bobphilo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am of the minority opinion that horses that
> break through the gate are at no disadvantage
> providing they are quickly stopped and do not
> engage in a game of tag with the outrider before
> the race. The front of the gate is purposely
> designed to open with little force just to prevent
> a horse from hurting itself if it breaks through.
> A horse should be more hindered by hitting the
> side of the gate, which does not have the same
> give, at the start of a race and yet these horses
> seem to win their share of races.
> A poster on another site who disagrees with me is
> doing a study allegedly proving that breakthroughs
> are at a disadvantage is including the confounding
> variable of horses that run off after breaking
> through. The result of such a flawed study cannot
> be valid. Is anyone aware of a fair study to
> determine the effect of breaking through?
>

Well, Bob, in the absence of verifiable empiricism, we really have only opinion. I'm seeing two here: yours and an individual who won nearly five thousand races. Again, we have nothing conclusive, but there is something to be said for an experiential base for an opinion. And it's equally possible that you might ask another Hall of Fame rider, and he would have an entirely different opinion. However, the rationale given by one of the most articulate individuals I've met in the sport lent quite a bit of credibility to the theory.