In our opinion track bias is massively overrated when it comes to adversely affecting results. It's more often than not used as an excuse after the event.

I doubt that track bias can be statistically validated for any meeting - there are too few examples to make any statistically valid conclusion.

For the bias to supposedly change as we get into an eight horse meeting to us seems to be a rather dubious conclusion when more than likely there was no bias whatsoever.

Because a couple of leaders win early is no reason to claim a roaring leaders' track. Likewise if a couple of backmarkers win. Pace of the race and ability of the backmarkers are very relevant factors.

Maybe track bias is also one area the TAB dominated racing media need to correct - to get punters to bet confidently before they see what bias, imagined or otherwise, exists on the track.

Maybe their tipsters will be told to no longer mention track bias as it puts punters off!