Track Trends

Speed did fairly well on the Main Track but likely it was at least close to fair. The two Outer Turf races played more fairly than the prior days while the one race on the Inner Turf was dominated by speed but more than likely it was situational.

The Main Track played fairly, as did the Inner Turf. There was only one race on the Outer, three on the Inner, where the rail continues to be an advantage.

The Main Track played fairly. Speed dominated the two races on the Inner Turf, but it's hard to say it was a bias. Forward horses dominated both sprints on the Outer Turf, but both results were logical. Fair to say, saving ground was an advantage, and we did see a little more movement from behind than on 4/16.

The Main Track played fairly. The rails were at zero on the Inner Turf and 24 feet on the Outer. There was little movement in both turf sprints on the Outer. The rail, and speed, could have been an advantage but it's hard to be sure. Worth following. Likely the Inner played fairly.

The track played fairly.

The track played fairly.

Speed dominated the races, with the 8th race being the exception, but with logical short priced horses dominating the card it's hard to be sure there was a strong bias. The 8th race, a competitive maiden race, was reasonably fairly run. Worth following.

The track played fairly.

The track played fairly. The rail was good but no real advantage. The wind picked up a bit late in the day and there was a brief, and minor, shower as well. 

The track played fairly.

The track played fairly, though most of the effective running was done off the rail. Whether or not the rail was bad is hard to know. 

The track played fairly.

Most of the best running was done at least a little off the rail, but the vast majority of rail runners didn't really underachieve, so it's hard to say the rail was bad. Could be worth watching but kind of dubious. Likely a fair track.

There were times speed seemed good, but overall the track played fairly.

The track played fairly.

The track played fairly.

The track played fairly.

The track played fairly.

 The rail was good, but no clear advantage, as overall the track played fairly.

The track played fairly.

While speed did well overall, there were mostly very logical results, and more than likely the track played fairly.

Despite the conditions, the track appeared to play fairly with a mix of successful running styles.

Speed did well, and the rail was good, but given the abundance of very logical results, it's hard to say there was a real bias.

The rail was good, though not a huge advantage, as overall the track played fairly.

Possibly best at least a little off the rail. Not really a dead rail but better a little outside. Fair mix of speeds and closers made it a relatively fair track despite the conditions.

While speed did fairly well, the results were extremely logical throughout the day, which makes it hard to determine a significant bias. Horses seemed to mostly stay at least a little off the inside. Likely, despite the conditions, the track was at least reasonably fair.

The races were dominated by forward horses, but that was likely a case of logical horses succeeding, as we saw some successful closers. Likely a fair track.

Speed did fairly well but the track seemed at least close to fair. Possibility it was best one or two paths off the rail but not clear. Could be worth following.

While not as extreme as 2/26, speed was still an advantage, but we did see some effective closing throughout the day. Also, unlike 2/26, the rail was not good, as horses were best at least a path or two off the inside.

Very strong speed bias, with very little movement, save one race.

The track played fairly, with a mix of successful running styles. The rail was fine but no advantage.

The track played fairly, with a mix of successful running styles, though much of the best running was done off the rail. However, we saw some effective running inside, which makes it hard to say the rail was bad.

The track played fairly.

There were times where the track appeared to be more fair than the prior seven racing days, but saving ground for an extended portion of the race still appeared to be a significant advantage, if not quite as big as some recent days.The bias only appears mitigated because of how strong it has been for the past two weeks.

The track was fairer than the previous six racing days, but still biased, as the rail continues to be an advantage, though perhaps not as strong as recent days. Being forward, however, continues to be an advantage as we did not see a lot of movement from the back of the pack. Many of the races also had significant gaps between runners at the finish.

Another day with an extreme inside bias. Saving ground for at least the majority of the race was pretty much a prerequisite for success.

The rail, saving ground, continues to be a significant advantage.

The rail continues to be a significant advantage. Some races came apart a little bit, but for the most part you needed to be inside for at least a sizable portion of the race to be at all successful.

While we saw some effective running from behind, as well as off the rail, the rail remains a strong advantage, as well as speed, which was also beneficial.

The rail was a significant advantage. Along with that, it was hard to close, which gave speed an advantage. 

Speed did very well today, for the most part, but the last two races argued against that enough to cast some doubt on there being a strong bias. Given the cold temperatures, it's possible kickback was an issue, which would hinder closers, and thus perhaps make speed look like an advantage. Worth following, but the best guess is closers were, at least, at a bit of a disadvantage.

The track played fairly.

The rail was good, but no advantage, as the track played fairly.

Mix of successful running styles, with speed and closers doing well, though there may have been an advantage to being forward. Likely the rail was not the best place to be as most of the successful running was done towards the middle of the track.

The races were cancelled after four races after some minor snow, which stopped minutes after the cancellation, and it appeared the track played fairly. Forward horses did well, save the 2nd race, where the winner came from well back.

The track played fairly and the rail was fine.

The rail continues to be dead with most of the effective running being done well out into the track.

Seemed like the rail continued to be off but later in the card that seemed in question. Not clear. Perhaps the track changed as the day wore on. Not many horses stayed inside so might be worth following.

The rail continued to be dead and did not appear to change after the track was sealed.

The rail was dead today. A significant disadvantage.

The track played fairly with a mix of successful running styles.

The track played fairly, with a variety of different running styles proving effective, as race dynamics played the biggest role in the outcomes. Much fairer than 1/2.

The was a strong bias towards speed, and possibly the rail, on today's track. Worth following going forward. 

It wasn't a gold rail, as we saw horses run well making outside moves, but there is an argument that the rail was good. How much of an advantage is hard to guage. Might be worth following.