Turf vs Dirt

[jbelfior]

Question for the TG board:

I\'m assuming most on the board play both surfaces and also assuming most, if not all, use numbers.

So which of the 2 do you feel gives you a better chance of success at the windows and why?


Good Luck,
Joe B

[Fairmount1]

Dirt.

Learned dirt only for first few years of following the game.  

Turf racing has more close finishes both in sprints and routes, more of a rider\'s game on the green, less \"obvious\" winners on turf as compared to many dirt sprint angles (trainers), and just my records show I don\'t win as often or with mutuels at the same strike rate and ROI as Dirt.  Beyer\'s, TG\'s, race replays.....none of it works for me as well as dirt.  

I do find breeding helpful in turf maiden races and find occassional success at decent odds with these angles but never with a high confidence level as with trainer angles and/or numbers of a dirt race.

[fasteddie]

Turf, all the way! They run more consistent numbers, and trips are easier to gauge. When I play dirt, I look for turf-to-dirt angles.

[Tavasco]

Joe, as you may suspect, without early pace consideration on dirt and late pace consideration on turf, I believe one is playing by obsolete methods.

Didn\'t AP prove cruising speed the key on dirt and turf races usually won in the last quarter mile when contenders separate from those that can canter along with the pace.

[FrankD.]

Turf for many reasons:
1) The \"move up\" guys are hardly ever a consideration on grass.
2) Turf horses run much more consistent figures.
3) Certain turf courses and rail placements make eliminating outside post positions almost an automatic.
4) The field size of turf races are larger.
5) Larger fields in a horizontal sequence make for better prices.
6) Trainer/jockey profiles and trips (ie.those who save ground) are far more identifiable on grass.
7) Track bias\'s are more easily identified (ie. lack of rain making for a speed carrying surface)
A far smaller pool of top notch grass sires as compared to dirt.

Give me 12-14 horse fields on a firm course all day long!!!!

Frank D.

[richiebee]

Frank:

Well put, and I guess this means you will be all in on today\'s late P4 at Aq,
which features three grass races and an old friend of yours from a couple of
Summers ago.

[P-Dub]

FrankD. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Turf for many reasons:
> 1) The \"move up\" guys are hardly ever a
> consideration on grass.
> 2) Turf horses run much more consistent figures.
> 3) Certain turf courses and rail placements make
> eliminating outside post positions almost an
> automatic.
> 4) The field size of turf races are larger.
> 5) Larger fields in a horizontal sequence make for
> better prices.
> 6) Trainer/jockey profiles and trips (ie.those who
> save ground) are far more identifiable on grass.
> 7) Track bias\'s are more easily identified (ie.
> lack of rain making for a speed carrying surface)
> A far smaller pool of top notch grass sires as
> compared to dirt.
>
> Give me 12-14 horse fields on a firm course all
> day long!!!!
>
> Frank D.

This. Well said, my best results are on the turf.

[Mathcapper]

Agree with each of Frank\'s points, especially the one about larger field sizes which, along with the pace dynamics typically associated with grass races, lends itself to a degree of what I like to call \"controlled chaos\" that makes for better vertical prices too; tris and supes on grass races with fields of 10+ being where I\'ve seen by far my highest ROI as well.

[jbelfior]

FrankD. Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Turf for many reasons:
> 1) The \"move up\" guys are hardly ever a
> consideration on grass.
> 2) Turf horses run much more consistent figures.
> 3) Certain turf courses and rail placements make
> eliminating outside post positions almost an
> automatic.
> 4) The field size of turf races are larger.
> 5) Larger fields in a horizontal sequence make for
> better prices.
> 6) Trainer/jockey profiles and trips (ie.those who
> save ground) are far more identifiable on grass.
> 7) Track bias\'s are more easily identified (ie.
> lack of rain making for a speed carrying surface)
> A far smaller pool of top notch grass sires as
> compared to dirt.
>
> Give me 12-14 horse fields on a firm course all
> day long!!!!
>
> Frank D.


Ah, and then you get \"The Matriarch.\"

I\'m not going to sit here and tell you I liked/bet Stormy Lucy yesterday (actually keyed Prize Exhibit who ended up in the parking lot)....but if you looked at the Thoro numbers, this mare should not have been 25-1, nevermind 65-1.

Good Luck,
Joe B.

[bellsbendboy]

Most difficult to find \"Lucy\" yesterday!  Long winded miss had never been remotely competitive going a mile in seven previous starts. Mare excluded from the \"Cup and was going to auction if she got in.

Happy for Steve n Eddie who have somehow kept this one sound especially considering that cross. Always seems a price, breaking her maiden for $30K at a $48 dollar mutual then returning in a 40K starter paying some $66, then beaten in a picture at some 40-1 in the Dmr Oaks!

As many, I much prefer turf as form is more consistent, this heat somewhat excluded, although first time Kent, on turf, always a positive.  

Also, read the Beyer prattle on turf figs a few weeks back. He has never grasped that class and configuration trump figures more often than not.

bbb

[TGJB]

I lost count of the unsupported assertions in that one. The last line is total nonsense. (Assertion based on making figures for both and seeing grass horses run figures in a much tighter range).

[gteasy]

Prefer long meets with consistent surfaces, dirt or turf...like the direction taken
at Woodbine...Tapeta will be installed next season...basically the same surface no
matter the weather...very safe...kinder to grass horses than dirt...helps with
field size,

The first few weeks of a new meet can be a crapshoot as horses transfer form to new
surfaces.

Del Mar turf was good, but didn\'t a profound speed bias show up on dirt?

Speaking of Del Mar, prices are too high, catering is out of touch, the annoying paddock commentator MUST be eliminated, and the wagering program needs a second P-4.
Add a third P-4 and a second P-5 with ten or more races...many times the Del Mar
card is front loaded with 2YO\'s and MSW\'s with first time starters.

[bellsbendboy]

JB with complete respect I am not impugning any figure maker. My point, apparently weakly stated, is that come from behind turf horse are at a SEVERE disadvantage when the rail is up. I\'ve posted here ad nauseum on why and will leave interested parties to do their own research.

No question turf animals run tighter figures, but that is not the whole story. When the rail is up, the pace is slower (horse run slower around turns) and therefore it is extremely difficult to close ground.

Although this assertion (I prefer tenet) has held for the fifty some years I have been playing, a glance at this weekends Delmar turf heats contains some germane results.

WITH A TWIST won her last with a big rail, 24 feet, moved up a class she gets the hedge and wins easy.

FAMILY MEETING wins in Baltimore with a tough trip.  Rail at 87 feet and well wide.  Ships to the left coast as the slowest horse in the race, by most figure makers, gets the hedge and pays $76.

CHIROPRACTOR caught the rail up his last pair. Nothin at 17-10, then a good race against older.  Saturday this one gets back to sophs, gets the hedge and returns some $30.

STORMY LUCY comes out of the Goldikova with the rail up, the race flips she has no chance, gets the hedge Sunday and gets up at 65-1.

Bottom line, betting figures without regard to configuration, is actual nonsense. Thanks for letting me post here.

bbb

[TGJB]

You do recall that you tried that slower-on the-turn, turf rail thing a few months ago, and I shot huge holes in it, right?

And that has nothing to do with the other thing you mentioned, \"class\".

[Boscar Obarra]

Rails up not favoring closers, no logic to it. If bellsboy has some stats on it, then fine, but if the only evidence are anecdotes , I\'d say , hogwash.