Belmont Stakes

Re: Belmont Stakes

Postby lurkey mclurker » Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:11 pm

Ridan_Remembered wrote:@Horsebagger and @Catalina, a high percentage of the time when there is a two-horse stretch drive, the horse on the outside has the advantage. I do not know why this is so, but it happens so often that it's clearly not due to random chance.


Okay so it was many many years ago :lol: but IIRC wasn't Affirmed always on the inside & Alydar on the outside in their TC battles? Which of course could be an outlier.

But when I read your comment RR it struck me as "huh, wow, that's true" too. 8-)
lurkey mclurker
 
Posts: 1408
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 8:15 pm

Re: Belmont Stakes

Postby barbaro111 » Tue Jun 13, 2017 1:54 pm

Ridan_Remembered wrote:@Horsebagger and @Catalina, a high percentage of the time when there is a two-horse stretch drive, the horse on the outside has the advantage. I do not know why this is so, but it happens so often that it's clearly not due to random chance.


Funny you should bring that up cause I often wonder why the outside horse wins so much more often in that situation--
barbaro111
 
Posts: 322
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: Belmont Stakes

Postby stark » Tue Jun 13, 2017 2:13 pm

barbaro111 wrote:
Ridan_Remembered wrote:@Horsebagger and @Catalina, a high percentage of the time when there is a two-horse stretch drive, the horse on the outside has the advantage. I do not know why this is so, but it happens so often that it's clearly not due to random chance.


Funny you should bring that up cause I often wonder why the outside horse wins so much more often in that situation--



I'm not so sure that the case is to be made for inside vs outside but rather pacesetter vs. closer with the closer getting the nod.

I have never once read post-race comments from a trainer of the closer saying his horse didn't see the competition.
But hundreds, if not thousands, of times I read comments where "the pacesetter didn't see his competitor coming up on him and when he finally did he dug in but it was too late"
Either due to blinkers or a third competitor blocking the view, it's all about line-of-sight for the true competitor and it doesn't matter if they attack from the outside or the inside, if they are sneaky they go right on by!

In one of Mike Smith's big wins a couple of months ago he even discussed intentionally trying to get in the "blindspot" of the horse and jockey on the front end as the race was developing around the final turn.

I think it just happens that the closer is usually on the outside rather than up the rail, but either way the "advantage" is in catching 'em off guard rather than where they are located on the track.

Same thing happens in human races, the closer can see everything in front of him, while the pacesetter is running blind but very seldom gives up the golden rail.
I've found it easier to tear up tickets at 8/1 instead of 8/5.
stark
 
Posts: 2230
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2013 9:55 am
Location: SoCal

Re: Belmont Stakes

Postby Curtis » Tue Jun 13, 2017 2:41 pm

stark wrote:

I'm not so sure that the case is to be made for inside vs outside but rather pacesetter vs. closer with the closer getting the nod.

I have never once read post-race comments from a trainer of the closer saying his horse didn't see the competition.
But hundreds, if not thousands, of times I read comments where "the pacesetter didn't see his competitor coming up on him and when he finally did he dug in but it was too late"
Either due to blinkers or a third competitor blocking the view, it's all about line-of-sight for the true competitor and it doesn't matter if they attack from the outside or the inside, if they are sneaky they go right on by!

In one of Mike Smith's big wins a couple of months ago he even discussed intentionally trying to get in the "blindspot" of the horse and jockey on the front end as the race was developing around the final turn.

I think it just happens that the closer is usually on the outside rather than up the rail, but either way the "advantage" is in catching 'em off guard rather than where they are located on the track.

Same thing happens in human races, the closer can see everything in front of him, while the pacesetter is running blind but very seldom gives up the golden rail.

Bingo, we have a winner. For a good illustration of what Mike Smith said find a video of the 1997 Belmont. Having ridden Silver Charm at two, McCarron knew it didn't behoove him to get in a prolonged tussle with him so he swung Touch Gold far outside. I know the prevailing thought has always been that the Belmont result validated the idea that Touch Gold was superior in the Preakness but, in my opinion, it was a terrific ride by McCarron in the Belmont that got the job done. Also factor in that the inside horse has usually made their move and is trying to maintain their position while the outside horse is still moving forward, and you have a reasonable explanation as to why it seems the outside horse has the advantage.
User avatar
Curtis
 
Posts: 531
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:17 am
Location: Monroe, WA

Re: Belmont Stakes

Postby Little Watermelon » Tue Jun 13, 2017 3:07 pm

One thing differentiating Irish War Cry from the other three top finishers is that they were wearing bends, while IWC did not. I still have a hard time figuring if this is worth including in my handicapping, but I remember when California Chrome ran in the Belmont, he was not wearing bends while the other three finishers in the super were.

Byk was talking to Nick Zito before the races on Friday, and his success seemed to diminish after the NYRA banned mud caulks.

I do take notice of small barns if they have a contender wearing them.
Little Watermelon
 
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 10:27 am

Re: Belmont Stakes

Postby barbaro111 » Tue Jun 13, 2017 3:22 pm

stark wrote:
barbaro111 wrote:
Ridan_Remembered wrote:@Horsebagger and @Catalina, a high percentage of the time when there is a two-horse stretch drive, the horse on the outside has the advantage. I do not know why this is so, but it happens so often that it's clearly not due to random chance.


Funny you should bring that up cause I often wonder why the outside horse wins so much more often in that situation--



I'm not so sure that the case is to be made for inside vs outside but rather pacesetter vs. closer with the closer getting the nod.

I have never once read post-race comments from a trainer of the closer saying his horse didn't see the competition.
But hundreds, if not thousands, of times I read comments where "the pacesetter didn't see his competitor coming up on him and when he finally did he dug in but it was too late"
Either due to blinkers or a third competitor blocking the view, it's all about line-of-sight for the true competitor and it doesn't matter if they attack from the outside or the inside, if they are sneaky they go right on by!

In one of Mike Smith's big wins a couple of months ago he even discussed intentionally trying to get in the "blindspot" of the horse and jockey on the front end as the race was developing around the final turn.

I think it just happens that the closer is usually on the outside rather than up the rail, but either way the "advantage" is in catching 'em off guard rather than where they are located on the track.

Same thing happens in human races, the closer can see everything in front of him, while the pacesetter is running blind but very seldom gives up the golden rail.



I appreciate your thoughtful explanation and it makes sense the way you explain it
barbaro111
 
Posts: 322
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 11:43 pm

Re: Belmont Stakes

Postby Apollo » Tue Jun 13, 2017 3:39 pm

Closers need something in their favor.

Actually, the one thing they benefit from is sucker vision.
Apollo
 
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Sep 26, 2013 1:05 pm

Re: Belmont Stakes

Postby Ridan_Remembered » Tue Jun 13, 2017 9:24 pm

I would not try to argue for or against anyone's reasoning why the outside horse wins a high percentage of the time (certainly not always). It definitely has nothing to do with post position, but it's so common at all levels of racing that, again, it is not due to random chance. Somehow the outside horse often is able to build and maintain more momentum, sometimes a lot more, sometimes only a whisker more. Sometimes it does seem to be pacesetter holding off a closer. Sometimes not, such as when the closer comes on the inside.

I offer a few of the classic stretch battles of all time just to illustrate the point. Often neither horse was wearing blinkers. In these examples, the horses don't give an inch as they battle down the stretch until the outside horse prevails.

Sunday Silence and Easy Goer, 1989 Preakness, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c48c26AJAXY

Rags to Riches and Curlin, 2007 Belmont Stakes, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pBEILIAXxOY

Stellar Wind and Beholder, 2016 Zenyatta Stakes, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvAdIWkV6IU

Beholder and Songbird, 2016 Breeders Cup Distaff, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWgDx2iGE3I
User avatar
Ridan_Remembered
 
Posts: 1008
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2013 2:15 pm

Re: Belmont Stakes

Postby peeptoad » Wed Jun 14, 2017 8:15 am

It's possible some horses find it daunting to cut through a perceived tight spot at the rail... that might inhibit forward progression occasionally.
Otherwise, I agree with what stark posted.
peeptoad
 
Posts: 2455
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 6:53 pm

Re: Belmont Stakes

Postby Little Watermelon » Wed Jun 14, 2017 9:54 am

One of the most famous stretch battles, with the inside horse winning in this case, was You and Carson Hollow.
Little Watermelon
 
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 10:27 am

PreviousNext

Return to Racing

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], sweettalk and 10 guests