias.

I mainly play Dirt stateside so can not talk about synth or turf tracks.


When people on tv, forums etc talk about golden highways, E is holding up well etc, ignore them, and take advantage.



Good Skill.

[alydar_ David]

Getting back to the topic at hand, major versus minor tracks, I’ll throw in my two cents.

I consider the following to be major tracks.

On the east coast: Aqueduct (main, not inner), Belmont, Gulfstream and Saratoga.

On the west coast: Del Mar, Hollywood and Santa Anita (not Oak Tree).

The minor tracks are the ones that offer cheap races like $2500 or $3000 claimers.

We run into a fuzzy area when we consider tracks less than major, but well above middle or minor. Tracks like Keeneland, Churchill Downs, Woodbine, Oakland and Monmouth are difficult to characterize. Are they all the same? Hard to say, but I’d put them in the first tier below major.

Then you have tracks which fall into a middle group which is difficult to classify -- tracks like Turfway Park, Delaware and Philadelphia to name a few.

Can you handicap these tracks differently? Yes, you can. Reason being the quality of horseflesh varies greatly. Cheap horses can’t hold their form as well as their higher class cousins and it’s harder to predict their performance.

What about making money? Some people prefer to play the best races at the best tracks because the horses are more predictable. Others prefer to play cheap races at minor tracks with large fields where the payoffs are greater. And then there are people like me that play all of them.

As far as I’m concerned the most money to be made using pace analysis is at minor tracks with large fields; cheap claiming and allowance sprints are the most profitable to play.

[Charlie D]

AD

I've been looking at at a glances and according to thier data there is not much difference in the average winning odds, fav win, ITM % at most of the tracks ( polytracks like Kee, Wood have low fav win %) however, there seems to be a good difference in what the Exacta, Tri payouts are

Minor tracks seem to hold the upper hand in this regard, so i would say if you want to play Exacta's, Tri, get to places Mnr.

[Charlie D]

HAWTHORNE AT A GLANCE

Avg. Winning Odds: 4.28 - 1
Favorite Win%: 42%, Favorite Itm%: 79%

Minor Track that you don't want to be playing as a win only bettor unless you like chalk, but on saying that, the Exacta pay off look passable though and may be probably easier to hit than at some other tracks with more competitive racing.

Uncompetitive racing can have advantages.