Back on June 30, I wrote briefly about a seeming abnormality in the Winning Post Positions stats at Calder Race Course; specifically, the failure of the Number 2 Post Position to win its fair share in dirt sprints. Here's how those numbers looked back then:
Calder Race Course Standings - Through June 29, 2012
Sprint Races
PP......Starts......Wins......Win%
1.........277.........57.......... 20.6
2.........277.........24.............8.7
3.........277.........45...........16.2
4.........277.........35...........12.6
5.........277.........31...........11.2
6.........258.........32...........12.4
7.........207.........21...........10.1
8.........123.........19...........15.4
9..........59...........6............10.2
10.........29..........6............20.7
11..........7...........1............14.3
12..........4...........0..............0.0
Excluding the 12 spot (which was oh-for-four), the only Post Position with a Winning Percentage below ten percent was Post Position 2. This struck me as rather unusual, especially in light of the fact that the two Post Positions on either side of the 2 were doing quite well for themselves. I speculated that small sample size bias may be to blame, and wrote that I would re-examine the numbers later in the meet.
Courtesy of Equibase.com, here's how the numbers look approximately one month later:
Calder Race Course Standings - Through July 31, 2012
Sprint Races
PP......Starts......Wins......Win%
1.........392.........75.......... 19.1
2.........392.........35.............8.9
3.........392.........60...........15.3
4.........391.........48...........12.3
5.........389.........45...........11.6
6.........364.........48...........13.2
7.........294.........32...........10.9
8.........175.........33...........18.9
9..........83...........7.............8.4
10.........39..........8............20.5
11.........10..........1............10.0
12..........5...........0.............0.0
Let's see; since June 29, the 12 post picked up another start without a victory; the 11 spot was winless in three tries; the 10 post went two-for-ten, to remain slightly above the twenty percent mark; while the 9 hole could only mange one first place finish in twenty-four tries, dropping it's Win Percentage to 8.4%.
As for Post Position Number 2, you can see its Win Percentage has crept up ever so slightly, advancing from 8.7% to 8.9%. The 2 spot no longer has the worst Win Percentage on the chart for Post Positions with more than five races (that distinction now belonging to Post Position 9); but it is still clearly not winning its fair share of sprints.
I want to mention again that these numbers are just for dirt sprints; as the above Equibase.com link shows, through July 31, Post Position 2 has the best Win Percentage in route races (excluding the 11, which has only twelve tries). Post Position 2 also does quite well in the grass at Calder, crossing the finish line first a respectable 12.3% of the time on the turf course.
So I ask again: what's the cause? For the statisticians in the crowd: can the numbers be explained by random distribution? How about the quality of the horses to draw Post Position 2? As I mentioned previously, my schedule won't allow me the time to examine the charts for the Calder meet to see if Post Position 2 has been getting its fair share of favorites (does someone else want to tackle that project?). Maybe Post Position 2 has received more than its fair share of bad beats; something that, again, would be revealed by a thorough chart examination. Perhaps this is a historical problem; does anyone have the Post Position Win Percentages from prior Calder meets?
And what to do with such knowledge? To be honest, I don't know what advice to give for those playing the game at Calder. Do you downgrade horses in Post Position 2 in sprints, knowing how poorly they have done this meet? Do you upgrade those horses, on the presumption that the numbers should even out? Or do you just ignore Post Position as a handicapping factor altogether? I'm very interested in hearing what others have to say on this topic.
Peace and Love,
Jimbo
No comments:
Post a Comment