Energy use and turns vs. straights
 

Is there anything in the Sartin methodology that tries to account for the fact that horses tend to run slower on turns?

Let's assume we have two horses:

A. Runs consecutive quarters of 22 23 24 for a 109

B. Runs consecutive quarters of 23 22 24 for a 109.

The only difference between these two horses is that they flipped flopped the first two quarters. Horse B ran his fast quarter on the turn.

Are these two horses considered equal/similar or is horse B considered superior because a 22 on the turn uses more energy than a 22 on the straight?

That's one thing I've always been curious about. It's easy to prove that horses tend to run slower on turns. It's not so easy prove how much energy is consumed.

Hi Class! Nice to see you here.

Factor X would be better for A (F1 and F3 average)
The energy profile by fraction would differentiate the two, and an oldie from the old days, Factor S, Contender Factor, which is F2 and 2nd call averaged.

I'm sure there are others in the newer stuff that I am not familiar with yet,

I have read this one in a follow up and Dr Sartin said that if the turn time is faster than the first two furlongs you flip the times around.

Are ALL turn times run "on a turn"?

Once you get out to 7F, not much of the turn time is on the turn. The purest is probably 5.5F.

lines
 

Cool question

Hansend you are very correct you would flip the calls

Also around the time of the Entropy program
It was published to eliminate horses with 2nd calls faster than the first
But Doc later would amit that doing this was not researched enough
and a false "never do this "

anyway I caompare lines in KGEN but both lines must be entered as

22 or 23 / 45 / 109
so KGENS line are exactly the same

The reason Michael Johnson was such a superior runner was because he was an exceptional TURN runner. Of course, he also participated in an event where turn ability really mattered: the 200 meter dash. And, of course, he was RESTRICTED to a lane in this event (as were the other runners).

How fast a horse runs on the turn as opposed to the straight would be relevant and interesting if horses were restricted to LANES. Since they're not and since pace is more often than not a result of how the race shapes up (and the position of a given horse within this setup and on the course), noting how fast a horse is going over a particular distance of ground with no regard to the overall context of the race is pretty much meaningless. Of course, for those who believe that numeric pace (raw or otherwise) is a larger set that SETUPS, it's gospel.

You are correct. The only distance with a "true" turn time (a.k.a. second fraction) is 5.5 furlongs.

You are also correct that 7 furlongs has "no turn" in the turn time. The first half mile (1st and 2nd fractions) are run on the straight.

Without an adjustment, it makes it difficult to compare turn time between one line at 5.5f and another line at 7f.

The second fraction (turn time) in a 7f race is going to be faster than in a 5.5f race and the difference in this time varies from track to track where 7f races are run.

If you are willing to flip the fractions, then it appears you think 22 23 is equal to 23 22.

Part of me (the intuitive part) seems to want to believe that the horse that did a 22 on the turn had a tougher trip because turns tend to slow horses down. So to run 22 on a turn you'd have to really be motoring. But obviously I don't know or I wouldn't have asked.

reason
 

I would have to think a horse running faster on the turn is fighting for position or maybe just broke slow in the gate
with out positions and beaten lenghts its all a guess