Think about running a race on the beach. You wouldn’t go through the soft, dry sand if you didn’t have to. You’d get down near the water’s edge where the sand is packed hard and firm. It’s faster. It’s easier to run on. Track bias in horse racing is exactly the same idea. A lot of people watching just don’t think to look for it.
Turf tracks are living things. They wear unevenly. They respond to rain, to traffic and to maintenance. At almost every meeting there is a part of the track that is better to be on – and a part that will cost you lengths.
I was probably one of the first jockeys in Australia to really get on top of this. I can trace it back to a race at Paeroa in the North Island of New Zealand, very early in my career. The track that day was really heavy and jockeys were taking the horses to the outside fence. Going out to the start of the race on my horse I went in and out across the track, feeling for differences in the ground. And what I found was clear. Hard up against the inside fence there was a narrow strip of grass that, if you really hugged the fence, was manageable. Step off it at all and it was deep and heavy.
So I made a plan. It was a 1400m race so I decided to stay back, go to the outside fence like the other jockeys but with 900 metres to go, to cut to the inside, and be hard up against the inside fence. Every other horse was on the outside fence and I went from last to five lengths in front by the time we entered the straight. In the straight I angled to the outside again and I won the race.
I’ve never forgotten that. I’ve always looked for advantages on tracks. And on most tracks, there are advantages. Even in Hong Kong.
A lot of it in Hong Kong is also barrier-draw related. What I mean is this: when you draw wide at Happy Valley on the wider configurations – the C or C+3 – it is very, very hard to win. It favours the inside draws. That’s a structural thing built into the shape of the track before you even think about the surface.
Then there’s the surface itself. And that changes. Take this past weekend on the C rail at Sha Tin – it was a huge leaders’ track. Most horses from behind simply could not make up ground. If you were back in the field you had to stay on the inside and save every inch of ground you could. Zac Purton’s two winning rides illustrated it perfectly. He was back in the field on both of his winners, saved ground and waited. Both rides were brilliant. Zac rides bias very well. He’s one of the better jockeys in Hong Kong for that.
One thing that also happens when a track is clearly biased like that: most trainers overreact. Every trainer suddenly wants their horse on pace. So all of a sudden it’s not just the track changing – it’s the pace dynamic changing. They go too hard too early, and the track bias that was hurting the backmarkers actually starts to bring them back into it. The pace and pressure created by the overreaction sets it up for a horse racing back in the field and saving ground.
So how do you identify a biased track early? Start looking after race one. It’s not complicated. You’re looking at where the placegetters are coming from. Are the horses finishing first, second and third the ones who were one, two and three around the turn? Are there long-priced runners in the placings who have no business being there on ability? That’s the track talking.
Something obvious to look for: if a favourite fails, where was he in the run? A lot of the time he has failed because of track bias.
But before the meeting even starts, I’m already looking. I’ve kept a written record of every Hong Kong meeting for twenty years – every rail placement, every observation. People think there are two turf tracks in Hong Kong: Sha Tin and Happy Valley. There are many more than that, because the different rail positions all act differently and have their own characteristics and patterns.
Back in 2005 and 2006, when I was stable jockey for Danny Shum, the B+2 track was a huge leaders’ track. Every meeting was on pace. Danny was an astute trainer – he understood it and we would only enter horses that could lead or be running in the first three. Anything that got back, we wouldn’t run on those days. It’s as simple as that.Rail placements and track surfaces do change over the years. That’s why you keep records.
But even with the record-keeping and the information you have, sometimes a track will surprise you. You have done all of the work, done the form and the races start – and your strategy needs to change after race one because of bias.
Tracks can be mysterious at times.
This Time Of Year: Rain, Chop, And Why Long Prices Are Coming
At this time of the season, 70 meetings in, the tracks are showing signs or wear and tear.
The surface has been through a long campaign of racing. It’s taken a lot of traffic, absorbed a lot of rain lately, and in places it doesn’t look as good as it usually does – soft in patches, choppy. That makes it far more likely to produce bias than a fresh surface at the start of the season.
Here’s the thing about rain-affected tracks. A track can be rated good ‘on the clock’ because a few fast sectionals make it seem fine. But it’s wet underneath. Especially at this time of year. The rain has affected the ground in ways the times don’t capture. You’re not getting a fair track. You’re getting a biased one, even if it is rated good.
The evidence shows up in the results. When a track is genuinely fair – not biased, good ground – you don’t get many long-price winners. Form holds up. But when the track is rain-affected it all changes.
On Saturday, there were winners priced at 159, 70, 50, 21, 13, 12 – that can’t happen on a good track that has no bias.
Take the $159 winner: It had shown nothing in trials, nothing in its runs in Hong Kong – he was the right price – but he had one run on a slow track in Ireland over a mile and won. It found a wet, rain-affected track at Sha Tin and all of a sudden it won. That’s not necessarily a good horse. That’s a horse that found the right ground.
There have been more of those results this season than usual. That tells you something.
Watch out for rolling the track as well. When you see the track being rolled during a meeting, get ready to reassess. Rolling can change the way the ground plays – it can compact moisture, alter the firmness of the top, shift which part of the track is the best to be on. It’s not a reset. But it’s a reason to watch those next races with fresh eyes and not assume the patterns from the previous races still apply.
Wind is another one. It doesn’t get talked about enough. There are tracks in Australia where wind can completely change how a race runs. Caulfield is one. Warwick Farm is another. On a day when it’s blowing across the track at either of those venues, the horses on the fence find it very hard to win because it’s the horses out wide that are getting cover from the wind. They are saving energy when the horses on the fence are using energy because of the wind. That’s also a bias – it’s got nothing to do with the ground, but it will swing a result just as hard.
I Already Know What You’re Going To Say
I don’t go on social media. But I’ve been told what the comments will say when track bias comes up. It’s always the same thing.
“Yeah Shane, but what about Veandercross?”
All right. Let’s talk about Veandercross.
The criticism was that I rode the horse too wide and it cost him the race. It’s become one of the most talked about rides in Australian racing history.
Let me tell you what actually happened.
The best ground that day was out wide. By a long way. Not slightly better – better by a hundred metres. I’d felt it. I’d walked my horse and trotted him across to find it before the race. I knew exactly where the good ground was and I went there.
I’d never ridden Veandercross before. At the 1000 metres he was a long way back and he hit a ‘flat spot’ – so I gave him a dig and that was a mistake because it got him going too early. He got to the front earlier than I wanted – but the fact he was on the best part of the track got him there even faster. The mistake was I went too soon. Not too wide.
Mannerism (1st) or Veandercross (2nd) – What side of the 1992 Caulfield Cup result were you on? 📸
— 7HorseRacing 🐎 (@7horseracing) October 13, 2020
Subzero was running on in fourth. pic.twitter.com/id3ATs1y9i
If somebody wants to argue about the ride and say I went too soon, I’ll cop that. But I didn’t go too wide. That was the best part of the track by a hundred metres. The criticism about how wide I was is ridiculous. It goes to show how little people understand about tracks and where to find the best ground.
People see a horse run wide and lose and they connect the two dots. They don’t consider that the jockey might have more information – that he could feel the track was firmer out there going to the barriers, seen in the earlier races when horses were winning out there – it is insight that you simply didn’t have sitting in the stands or watching at home.
That’s track bias. It’s information. The people who look for it find it. The people who don’t look, don’t find it – and then they’re surprised when a longshot winner turns up. ∎
