Favorite Harness Race Distance

[Danno]

What is your favourite distance for trotting races? (suggested by jimbeau)
1600m (9%)
http://www.harness.org.au/images/poll-graph.gif
2100m (38%)
http://www.harness.org.au/images/poll-graph.gif
2600m (46%)
http://www.harness.org.au/images/poll-graph.gif
3200m (7%)
http://www.harness.org.au/images/poll-graph.gif
Total Votes: 149
http://www.harness.org.au/images/button-results.gif (http://www.harness.org.au/poll-results.cfm)





Noticed the latest poll on Harness.org.au......it appears the overwhelming majority of respondents prefer middle distance ( 2100 metres) to middle staying distance races ( 2600 metres) very few prefer the 1609 metres, whilst the joke distance of 1k thankfully didn't even get a mention.
To me, the interesting thing thats coming from this poll is that very few people ( 9%) reckon 1609 metres is the go!! I feel vindicated to a certain extent, as I've not ever believed that copying the progressively diminishing " success" of our North American cousins has been what's appropriate for our own market.

I'd love to hear other's opinions! IMO we have been bombarded, and to a certain extent "brainwashed" with too much mile racing for too long! From a trainer/driver's perspective the mile racing reduces your options for putting your horse into the race at some stage without butchering him. And from a punters viewpoint? well look at the success in the good old USA!

To be fair, the downward spiral can not be blamed on mile racing alone, all mobile starts, conditioned racing that is designed to even up fields but actually causes barrier draws to influence people to bet on "numbers" and "systems" rather than assessing the qualities of the the individuals, and in general, a system that is trying to appeal to the desire of punters for a consistent or "predictable" product, when in fact that alone kills the punters interest!!! the punters don't want $1.30 favorites winning! they know the odds are against them with factors like luck in running etc. The punters want a fair go thats all, they don't want to see horses that can't win a race at Wagga or Newcastle lining up, sitting in the death, and blitzing their rivals in the straight at Melton or Menangle and the only explanation is the horse was driven "American Style" or that trainer swims his horses,even though the horse has been in his/her yard for about 4 days!!!!

As has been said on this forum many times... the punters want to see a reasonably consistent product and the participants would like a reasonably level playing field.

[strong persuader]

Very good and valid points Dan. Personally prefer the mile and a half too. You're right, the longer distances give drivers more options on getting into a winning position at some point.

[clumsy]

A story going around that Wagga will be running some 1300m races in September, hope it is only a rumor!

[aussiebreno]

I took it the poll was for trotters only.

I voted 2600m because trotters lack the high speed and 2600m races seem to be more competitive.

As for pacing its a whole different ball game. 2565m races at Wagga end up like a dogs breakfast down the straight, because country front horses just aren't fit enough. But then mile races the leader gets such an advantage on 800m tracks (as you said Danno some horses/drivers are just damned from the start - 100% agree with you here). 2100 is probably the right distance.

But then in grand circuit racing mile racing is cutthroat and they go fast enough and with enough pressure on it brings the whole field into races. Same story with 2600m, its a great staying test at that level. 2100 seems neither here not there at that level.

Then we have different tracks. I absolutely love the Menangle Mile. If driven right every horse has a chance. But then line the same field up over the middle distance and I'd rather see them race at Melton 2240m.

I wouldn't have a definitive answer of favourite distance for pacers.

Lol I don't know how that question evoked such a detailed response from you Danno but I shall reply!
From a punters viewpoint it would be much easier if every race at every track was over the one distance. Whether that be 1600m or 3200m it would be much, much easier for punters. If this were to happen the breed, not punters or anyone else, would dictate that the mile would be the selected option - with an almighty amount of our mares bred to American sires that never raced a metre over 1609m. That said, for the love of the game I wouldn't want to see that happen. As it is now though I hardly see a problem with the amount of mile racing - it isn't that prevalent is it? Middle distance still rules the roost everywhere except one track.

The systems betting approach. From my experiences it is much more prevalent, and more importantly much more proportionately prevalent, in gallops and dogs. The gallops barriers are random 100% of the time (while I don't know about dogs). I daresay most harness systems are based around numbers drawn to lead. This could happen with both PBD and RBD, somebody is always going to be drawn to lead. You say you don't like $1.30 faves but tell me, what happens when the best horse in the races draws barrier two under RBD?

You even have a go at mobile starts. Tell me how many punters turn away as soon as they see the race is a stand start? I don't know the answer because I'll admit I just can't count that damn high.

In the middle of your text you say "a system that is trying to appeal to the desire of punters for a consistent or "predictable" product, when in fact that alone kills the punters interest" Then you finish your post by saying "the punters want to see a reasonable consistent product".
For starters I don't think harness racing is predictable. I don't think conditioned racing is predictable. It brings in enough predictibility in the sense that formlines can be matched rather than all over the place - but who wouldn't want that? It also brings in predictibility that trainers can nominate with confidence - but who wouldnt want that? But selecting a winner from raceday fields certaintly isn't predictable. Horses racing their own class - or if they are up or down in class we have PBD races. Its a level playing field in that respect and is the best bet for steering away from odds on pops.

[aussiebreno]

A story going around that Wagga will be running some 1300m races in September, hope it is only a rumor!
Yeah thats right. Heats of the Menangle series or some crap....They will start from the back straight. Head on into the first turn will be interesting.

[Triple V]

I took it to mean the Trotters/Square Gaiters races.

[David Summers]

I took it to mean the Trotters/Square Gaiters races.

So did I.

[gutwagon]

The question was for trotting races not pacing races. I voted for 2100m because it gives them more time to recover from a gallop.
This poll is meaningless because I prefer mile racing for pacers but a mile is 1609m not 1600m as the poll question says. No tracks race over 1600m and anything less than 1609m is crazy. So just because 1600m scored a low result means nothing !

[Danno]

I took it the poll was for trotters only.
DG .. my blunder, it probably was.. although that would not change my post at all....

I voted 2600m because trotters lack the high speed and 2600m races seem to be more competitive.

As for pacing its a whole different ball game. 2565m races at Wagga end up like a dogs breakfast down the straight, because country front horses just aren't fit enough. But then mile races the leader gets such an advantage on 800m tracks (as you said Danno some horses/drivers are just damned from the start - 100% agree with you here). 2100 is probably the right distance.

At least I got something right!!

But then in grand circuit racing mile racing is cutthroat and they go fast enough and with enough pressure on it brings the whole field into races. Same story with 2600m, its a great staying test at that level. 2100 seems neither here not there at that level.

DG...Grand circuit racing was definitely NOT what I was referring to.

Then we have different tracks. I absolutely love the Menangle Mile. If driven right every horse has a chance. But then line the same field up over the middle distance and I'd rather see them race at Melton 2240m.

"If driven right every horse has a chance" DG.. this is as close as you get to being right Brendan, but I can tell you ( from experience, not a bar stool or lounge chair) sometimes you are just outclassed, and in those circumstances mate you just can't carry them over the line.

I wouldn't have a definitive answer of favourite distance for pacers.

DG ..Thanks for that confirmation.

Lol I don't know how that question evoked such a detailed response from you Danno but I shall reply!
From a punters viewpoint it would be much easier if every race at every track was over the one distance. .Whether that be 1600m or 3200m it would be much, much easier for punters. DG.. think you may have missed the point Brenno......if you make it easy everyone gets the same answer....what you get then is very short favourites! you're an apprentice bean counter, I'm sure you can now do this equation!!
If this were to happen the breed, not punters or anyone else, would dictate that the mile would be the selected option - with an almighty amount of our mares bred to American sires that never raced a metre over 1609m. That said, for the love of the game I wouldn't want to see that happen. As it is now though I hardly see a problem with the amount of mile racing - it isn't that prevalent is it? Middle distance still rules the roost everywhere except one track.



The systems betting approach. From my experiences it is much more prevalent, and more importantly much more proportionately prevalent, in gallops and dogs. The gallops barriers are random 100% of the time (while I don't know about dogs). I daresay most harness systems are based around numbers drawn to lead. This could happen with both PBD and RBD, somebody is always going to be drawn to lead. You say you don't like $1.30 faves but tell me, what happens when the best horse in the races draws barrier two under RBD?
DG ..ditto
You even have a go at mobile starts. Tell me how many punters turn away as soon as they see the race is a stand start? I don't know the answer because I'll admit I just can't count that damn high.
DG...do your homework Brendan, standing start races in Australia hold very similar to mobiles, not my opinion but indeed FACT.

For starters I don't think harness racing is predictable. I don't think conditioned racing is predictable. It brings in enough predictibility in the sense that formlines can be matched rather than all over the place - but who wouldn't want that? It also brings in predictibility that trainers can nominate with confidence - but who wouldnt want that? But selecting a winner from raceday fields certaintly isn't predictable. Horses racing their own class - or if they are up or down in class we have PBD races. Its a level playing field in that respect and is the best bet for steering away from odds on pops.

DG...Brendan, if you think harness racing is not predictable, then you are entitled to your opinion.. my personal belief is that its MUCH more predictable now than it has ever been and I've been around this game for a long time. I also believe that the predictability is one of our bigger problems!!

[matrightyeh]

i like the short 1600m short and sweet hehe https://imageshackau.com/sports/131/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/133/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/138/b/happy.gif
https://imageshackau.com/sports/123/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/52/b/happy.gifhttps://imageshackau.com/sports/134/b/happy.gif

[aussiebreno]

DG...Brendan, if you think harness racing is not predictable, then you are entitled to your opinion.. my personal belief is that its MUCH more predictable now than it has ever been and I've been around this game for a long time. I also believe that the predictability is one of our bigger problems!!
I used the Grand circuit just as a pointer as to why I can't decide on a favourite distance. Every class, track etc is different. That part of my post was just thinking aloud rather than replying to you!

When, as a driver (and to be perfectly honest you don't need to be a driver, random drunk can see it), you are on a horse who is outclassed and it just doesn't matter what you do you can't win...is that not a part of racing? Plenty of times in footy I've been in situations where in a one on one contest or as a team we've been outclassed. Thats sport. There are things in place in harness racing to help stop this from happening eg claimer races and drop back a class.

How exactly does one program races so every horse is around the same mark. Not only that but then so after the barrier draw things are still pretty even. My answer would be the current system work pretty darned well (not perfect but who and what is). What is yours? I'm guessing stand start handicap races will be your answer. Please summarise specifics of your plan in your next post. :)

I find your stand start races claim hard to believe. Stand start races are generally trotters races and they have a knack of finding themselves as either the first or last race on the card - especially so the last race. For turnover (and on cold nights), pacing and trotting alike, the last race isn't the place to be. As for pacing SS races well there just wouldn't be enough data to make a decision either way. But if you say its fact I will indeed do my homework, all my teachers who sprouted facts had textbooks or something to back it up, do you have something I could look at?

As for predictibility. I believed you were saying its predictable because of the current handicapping/fields conditions. If I've misinterpeted I do apologise. But how does one handicapping system bring in unpredictibility?

[Danno]

Brenno,
here is a quote...NZ harness not Aus, Provided by Jules on another thread late last year, I am trying to dig up a similar comment by a NSW administrator, by the way we are getting a bit off topic, the original comments were about race distances. And I do believe all mobile racing over short distances is one of the things slowly choking our game.



Peter Cook, who is the secretary of the NZ Trainers and Drivers Association said this on Harnesslink:



Perhaps he should consider why turnovers in the South, where there is a mixture of standing and mobile starts, is almost always far higher than in the Auckland area where mobiles are the norm. Also if he was to research the facts, as have officials at Addington Raceway recently, he may discover that there is no discernible difference between turnovers on standing and mobile starts, at least at that venue.

[Triple V]

...the race distance and the subsequent competitiveness or otherwise of a race is only half of the equation.
Possible outcomes & so the wagering is inherently linked to and directly influenced by the dimensions of the track.
On half mile tracks we've seen plenty of squibs buzz out for less than a furlong, hold & lead up, walk middle sectionals & zip home to score. They have just enough speed to hold everything else out & their drivers use geometry rather than the ability of the horse. It becomes less of an issue on 5/8ths tracks and it becomes even less again on 7/8ths and less still on 1 Mile circuits. The bigger the track the fewer places there are for the ordinary horses to hide, regardless of the race distance.

[aussiebreno]

Brenno,
here is a quote...NZ harness not Aus, Provided by Jules on another thread late last year, I am trying to dig up a similar comment by a NSW administrator, by the way we are getting a bit off topic, the original comments were about race distances. And I do believe all mobile racing over short distances is one of the things slowly choking our game.


Turnover in QLD also differs from turnover in NSW. Both are predominately mobile starts. Many things affect turnover.

[Danno]

Ok boys,
please point out which of this part of my original post is bullshit,




I'd love to hear other's opinions! IMO we have been bombarded, and to a certain extent "brainwashed" with too much mile racing for too long! From a trainer/driver's perspective the mile racing reduces your options for putting your horse into the race at some stage without butchering him. And from a punters viewpoint? well look at the success in the good old USA!

To be fair, the downward spiral can not be blamed on mile racing alone, all mobile starts, conditioned racing that is designed to even up fields but actually causes barrier draws to influence people to bet on "numbers" and "systems" rather than assessing the qualities of the the individuals, and in general, a system that is trying to appeal to the desire of punters for a consistent or "predictable" product, when in fact that alone kills the punters interest!!! the punters don't want $1.30 favorites winning! they know the odds are against them with factors like luck in running etc. The punters want a fair go thats all, they don't want to see horses that can't win a race at Wagga or Newcastle lining up, sitting in the death, and blitzing their rivals in the straight at Melton or Menangle and the only explanation is the horse was driven "American Style" or that trainer swims his horses,even though the horse has been in his/her yard for about 4 days!!!!

As has been said on this forum many times... the punters want to see a reasonably consistent product and the participants would like a reasonably level playing field.


I think the original point of the thread has been hijacked, I acknowledged already that I misinterpreted the poll question, so please explain your opinion about the rest.
cheers,
Dan

[aussiebreno]

Ok boys,
please point out which of this part of my original post is bullshit,



I think the original point of the thread has been hijacked, I acknowledged already that I misinterpreted the poll question, so please explain your opinion about the rest.
cheers,
Dan
Danno, much of your original post was off the topic of distances. Note I did reply to the distance bit first then the rest second. We're equally to blame there.

This is the part in particular I'm talking about - not calling bs

To be fair, the downward spiral can not be blamed on mile racing alone, all mobile starts, conditioned racing that is designed to even up fields but actually causes barrier draws to influence people to bet on "numbers" and "systems" rather than assessing the qualities of the the individuals, and in general, a system that is trying to appeal to the desire of punters for a consistent or "predictable" product, when in fact that alone kills the punters interest!!! the punters don't want $1.30 favorites winning! they know the odds are against them with factors like luck in running etc

I'd like to know more about the perceived failings of the conditioned racing and how you would fix this?

[Greg Hando]

2400 mts for mine for the trotters

[Danno]

Brenno,
the point I was trying to make was not that conditioned racing alone causes predictability, but that the whole package incuding all mobile racing, more and more racing over short distances.
Our handicapping system as it stands has the room to add conditions to "even up" fields, but with all mobile racing and the known ability of all horses to leave the gate, it's causing predictability to the point where if "sammy Smith" doesn't go straight to front from barrier 4 then everyone wants to know why?? This is why I'm saying the predictability, in appeasing the punter is also assisting to create a situation that stifles the betting.

Cheers,
Dan

[aussiebreno]

Brenno,
the point I was trying to make was not that conditioned racing alone causes predictability, but that the whole package incuding all mobile racing, more and more racing over short distances.
Our handicapping system as it stands has the room to add conditions to "even up" fields, but with all mobile racing and the known ability of all horses to leave the gate, it's causing predictability to the point where if "sammy Smith" doesn't go straight to front from barrier 4 then everyone wants to know why?? This is why I'm saying the predictability, in appeasing the punter is also assisting to create a situation that stifles the betting.

Cheers,
Dan
It's quite hard to reply when you won't put something on the table. It's quite easy to scream until your face is blue.

I'll have a crack anyway.

I am guessing you want mile and a half SS racing. You're big three are mile, mobile and conditions. Miles are a blimp on the radar, however mobile and conditions occur (just about) every race so I want to know more about them.

How will handicaps be decided? Number of races won? Handicappers discretion?
If it is a) no of races won then that is simply what we are already doing, just making it over a stand instead of a mobile, leaving punters angry though when the rate of horses losing their chance at the start goes spiralling upwards. Then if its mixed class racing the complimentary 10m is hardly different to PBD from the back row. If the handicap was 20m well C4s just aren't 40m better than C2s and you will be setting races up for front markers. Likewise a C2 wins a C2/C3 then has to go back 20m, they were either $1.10 in their C2 win or you wouldn't back them in their next start. Again if the handicap was 10m well thats hardly different to a horse winning their C2 and then starting from back row under PBD in a C2/C3.

If it is b) handicappers discretion....well we need new super genius handicappers. Races will be decided by handicapper decisions. Its not the fault of any certain handicapper - its a job bound to produce mistakes. More handicapping needs to follow a textbook rather than human intuition. People think along different lines and different decisions get made - similar to punting. Handicapping shouldn't be a punt, it should be set in stone. Instances where handicappers are following intuition, here in NSW at least, have left me baffled as I've pointed out on the forum before. The more set in stone bit eg a C1/C3 PBD Sex/$L4 with field selection based on highest points down is great - giving the handicapper the task of just sorting out the noms rather making decisions.