|
|
Post by kassracing on Mar 25, 2008 20:31:02 GMT -5
I am a firm believer in 9 horse fields. I even like the idea of 10 horse fields, but I also think it is utterly foolish racing NW1 races and NW2 races with 9 horse fields. What does anyone else think!
|
|
|
|
Post by longtimeplayer on Mar 26, 2008 18:50:26 GMT -5
Depends on the type of 9 & 10 horse races you are talking about, if the 9 starts in back of the one horse like at Northfield that works. Can't say I like the 10 across the track like the Meadowlands has. If you bet the 8,9 or 10 there and they don't shoot out at the start for position, chances are you are looking at the next race alot sooner. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by kassracing on Mar 26, 2008 20:31:25 GMT -5
Two horses in the second tier makes the outside horses leave a little more. Makes for better racing. Higher payoffs. No lineup numbers. Why I don't like them in the NW 1's and 2's is the horses are so green, they dont know what they are doing half the time anyway.
Think if you had a superfecta race with 10 horses rather then 9. I think you would handle much more on the race as well as get much better payoffs, not to mention more entertaining racing. And instead of raising the purse for the race, throw the owners of 6-10 a $50 spot for racing in the race.
Giss, you talked about racing two heat races before, why not different distances also? 1/2, 5/8, 3/4, 1 1/4, 1 1/2 racing...might be fun for the betters.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegiss on Mar 27, 2008 10:47:24 GMT -5
Two horses in the second tier makes the outside horses leave a little more. Makes for better racing. Higher payoffs. No lineup numbers. Why I don't like them in the NW 1's and 2's is the horses are so green, they dont know what they are doing half the time anyway. Think if you had a superfecta race with 10 horses rather then 9. I think you would handle much more on the race as well as get much better payoffs, not to mention more entertaining racing. And instead of raising the purse for the race, throw the owners of 6-10 a $50 spot for racing in the race. Giss, you talked about racing two heat races before, why not different distances also? 1/2, 5/8, 3/4, 1 1/4, 1 1/2 racing...might be fun for the betters. I know you are a newcomer to the boards and Northfield, so I will explain again that the horsemen havd refused repeatedly to race at odd distnaces. Our preference is to offer it, but the races simply do not fil, evne when we have offered bonuses. |
|
|
|
Post by trackrat on Mar 27, 2008 14:31:32 GMT -5
I know you are a newcomer to the boards and Northfield, so I will explain again that the horsemen havd refused repeatedly to race at odd distnaces. Too bad they won't agree, since a lot of the horses racing at Northfield right now can only contend for 1/2 to 3/4 mile. What was the name of that horse Chico Gnoli had that was a world beater for one half mile? I think Don O'Dwyer used to drive him. I remember those half mile and 3/4 mile dashes and those usually ended up being match races with only two real competitors going full bore. Still, it was interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by poohollar on Mar 29, 2008 21:59:05 GMT -5
Two horses in the second tier makes the outside horses leave a little more. Makes for better racing. Higher payoffs. No lineup numbers. Why I don't like them in the NW 1's and 2's is the horses are so green, they dont know what they are doing half the time anyway. Think if you had a superfecta race with 10 horses rather then 9. I think you would handle much more on the race as well as get much better payoffs, not to mention more entertaining racing. And instead of raising the purse for the race, throw the owners of 6-10 a $50 spot for racing in the race. Giss, you talked about racing two heat races before, why not different distances also? 1/2, 5/8, 3/4, 1 1/4, 1 1/2 racing...might be fun for the betters. I know you are a newcomer to the boards and Northfield, so I will explain again that the horsemen havd refused repeatedly to race at odd distnaces. Our preference is to offer it, but the races simply do not fil, evne when we have offered bonuses. I think the idea could be revistited Keith. Possibly an attraction for Battle night? I do know the idea has been kicked around a few times among the horsemen....how about we re-think? |
|
|
|
Post by BlackWater on Mar 30, 2008 12:07:03 GMT -5
I know you are a newcomer to the boards and Northfield, so I will explain again that the horsemen havd refused repeatedly to race at odd distnaces. Our preference is to offer it, but the races simply do not fil, evne when we have offered bonuses. I think the idea could be revistited Keith. Possibly an attraction for Battle night? I do know the idea has been kicked around a few times among the horsemen....how about we re-think? Here's my vote (for what it's worth) for some odd-distance races - especially longer ones (1-1/4, 1-1/2m)........ I think it would add some variety to an evening of racing, and it would be interesting to see which of my favorites can go the distance! I agree with Pooh that an event night like Battle Night would be a good time to try it out - those races seem to always fill, and with the visiting horses/drivers/trainers there, it might add even more excitement! And who knows - the odd-distance races might catch on with the local horsemen. Just another opinion.......... |
|
|
|
Post by jimhorseman on Mar 30, 2008 14:04:11 GMT -5
I'll take the opposing view on odd-length races. I am not in favor of them from a purely betting perspective. When I handicap a card at Northfield on average I can find 2-3 races I plan to key or bet more heavily; maybe 4-6 races that are more competive but playable and the remainder look like races to pass that I play minimially (sometimes just a $2 bet to force me to watch the race).
Races at odd lengths would be in my mind virtually unplayable. I would only be guessing if a speed horse would hold at a shorter distance or if a closer really has that much better of a chance with more distance to run. The reason harness racing appeals to me more than the T-breds is the constants. Most horses run weekly at the same track at the same distance against similiar competition. Much easier to handicap and while the payoffs may not be as rewarding compared to a T-bred race I find I hit more frequently and in the long run am more profitable with the harness racing. Odd distance races from a purely selfish motive would only screw up my number ratings system and give me less information to work with for future races. Yonkers often ran races that were at 1 1/16th miles and I hated seeing them in the past performance charts. Bottom line: I would watch the races out of curiosity but would not be inclined to wager on them and I'm not sure a product that discourages wagering would be beneficial to the track.
|
|
|
|
Post by trackrat on Mar 30, 2008 15:49:17 GMT -5
Jim, interesting reference to Yonkers' old practice of mile and 1/16 races. I used to watch horses ship into Northfield from Yonkers, dropping back to our one mile standard and often found value in betting horses that showed they could race more than a mile competitively at Yonkers, even if they weren't winners. I often speculate, privately, that the New Zealand and Australian imports are hardier lots because they race at more than a mile in the land down under. That may all be a false perception, because maybe the horsemen who bring those NZ and Aussie horses to the USA only bring the outstanding ones.
|
|
