Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 5 votes, 4.20 average.
Old 09-16-2018, 11:22 PM   #601
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-19-2018, 04:54 PM   #602
ultracapper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,943
Maybe it was just the day at LosAl 9/16/2018

1st race 22.15 45.89 57.29 1:04.62

(23.74) (11.40) (7.33)

Bold numbers. I don't think so. They didn't accelerate like that at the top of the stretch, and they sure didn't stop like that in late stretch.

58.29 would be more likely.

Last edited by ultracapper; 09-19-2018 at 04:55 PM.
ultracapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-19-2018, 06:24 PM   #603
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by ultracapper View Post
Maybe it was just the day at LosAl 9/16/2018

1st race 22.15 45.89 57.29 1:04.62

(23.74) (11.40) (7.33)

Bold numbers. I don't think so. They didn't accelerate like that at the top of the stretch, and they sure didn't stop like that in late stretch.

58.29 would be more likely.
Watched the replay, timer clearly malfunctioned. This must be a hand time that isn't very accurate. I've let Equibase know. They are working to make sure hand times are noted in the charts but some are still getting through the cracks as it is fairly new still.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-21-2018, 02:10 PM   #604
elhelmete
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,731
CJ, I'd be curious about your opinion on something.

My expertise is in broadcast TV and considering my actual job title, I know enough about the technology to be...dangerous. But mostly I hire very, very smart people to handle that for me.

A few years ago one such person was working with a partner using a teeny amount of VC $ to essentially solve a data problem simply by using a camera picture. In other words, rather than set up a complex remote data collection and report system they just use video from a camera, and not necessarily a special camera or under highly controlled circumstances. I was kind of floored, but they chuckled and said something to the effect of, "pound for pound the data we can get from this video is just so superior."

I know you hand time races a lot off of video replay. Based on that hands-on experience, do you think this could eventually be the better way to go, or that it could be done in wholesale and offered as a data product for sale?
elhelmete is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-21-2018, 04:27 PM   #605
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by elhelmete View Post
CJ, I'd be curious about your opinion on something.

My expertise is in broadcast TV and considering my actual job title, I know enough about the technology to be...dangerous. But mostly I hire very, very smart people to handle that for me.

A few years ago one such person was working with a partner using a teeny amount of VC $ to essentially solve a data problem simply by using a camera picture. In other words, rather than set up a complex remote data collection and report system they just use video from a camera, and not necessarily a special camera or under highly controlled circumstances. I was kind of floored, but they chuckled and said something to the effect of, "pound for pound the data we can get from this video is just so superior."

I know you hand time races a lot off of video replay. Based on that hands-on experience, do you think this could eventually be the better way to go, or that it could be done in wholesale and offered as a data product for sale?
I don't actually hand time for the record, I use video editing software with timing capability. Accuracy is dependent on the frame rate and quality of the picture.

Currently the video isn't precise enough to be as accurate as the beam system (when it functions properly). It is as or more accurate than current GPS and Trakus-like systems. It takes a bit of work to learn all the different angles at the various tracks and the different distances. You have to establish a baseline first from accurately timed races.

Once we have a frame for every hundredth of a second with video it could be as accurate as the beam system IMO. GPS is getting better all the time and maybe could get there some day, but it isn't yet. Trakus...meh. Seems almost DOA to me at this point.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-23-2018, 01:19 AM   #606
AltonKelsey
Veteran
 
AltonKelsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
Not a time issue, but Equibase charts kept the BEL turf as Yielding today, when it clearly was not, it was Good and so labeled during the races
AltonKelsey is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-23-2018, 02:23 AM   #607
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltonKelsey View Post
Not a time issue, but Equibase charts kept the BEL turf as Yielding today, when it clearly was not, it was Good and so labeled during the races
Pretty sure track labels are supplied by the tracks. I've seen Equibase change it at times but I imagine that isn't something they like to do.

I'm actually working on a scale that add some context to the traditional track ratings and should be particularly helpful on turf. It will rate tracks from 1 to 10, with 1 being like the turf at Pimlico on Black Eyed Susan Day and 10 being similar to Ellis Park after it bakes in the sun.

Belmont today would have been a 7 or 8 for the inner, which definitely falls in the firm category, and the outer would have been a 6, good to firm. Parx ran one turf race today on a track labeled good that will get a 4, slower than Belmont's yielding for sure.

By the way, do tracks with multiple courses ever use different ratings? Can't say I've ever seen that but I've noticed they definitely aren't always the same.

Now for a timing error, R5 at Woodbine Saturday had the 1/2 mile 0.60 too fast.

Last edited by cj; 09-23-2018 at 02:35 AM.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-23-2018, 02:06 PM   #608
AltonKelsey
Veteran
 
AltonKelsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
NY recently has called the main and inner with different conditions.


NYRA was posting the T as Good yesterday, so if they sent Equibase the wrong info.....
AltonKelsey is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-23-2018, 02:26 PM   #609
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,816
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltonKelsey View Post
NY recently has called the main and inner with different conditions.


NYRA was posting the T as Good yesterday, so if they sent Equibase the wrong info.....
Interesting. I'll ask about that. I've seen Equibase override the track before but never in what I would consider the wrong direction. Do you mean NYRA had the outer as Good and the inner as Yielding?
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-23-2018, 03:57 PM   #610
AltonKelsey
Veteran
 
AltonKelsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
I think they were all listed good yest .


PS in the 5th today , our friends at Trackus have placer Souper Tapit running +141 feet to the winner.


Jerry Brown gonna have a field day.
AltonKelsey is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-24-2018, 12:10 AM   #611
AltonKelsey
Veteran
 
AltonKelsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
Trackus belmont must have broken today, that 5th race and some others never got posted.
AltonKelsey is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-24-2018, 10:15 AM   #612
ubercapper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,229
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj View Post
Pretty sure track labels are supplied by the tracks. I've seen Equibase change it at times but I imagine that isn't something they like to do.

By the way, do tracks with multiple courses ever use different ratings? Can't say I've ever seen that but I've noticed they definitely aren't always the same.

Now for a timing error, R5 at Woodbine Saturday had the 1/2 mile 0.60 too fast.
Craig is correct. The track supplies the label on the board/video. Equibase Chart Callers can label the condition differently in the chart, though that rarely occurs.

Here's an example: At a track recently the dirt track was "fast" to start the card but in the middle of a card it started to rain lightly. When it started to rain, the upcoming race was on turf, which was displayed as "firm" on the track video. There was no disagreement with "firm" being the condition of the course when the race was run. "Firm" was the condition in the chart as well.

Also, before the turf race was run, the track changed the dirt condition to "good" on video. Additionally, either before or just after the turf race (I can't recall) the track was sealed. After the turf race was run the video the track changed the condition to "sloppy." This was correct, and so "Sloppy" (sealed) is what was displayed in the rest of the charts for the day. The track never got to "muddy," which would have been the next condition.

However, had the track video still displayed "good" as the condition following the turf race, the chart for the next dirt race would most likely (75% confidence) have displayed "sloppy" (sealed) and not "good" as on the video.

"Good" would not have appeared in the chart because "good" is a drying out condition. A track can go from some form of wet to "good" but not the other way around. This has been the case as far as I can remember. If anyone wants to know the definitions for dirt and turf conditions, they are on this page:
https://www.equibase.com/newfan/codes.cfm

As for different turf courses having different track condition labels on the same card, I have seen that in New York but not other places.

Regarding the timing error, it is being looked into.
ubercapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-24-2018, 11:51 AM   #613
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,470
Seems to me that with the abundance of evidence that GPS and beams are not reliable, video timing is the state of the art at this time.

For at least timing, but probably for positions and beaten lengths as well.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-24-2018, 12:00 PM   #614
jay68802
Registered User
 
jay68802's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 15,111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
Seems to me that with the abundance of evidence that GPS and beams are not reliable, video timing is the state of the art at this time.

For at least timing, but probably for positions and beaten lengths as well.
They have used these systems for cross country track races since the 80's. Able to time all the competitors during the race.

Never mind, it makes sense and works....
jay68802 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 09-29-2018, 07:17 PM   #615
AltonKelsey
Veteran
 
AltonKelsey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
Unreliable turf designations at NYRA


Based on the times, no way I'd call the Main turf soft today.


Both yielding
AltonKelsey is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.