POST TIME ODDS RECAP: FINGER LAKES - 2009 MEET
Following the close of each meet, we will review the trends exhibits by the betting public in the form of post time odds.
We will look at results of the 1390 thoroughbred races from the 2009 meet (April 17, 2009 - December 5, 2009).1
585 of the 1551 post time favorites went onto win their races at a strike rate of 38%. By field size, the success of Finger Lakes post time favorites varied. The post time favorites in a 4-horse field won 40% of the time (2 for 5), while a 35% of the post time favorites in 5-horse fields won (28 for 80). 116 of the 291 PT favorites won in 6-horse fields at a rate of 40%. Surprisingly the crowd had more success with 7-horse fields than with 6-horse fields. In fields with seven runners, the crowds' favorite won 39% of the time (152 for 362). Among 8-horse fields, 131 of the 329 PT favorites won at a rate of 40%.
The betting collective saw declines in winning percentages in 9- and 10-horse fields. At Finger Lakes, the win percentage of post time favorites in 9-horse fields was 33% (75 for 228). 43 of 141 post time favs won in 10-horse fields (30%). 27 for 84 (32%) and 11 for 31 (35%), in 11- and 12-horse fields respectively. There were no 13+ horse fields at the Finger Lakes meet. One would not have expected the crowds success to increase after field size reached 12.
Post time favorites in allowance and stakes races won 115 of 337 races (33%). The crowd was equally impressive with claiming races where their favorites won 338 of 884 events (38%). 132 of 330 maiden races were won by their post time favorites at a strike rate of 40%. The average field size of Finger Lakes' maiden races was approximately 7.9 runners per race this autumn while claiming, allowance, and stakes races averaged near 8.0 and 7.0 runners per race. Counterintuitively, the betting collective at judge the favorites more correctly with the large field sizes.
To try and deconvolute field size from class, we looked at the win rate of post time favorites for each of the 3 major class groups for double-digit field sizes. 4 of 24 favorites won in 'large' allowance and stakes races (17%). 56 of 172 won in 'large' claiming events (33%). 21 of 60 maidens were won by PT favorites (35%). The variable of field size doesn't explain the patrons' success with maidens.
The betting public did less well with dirt-sprints than dirt-routes with respective strike rates of 40% and 36%.2 The Finger Lakes crowd is very adept it spotting winning mudders: 38% and 29% of the favorites won in wet-sprints and wet-routes respectively.
Let's see if we can explain the crowds success with maidens as a function of track condition. 19 of 58 favorites won on wet-sprint allowance/stakes races (33%). 5 of 22 favorites won on wet-route allowance/stakes races (22%). 51 of 139 favorites won on wet-sprint claiming races (37%). 20 of 72 favorites won on wet-route claiming races (28%). 28 of 59 favorites won on wet-sprint maiden races (47%). 9 of 23 favorites won on wet-route maiden races (39%). The track condition may explain why the crowd fared better with maidens in general than the other classes -- The Finger Lakes bettors were strong in identifying the winning favorites for maidens in the slop.
The Finger Lakes crowd handled juveniles better than older horses. Two-years produced only 48% winners from PT favorites, while older horses yielded 37%.
Situationally, the betting public will be expected to be less and less successful in identifying the winner as the post time odds increase. The table below shows the winning percentages of various post time odds ranges.
1/5 - 4/5 380 198 52% 1/1 - 9/5 848 307 36% 2/1 - 9/2 2209 429 19% 5/1 - 9/1 2001 191 10% 10/1 - 19/1 2051 103 5% 20/1 - 49/1 1819 52 3% 50/1 - 999/1 574 1 0%
The sole bomber was an older male claimer routing in the slop. The $113 winner was 20-to-1 on the morning line.
In the future, we will recap the wisdom of crowds by looking at the post time odds of other meets upon their conclusion.
1. While every effort has been made to insure the accuracy of the statistics provided above, the author assumes no risk on the reader's use of the information. As with all financial markets, past results do not guarantee future performance.
2. All dirt statistics will be exclusively for dry surfaces. Wet tracks will be accounted for seperately.
(2009.12.13 -- sps)