Tony,

I analyzed the card in detail ad here’s the race by race break-down of the dirt races.
1st) The early leader faded to 3rd despite being the even-money favorite.

2nd) Early leader faded to 9th. Horse running 2 and 3 early finished 1 and 2, but they were the 2 favorites

3rd) Early leader faded to 10th. Winner closed from 5th to 3rd to 1st.

4th) Winner went wire to wire but was odds-on favorite. 2nd and 3rd place finishers closed from 4th and 8th early though they were 8-1 and 19-1 shots respectively.

6th) Early leader faded to 3rd. 1st and 2nd place finishers were 2nd and 3rd early but were also 2 favorites.

7th) Early leader faded to 5th (last). Winner was 2nd early but was odds-on favorite.

9th) Leader faded to 6th. Winner was 2nd early but the 2nd place horse closed from 6th. The 3rd placed horse closed from 7th to 5th to 3rd despite very wide trip.

11th) Bandini went wire to wire but was odds-on. The 2nd and 3rd placed horses closed from 4th and 6th at 37-1 and 38-1 respectively.

12th) Best 2 horses in race ran 1-2 (see my pre-race analysis) and happened to do it from the front. 3rd place horse closed from 8th to 5th to 3rd but couldn’t catch better horses on lead.

Ergo, no evidence of speed bias. Q.E.D.

Sorry you had to work so hard searching for a non-existent bias when you could have easily had the Florida Derby Exacta cold by seeing the track was playing fair.

Quite frankly I’m puzzled how otherwise rational handicappers can believe that the track surface can magically recognize the hooves of front runners and give them more spring than those of closers. Yes, there is such a thing as a live rail bias and on those days, horses with speed are more likely to beat the others to it, but that’s not what most people mean by a speed bias.

Bob