Last 5 days racing in Vic.. 40+ races... 1 winner has used sprint lane to win. Oaks winner last Friday night.
Printable View
Last 5 days racing in Vic.. 40+ races... 1 winner has used sprint lane to win. Oaks winner last Friday night.
I didnt like the idea of sprint lanes when they were first proposed. But the way I see it now is, there used to be 1 good barrier that everyone was after. Now there are 2. In my eyes it gives another horse with an otherwise useless barrier a chance in the finish. And, if you do some homework, it can be lucrative too. Especially over the sprint journey at Melton. ie. Trifecta's and first 4's.
Month of April 2014 courtesy of son Luke (homework assignment...). 272 races on tracks where sprint lanes. 26 winners used sprint lane. Less than 1 per meeting. Take off of that ones that would have got up inside even without sprint lane.
Our horse been beaten 5 times after working to front and leading and running 2nd getting beaten by sprint lane horse. Once won one doing same..moment to savour!
Has changed racing in good way IMO. No more sit up and sprint. Certainly not at Melton. Leader must get going early to negate horse on its back.
Good work Lukey.. just don't be telling your Mum I asked you to do that...
VVV- OUTSTANDING work there Luke. A +++Quote:
Originally Posted by Toohard
Incredible stats. Sprint Lanes are a myth winners wise. Race tempo yes. Winners, no.
The problem that I have with the sprint lane is not so much that the inside line get a huge advantage, it's more so that the horses in the second half of the field have no chance. It's changed racing so that everything revolves around protecting field position. Horses don't run the gate unless they can genuinely get across, then they hand up to something that just sits wide around the first turn out of trouble. The next one follows it up to the breeze and no sooner does it get there and the three wide line takes off 1200 out but don't put pressure on they just amble up.
So at the bell you have four lines of three but only 4-5 genuine winning chances(all of whom are in the front half of the field). The horses 3-2, 3-3, 3-4 all sprint there arses off around the corner into the straight before the inside line just cruise through.
The exact same thing happens at tracks without sprint lanes though, at least in the Riverina. At least with a sprint lane its one more genuine danger to the leader.Quote:
Originally Posted by Njcstables
Every example is better and probably fitter horses being driven aggressively to win (or attempt) to win races.Quote:
Originally Posted by aussiebreno
Squibs aren't beating them with a sprint lane.
Exactly right. Which means the PBD system doesn't have an impact so there us in effect no handicapping going on and we get short priced faves which punters hate and other trainers no chance of a winner and leaving game or reducing numbers. Thr PBD is our answer to weights in the gallops, but with no sprint lane its one less chance for lower quality horses.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaroldParker
Not wanting to argue about it but I thought race 4 at Pinjarra yesterday was a big plus for sprintlanes.Longshot draws 7..drags back to last..runs up to 3 back the pegs..all horses have the opportunity to pull out and get some momentum up before the inside horses get an opportunity to sprint.with no sprintlane the winner would have run around 5th.Great to see all horses on a loose rein up the straight..Have a look when the replay becomes available..as for some reason it sometimes takes forever for race replays to be put up for WA races!!
Cheers K
(I have quoted K's post from the odds and ends thread here)
Fair call K, it definitely turned out to be an astute drive. I did however think there were a couple of other factors too. A field of only 8 helps as does a 3rd Q of 27.5 Even then the horse that ran 7th was definitely held up
Cheers Another K
Thinking about how a smaller field helps more runners to see daylight, how would it be if Harness were daring enough to stage 6 horse races on sprint lane tracks. Place betting becomes only 2 divies - so what. Promote the fact that every horse is going to see daylight/have a winning chance no matter where they settle (should happen 90% of the time), promote the quinella, promote a first 6. What do you think? It would be a point of difference from the gallops and even better than the doggies 8 starters (where anything can happen)
Sorry Kevin,
but I think that idea absolutley stinks, our game has been gradually becoming more and more like the North American model....mile racing, mobile starts..and look how successful they are at holding punters on Harness racing...NOT, if it wasn't for "the slots" they would be racing for fun and bugger all else ( like we will be if we don't get some real action).
Sorry mate my personal opinion is lets be different and interesting rather than the same boring thing, I'm aware there was some unqualified "market research" doing the rounds a while back saying "young punters want shorter races" but I'm pretty sure if you did the same survey 60 years ago, using the same demographics, you would have got a similar skewed result.
Seriously mate, if we go down the track of 6 horse 1,000 metre races wearing colours that represent barrier draws, I for one will definitley give the game away, and that's a big but honest statement, this silly game we play has been a big part of my life for about 45 years so far, but I am definite on that, I'm gone if we get to that and I know a lot of other people who would as well.
cheers,
Dan
I'm with you Danno.
I am not saying I would like it men (definitely think it would work better for 2000+m races anyway) but if we really need to catch the punting dollar, I think small fields keep everybody interested. I do not have a problem with coloured barrier numbers and/or driver colours. I admit to clutching at straws a bit as I do not see HRV resurrecting interest/providing entertainment and facilities at tracks other than Melton (which is too outer Melbourne) and I fear winning punting dollars is the only alternative to improving attendance.
Edit - Just going through tonight's results and saw that there was 1200m 7 horse racing tonight at Melton - I had no idea about this when I made the post about 6 horse fields, so that is not what I was referring to folks (but I am now interested in watching the replays)
ps The gross times in the results for these races do not add up
The whole state will be infected by them soon.
The argument for them is flawed.
"Harness Racing NSW (HRNSW), in conjunction with the Bathurst Harness Racing Club (BHRC), has resolved to introduce a sprint lane and a mobile configuration of eight and four, to allow for a maximum field size of 12, from the initial race meeting on 10 October.
It was determined that the most opportune time to experiment with a sprint lane is from the outset of the track’s opening and the move to increase the maximum field size is linked to the turnover benefits that go with larger field sizes."
How long until Menangle has 8 x 4 and a Sprint Lane ?
Think of the multi nationals lining up to buy naming rights to the Cheats Lane : )
Tabcorp is running the show.
Back more winners than they deem appropriate (Fixed Odds) on the TAB or with Luxbet and they'll restrict / refuse your bet quick smart.
They've got Harness Racing NSW and VIC jumping through hoops for them ... yet at the same time they're short changing (robbing) the industry.
At some point, similar to Racing NSW, they've got to grow a pair. Which isn't going to happen anytime soon whilst Tabcorp is (no doubt) making the appointments.
I don't like them either Bob. I consider them a cheats lane for why should the 3posn be guaranteed a run in the str. The leader, the death, the 3w and wider are all guaranteed runs in the str BUT they have done some work to earn their run whereas the 3 posn horse has generally done nothing. Sometimes they have had to lead and hand up to get it but if there was no sprint lane the handing up of the lead is going to go back to being a rare occurrence.
If I was still a punter I am not sure how I would feel.
With NO spr lane I would have to consider whether the 3posn horse may or may not get out but it was not a huge consideration
With the spr lane I know he (and maybe 5posn) is going to get out.
If I fancy the leader I really have to be able to assess the tempo of the race to determine whether the 3posn is likely to finish over the top of the leader. If I fancy a swooper or Death horse, I have to consider how good a cart in the leader will give the spr laner.
For Quinellas, Trifectas and First Four betting it probably creates more possibilities and thus bigger dividends (like more genuine chances does) and thus becomes more attractive to some punters which can be self perpetuating.
Forgetting the pro punter. Just trying to make the Red Hots less hot and more attractive to the general punter I think the spr lane only makes supporters of the 3 and 5posn horses less likely to be disillusioned because their horse now sees daylight in the str.
Horses not getting a run in the gallopers is far rarer (and what the public are often comparing us to) as their track/strs are so much bigger but we do we really want huge tracks for then we become another TV/Binocular only viewing sport and lose our point of difference. It is strange that we mostly get compared to the gallopers (horses I guess) and not the dogs as they have the problem of dogs drawn the middle getting squeezed up and yet I do not think it is considered a huge problem for their turnover so maybe the belief that 'held up horses' is really hurting Harness is greatly exaggerated.
As a punter you adjust to it. Trouble is, because it's there, there's always that element of doubt that a horse who shouldn't be handing up will because a) it's a stablemate or b) it's a lazy option to sit on a danger rather than race it. On the whole wherever they've been introduced racing has become less competitive and as a fan of the sport, less interesting.
There are far more three and four pegs winners at tracks without than with.
NSW was always going to get them. The vocal minority had the ear of the right people.
... Oh and Tabcorp probably told them that there's 0.1% of extra turnover in it ... yet I try and have $200 on something @ 11-4 on Sunday and they won't take anything over $34.
$34 LOL
They provide but do not really like Fixed Odds.
They long for the tote pool days only where they don't care if you bet more than the pool as they cannot lose and like the Pokies they just take their healthy % of the pool
What I find perplexing, especially @ Melton, is there could be a ton of room outside yet drivers are fixated on a Sprint Lane that is of no benefit to them.
I watched Glenferrie Shuffle' race last Sunday before I backed her yesterday. I don't know what she was expecting to occur, a Miracle parting of the seas ? but there was an acre to her outside to try something. I think we've a crop of drivers shit scared to avoid contact / make something happen because of sprint lanes.
Best racing in Australia ... Gloucester Park and Menangle = no Sprint Lane.
so when Tabcorp instructs HRNSW to change Menangale to 8 x 4 and a Sprint Lane wider than the Jersey Turnpike because their modelling shows there's an extra 0.1% of turnover in it for them ... that leaves GP.
Won't be long until Menangle kicks off @ 10am on a Saturday morning to plug the gap.
You would have been happy with Dixons drive!!Quote:
Originally Posted by HaroldParker
My arguments against sprint lanes in NSW include all previously listed but add in NSW we still have the "push out rule" where upon passing the candy pole in the back straight the last time you may shift a runner outside you without causing interference." To my understanding this rule does not exist in VIC. It is a driving skill to extract yourself and this where skilled drivers are concerned should minimise a lot of the argument for sprint lanes.
But Norman because all drivers are not of the same skill it is hard to believe it is allowed to exist in these days of OH&S
So the $3 Fav draws 3, the 2 horse at $45 leads and Fav ends up quite ok 1 out 2 back. Just after the bell the Fav is now same but a 3 wide train has started with 2 horses in it, so now at the turn into straight, Fav is 4 back with all but 2 horses in front of him basically last, and sweet bugger alls chance of winning.Quote:
Originally Posted by HaroldParker
Now if this race was at GP or Menangle, Ballarat etc, you've done your dosh, damn!
Hang on, this race was at Port Pirie tonite, Race 3, and theres a sprint lane, who wins, the $42 leader on the small track, or do the punters celebrate cos their horse now 4 pegs got a chance?
http://www.harness.org.au/meeting-re...sa#PPC22081407
Ash you get yourself in the 'Trotters Only' thread quick smart and give us some predictions for Races 2,3,4 on Sunday.
Who let him out here in the general public :confused:
Pay special attention to R4 Ash........will the fav hand up to Blitz??Quote:
Originally Posted by Messenger
I understand this, but it is in the rules. What has happened however is "less" driver education. There are skills that you have to learn if you want to be the complete driver. Some drivers are best out it front but all but useless if they get stuck in a field. Sprint lanes require a different skill for rating a race by the driver in front.Quote:
Originally Posted by Messenger
Then there is the stewards. If you cause interference you get a holiday. Maybe this needs to be a harsher penalty however you do see drivers with a lap full of horse 3 pegs who either hasn't developed the skills required and therefore is "scared" of getting a holiday and they stay put.
One thing a sprint lane does is take away part of the RACING by trying to make it more predictable. Predictable isn't racing it's called a procession.
(I'm sorry if I covered more than 1 topic there but they are sort of related)
As I said, I am not a fan either and you are so right about the lane makes racing more predictable - do they believe this is what punters want.Quote:
Originally Posted by NormanS
I have been led to believe that the Dogs turnover has increased in the last decade - they're not predictable, they often resemble a roller derby
Many years ago the big wigs suggested that the image of the game was an issue and we needed to improve the quality of the product. An opportunity came up to run some short meetings in the "twilight zone" between the end of the Saturday gallops and the start of the Saturday night harness card. Our little club took the initiative and started running 4-5 race restricted cards televised on Sky for the minimum prizemoney $1500 per race from memory.
The turnover was staggering but it proved that quality had zero to do with it. With respect to the horses that raced these were the ones that were at the time unable to get a start at normal C Tab meetings as the fields were selected from the bottom up. Not long after our little trial, bigger clubs tried to move in and this was the for runner if you like to Menangle starting their Saturday night cards at 5pm ish.
Sprint Lanes are created for perception only, I cannot see why we need them on any track, let alone those >1,000M, it has changed the way races are run and removed much initiative from horses who settle back in the field. The above example proved to me that aesthetics and horse quality play no part in whether people will partake in the sport. If it's on and they are near an outlet, people will bet on it and sadly that's the only thing that now matters.
Sprint Lanes are a MASSIVE WANK.
The best two tracks to watch/bet on by far are Menangle and Gloucester Park and NEITHER has a sprint lane. A Pox on the houses of all those responsible for their introduction to NSW. Hang your heads in shame.
I am opening this debate to get opinions on whether the sprint lane is necessary! it would be helpful to hear from all industry participants. Bathurst is on trial, let's see if it is needed before it becomes a piece of folklore!
Some like me, would call them "Divine Intervention"
I don't think one horse has won so far using the sprint lane at Bathurst, even being early days, so do horses need the sprint lane "divine intervention" to improve their chances?
They have built a bigger track, but now some want to add a sprint lane, next we will be racing in staggered lanes around the track!
Come on, you have got the bigger track, some drivers are better than others, some drivers or horses are luckier than others, so let the race decide the winner?
Barrier draws are important they are there to put your horse in a race, the race starts you take your chance, there is no need to provide added advantages with a sprint lane! If you get held up for a run, that is the luck of the game. The arguments has been used, that to "punters" this creates the "red hots" syndrome, did you see that? Some get runs, some don't, that is it, I don't think people are that naive not to recognise this!
What about horses in the running line being help up when someone make a run 3 or 4 deep, that is racing! Or do you want the drivers moving wider to allow room for them to get out!
At Menangle, a lot of horses get inside runs and there is no sprint lane, take the last race yesterday!
At Melton, the sprint lane changes the race completely on straightening, the leader may have fought off all challengers during the race, then up the inside goes someone having an easy run, not going around one horse, knocks it off! Without a sprint lane the driver of the leader can use his ability to hold them in, and perhaps get his deserved win, not serve it up to others on a platter.
Albion Park, is the "Sprint Lane" capital of the world, every race and tactics revolves who is going to be getting the sprint lane run!
My opinion is, every runner should be racing on a level playing field! I welcome your comments.
Have to agree i dont think we need them, could argue both ways !
Not a fan of sprint lanes, I think the tactics that come from having a sprint lane reduces the overall value of the race as a spectacle and as a gambling option.
The sprint lane "mutes " a lot of other tactics, just like mile racing does, it limits the options of the drivers and hence limits the race as a gambling option. I have been saying this for as many years as I care to remember! Look at harness racing in North America with its mundane racing, if it wasn't for pokies the game would not exist over there, Harness punters bet on numbers and systems, they might as well bet on machines, not horses and drivers!!
while you are having a look around look at harness racing in Europe, still going gang busters and still racing over varying distances...
Cheers,
Dan
Absolutely no, definitely not get rid of them now, get rid of them forever!
Totally agree, if you draw wide on the second row, why would anybody go out of their way to try to win if they have a mediocre horse in that particular race? The incentive is not there for them or the punter! In general, you expect the better horses to win a race, not someone being give a presentation on a platter! You make a run from back in the field, make up 5-6 lengths and hit the lead, then something that has been "asleep" for most of the race gets a rails run and knocks you off! Come on the administrators of Harness Racing, you have your bigger tracks, let's just leave it at that, not change the credibility of the sport!
6 pages of thoughts in this Sprint Lanes Suck thread from May 3 this year after Mindarie Priddy was beaten in The Oaks
http://www.harnessracingforum.com/sh...int-lanes-Suck
Thanks Kev, I knew there was a previous post somewhere on this topic...........it is now "urgent" for NSW racing, as once Bathurst get's its foot in the door, the floodgates will open for all tracks here! Look at WA, there major track is still only 800 metres, and yes leading is a big advantage, but it has not disadvantaged them, and runners back on the fence, take their chance and quite often get a run! We have bigger tracks now, and we then want to put a sprint lane on top!
Any person, driver trainer or punter etc, now looks at every race on the basis of who will be the leader, and the fence runners, this strategy takes the majority of the race form out of play!
If someone takes on a leader for the lead, the leader can say I will let him go, and will automatically get another crack later in the race. The skill and tactics have gone out the window! We need to look at this on an overall basis, not a particular race, or talking through your pocket! We all have had these situations go for us and against us, but in the end there should be no free ride for anybody!
As the previous thread shows, I am not a fan of the Sprint lane but as far as the emboldened goes - I wonder whether there shouldn't be 'more doubt' in that with more aggressive drivers the early leader who hands up should be a little concerned about what if the new leader hands up too and I end up in the 5 posnQuote:
Originally Posted by The Form Student
It does not seem to happen much and I sometimes wonder whether there isn't a case of peer pressure in that senior drivers put 'maverick' drivers back in their box
The more pertinent aspect is that the driver of the leader and the horse outside now drive to conserve something for the home straight, unless something is coming fast 3 ,4 or 5 wide, to offset the rails run they know is coming! This does not mean a strong pace in the final lap and hinders runners ready to make their final sprint! What is happening is that leaders are more dominant than ever before!
I agree with Danno, there are just not enough longer races, these races give the opportunity for more tactics to come into play, not stereo-typed "mile" race where the barrier draw generally determines how the race is to be run!
I am not sure that driving to conserve something in the home str is anything new Steve. Without a sprint lane, drivers in the past sometimes never fully released their horse in the home str so that the death horse could stick on long enough to stop the sit horse on the leaders back from getting out. As for a strong pace in the final lap - I think we are actually still seeing that but rarely a strong pace the lap before. Without much pace except for the last lap, horses from back in the field have to exceptional to make ground lateQuote:
Originally Posted by The Form Student
To refine my thought, the leader and death horses are "looking over their shoulder" waiting for the fence horse to come through, so the death horse is not overpowering the leader to early if it can, and visa versa, they know they are just sitting ducks! In the past the sit horse would have to pull back and come 3 or 4 wide, or look for a split, now they just wait, less distance and timing involved to get a run!
One of only a few times that I can recall a driver forsaking the "privilege" run behind the leader waiting for the sprint lane, was Amanda Turnbull on Just Cala, to win the Breeders Crown Final. She came 3 wide, she was not waiting for the sprint lane, it shows that racing tactics and race circumstances, are what brings the glorious uncertainty to racing, not follow the leader!
Look at Menangle racing, no-one gets upset when a horse gets held up, or can't get a split, it is just racing at it's natural best!
Like I said Steve, I hate the Sprint Lane too. This season I am keeping stats for Melton on how often the 3 or 5 posn win or place