One claim I read recently stated, “This is of the most important handicapping angles in the sport.” I am not sure if he left out the word ‘one’ or whether the word ‘of’ does not belong. Oh well, I digress.) Another read, “A track bias occurs when a certain part of the racetrack or certain running styles are favored over others, which results in a change of what would normally happen.” Then there was the article that began, “In the 21st century of horse racing there is no downplaying the importance of track bias.”
I know I asked this before, but how would you know if there was a track bias?
If six out of nine races were won by front runners on day one of a meet, does that mean six out of nine races on day two will likely be won by front runners? Even if such a phenomenon happened, does that constitute a bias? If so, should you focus your attention on front runners on day three? Personally, I do not see a correlation between what happened on day one, what happened on day two, and what might happen on day three as the horses that ran on day one did not compete against each other again on day two, and only by running the same exact fields from different starting gates on day two could you even gain a hint that a bias existed. Otherwise, there are too many variables in play to know for certain.
There are people, however, who will swear that a track bias exists at their favorite oval and that they have won bundles of money playing horses that fit their definition of an alleged bias. Yet when pressed for evidence of said bias, they have no documentation to back up their claim. Neither do any of the authors quoted above.