Another photo finish controversy?

[wiffleball whizz]

How they put up the 3?!?!??

Tons of green between nose and wire......watched race half asleep in bed so I have no dog in the fight

[wiffleball whizz]

Hmmmmmmmmmmmm

[sammy the sage]

at least there's a pic...some tracks won't post them....hhhhmmmmm.

[PaceAdvantage]

Again, the "wire" you see in the pic isn't actually the wire. It's a movable line.

The actual photo IS the wire, for lack of a better description.

Thus, if we move that yellow line a tad more to the left, who won? Whose nose do you think would be touching the line first.

Looks to me like the 3.

This looks a bit botched to me, in terms of line placement, but it does look like the 3's nose is in front, at least from what I can tell.

[wiffleball whizz]

I saw the pk5 was 4/5 wonder if somebody scooped pool if 5 win....gotta check on this/...

I'm not calling the mjc out on this but something isn't right here

[precocity]

the :3: won whizz go play some blackjack! :cool:

[jk3521]

:lol: the :3: won whizz go play some blackjack! :cool: :lol:

[precocity]

:lol: :lol:
he knows? he's mad because he lost?!!!!!!!! still my boy!!!!! :cool:

[wiffleball whizz]

I'm not saying the 3 didn't win.....can you at least touch the wire?! I'm not asking for much here :lol: :lol:

Just not sure where u guys are coming up with "the 3 won whizz"......how so?

Talked to my friend before and he said it's a stink bomb

[precocity]

:D :D you lost go take a shot of crown black!!!!!! :D

[PaceAdvantage]

I'm not saying the 3 didn't win.....can you at least touch the wire?! I'm not asking for much here :lol: :lol:

Just not sure where u guys are coming up with "the 3 won whizz"......how so?

Talked to my friend before and he said it's a stink bombYou know what that photo represents, right?

Do you really need a computer generated line (which is what that is) to help you see the 3 horse won? I don't.

I agree though, you're not asking for much. However, it's pretty conclusive that the 3 is in front.

[Stillriledup]

You know what that photo represents, right?

Do you really need a computer generated line (which is what that is) to help you see the 3 horse won? I don't.

I agree though, you're not asking for much. However, it's pretty conclusive that the 3 is in front.

According to that photo, it seems like this is a photo of the race before it was actually over. Also, you suggest that they move the line a little to the left so that the line touches one of the noses....but why not move the line a little bit to the right...or, how about 1 foot to the right, or 1 yard.

I'm not too big into "moving lines" in order to appease people who are questioning why they are showing a photo of 2 horses before the race is over.

I think Wiz was asking for the photo finish where the winner is on the wire. If its a computer generated wire, how do we know where the REAL wire is? Is there even a real wire? Is there an actual physical wire that the horse's run under, or does the computer just decide where the wire might be if there was an actual physical wire to begin with?

You're acting like Wiz is being unreasonable, i don't think he's being unreasonable at all, he's just asking to see the win photo, not some random photo that was snapped before the race was over.

[PaceAdvantage]

According to that photo, it seems like this is a photo of the race before it was actually over. Also, you suggest that they move the line a little to the left so that the line touches one of the noses....but why not move the line a little bit to the right...or, how about 1 foot to the right, or 1 yard.

I'm not too big into "moving lines" in order to appease people who are questioning why they are showing a photo of 2 horses before the race is over.

I think Wiz was asking for the photo finish where the winner is on the wire. If its a computer generated wire, how do we know where the REAL wire is? Is there even a real wire? Is there an actual physical wire that the horse's run under, or does the computer just decide where the wire might be if there was an actual physical wire to begin with?

You're acting like Wiz is being unreasonable, i don't think he's being unreasonable at all, he's just asking to see the win photo, not some random photo that was snapped before the race was over.How many times do I have to say the same thing?

THE PHOTO IS THE WIRE.

That picture you see IS THE FINISH AT THE "WIRE"

That's it. There is no other photo. That's THE photo. You're LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL FINISH.

The "wire" or computer generated line, is simply an AID to help determine (in a close finish), who is in front. So, your question "how do we know where the real wire is" is meaningless, because THE PHOTO IS THE WIRE. I'll say it again. THE PHOTO IS THE WIRE.

You can move that computer generated line all you want, it DOESN'T CHANGE THE OUTCOME OF THE PHOTO. The PHOTO is the FINISH.

I don't need a line to see the 3 is in front. But they put a line on there to help you see it...there is no LINE in the actual photo...the line is put there AFTER THE FACT.

How is it that people who have supposedly been playing this game for years, and been on this board for years (where this has been explained MANY times) still fail to grasp this rather simple concept?

Ut0nKdLCAEo

[Stillriledup]

How many times do I have to say the same thing?

THE PHOTO IS THE WIRE.

That picture you see IS THE FINISH AT THE "WIRE"

That's it. There is no other photo. That's THE photo. You're LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL FINISH.

The "wire" or computer generated line, is simply an AID to help determine (in a close finish), who is in front. So, your question "how do we know where the real wire is" is meaningless, because THE PHOTO IS THE WIRE. I'll say it again. THE PHOTO IS THE WIRE.

You can move that computer generated line all you want, it DOESN'T CHANGE THE OUTCOME OF THE PHOTO. The PHOTO is the FINISH.

I don't need a line to see the 3 is in front. But they put a line on there to help you see it...there is no LINE in the actual photo...the line is put there AFTER THE FACT.

How is it that people who have supposedly been playing this game for years, and been on this board for years (where this has been explained MANY times) still fail to grasp this rather simple concept?

Ut0nKdLCAEo

If its such a simple concept, why isnt the winning horse's nose on the wire in the photo that i see?

You say its simple, but if it was so simple, why can't they show a photo with the winning horse on the wire?

[Helles]

The nose is on the wire, it's just not on the computer-generated line an inch past the wire. This photo represents the position of the horses at the time a horse hit the wire.

[Rise Over Run]

If its such a simple concept, why isnt the winning horse's nose on the wire in the photo that i see?

You say its simple, but if it was so simple, why can't they show a photo with the winning horse on the wire?
People make mistakes, it happens all the time.... It was a poor effort by the photo finish company to move the computer line right onto the winners nose in the photo provided to MJC. It was the last race of the day on Mother's Day and maybe the operator was running late for dinner with mom.

"You say its simple, but if it was so simple, why can't they show a photo with the winning horse on the wire?"

PACEADVANTAGE---> :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:

[johnhannibalsmith]

Pace Advantage offered up a video... :lol:

I hate to say it, but if at this point, after pages upon pages of explanations in thread after thread over the last however many years, he still needs a video to understand the basics...

[wiffleball whizz]

Ok to everybody except SRU who gets what I'm talking about this is a bullshit situation......

If you go to Maryland jockey club on YouTube and go to the race 9 you will see what I'm talking about....

The 3 is stopping and the 5 is surging....I'm hot at the fact that they all these dumb superimposed graphics all throughout the stretch then have a white line after the actual finish......if the graphic was the finish the 5 nails him....

Also I believe the 5 wins it scoops the pool though I'm not 100 percent sure but the 3 carried the 100k jackpot pick5......

Now unlike the Bangor situation the other day the camera is a few feet past wire so if it's close you give edge to outside horse.....

After watching race just now I'm gonna say the 5 nailed him


Watch replay 5 wins the race and then the photo doesn't even clear it up....I'm not interested in where the wire is.....the 5 win the race and that the end of story.....and this coming from somebody who goes to bat for pimlico every time I get the chance

[iceknight]

I will take another shot at explaining, in case the youtube video at Woodbine didnt make it clear.

To augment what I was thinking of saying with actual backup proof...I google-searched "the width of the image is the width of the finish line" and found this Aussie site which explains it and, of course, has that phrase inside their description.

http://aviewfinderdarkly.com.au/2014/04/21/how-the-photo-finish-system-works/

Hope this clarifies how the photos are generated. One way you could test this yourself is you have two remote operated cars have them run across a stationary post with a small line (you can set this up on a flat table or garage floor) and take continuous shot pictures (most normal point and shoot cameras ~ 100 bux) allow that. When you review your pictures on a computer, your focus should be on the stationary line and you can also draw another line to clarify for yourself.

If you still wan to disagree/argue with the veracity, I guess I will agree that the earth is flat.

[wiffleball whizz]

What about when they "bury" the nose in the wire? That was explained a few months ago....??

I'm just gonna let it go as I didn't even bet the race....so in reality why do I even care?

[wiffleball whizz]

People make mistakes, it happens all the time.... It was a poor effort by the photo finish company to move the computer line right onto the winners nose in the photo provided to MJC. It was the last race of the day on Mother's Day and maybe the operator was running late for dinner with mom.

"You say its simple, but if it was so simple, why can't they show a photo with the winning horse on the wire?"

PACEADVANTAGE---> :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:

Hate to sound blunt but I don't really care if the photo finish judge has dinner plans with mom.....people there are betting their case $3s and $6s on this race....I think it's owed to them to at least get the horses nose on the wire...

[PaceAdvantage]

From the Aussie link iceknight posted above:

"Once the horse or greyhound race is over the photo finish operator displays the image a computer running a software application compatible with the photo finish camera. The operator places the movable vertical line cursor on the edge of the animal’s nose and this corresponds to one of the thousands of timestamped images that make up the composite photo finish picture."

[PaceAdvantage]

Hate to sound blunt but I don't really care if the photo finish judge has dinner plans with mom.....people there are betting their case $3s and $6s on this race....I think it's owed to them to at least get the horses nose on the wire...But the #3 horse's nose is on the wire. The picture IS the wire. It can't be any other way.

If you can't see by the photo you posted that the 3 is clearly in front of the outside horse, then I don't know what else to tell you. Forget about the line. You don't need a line in this instance to see the 3 is in front.

Once you accept that the photo you posted IS THE FINISH, then you'll realize what I'm saying.

Everything else is just flawed perception.

But hey, what the hell do I know? I'm currently 0 for my last 19 in posted picks on this board.

[elhelmete]

It's somewhat like the graphically superimposed 1st down yellow line on football games on TV. That line doesn't actually take precedent over the official markers on the field, although it's derived from them.

[iceknight]

What about when they "bury" the nose in the wire? That was explained a few months ago....??

I'm just gonna let it go as I didn't even bet the race....so in reality why do I even care? You know.. they do have dead heats sometimes.. Travers with Alpha and Goldenticket.. remember?

[ultracapper]

The yellow line is not the wire. The yellow line is a computer generated aid to help visualize the positions of the horses at the wire. At the time this picture was taken, the 3 horse's nose was on the wire. Wizz and SRU want the 3 horse's nose to be on the visual aid. The visual aid doesn't determine the winner.

[wiffleball whizz]

You know.. they do have dead heats sometimes.. Travers with Alpha and Goldenticket.. remember?


Yes make the wire thicker.... That's so funny I gotta dig up that thread

[ultracapper]

scratch and sniff thingy

[Stillriledup]

People make mistakes, it happens all the time.... It was a poor effort by the photo finish company to move the computer line right onto the winners nose in the photo provided to MJC. It was the last race of the day on Mother's Day and maybe the operator was running late for dinner with mom.

"You say its simple, but if it was so simple, why can't they show a photo with the winning horse on the wire?"

PACEADVANTAGE---> :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang:

I'm not interested in mistakes or poor efforts, neither is whizz. ;)

[cj]

Do people still not get this? The picture is the wire.

Try this, imagine the photo is mailed to you at home. You would take a ruler and try to figure out which nose is the wire. It really doesn't matter where they show the wire on the photo, though obviously they should do it better than some I've seen recently.

The only way there is a problem is if the nose of a horse not declared the winner is the one on the wire. I can't say I've ever seen that happen.

[Stillriledup]

The yellow line is not the wire. The yellow line is a computer generated aid to help visualize the positions of the horses at the wire. At the time this picture was taken, the 3 horse's nose was on the wire. Wizz and SRU want the 3 horse's nose to be on the visual aid. The visual aid doesn't determine the winner.

There's a long precedent in horse racing that all photos are showed with the "visual aid". Just show the photo with the winner on the line.

Racing is on thin ice these days in the integrity, perception and transparency department. Just show the winning picture....this is 2014, we're not asking them to solve time and space dimensions in the universe.

[Stillriledup]

Do people still not get this? The picture is the wire.

Try this, imagine the photo is mailed to you at home. You would take a ruler and try to figure out which nose is the wire. It really doesn't matter where they show the wire on the photo, though obviously they should do it better than some I've seen recently.

The only way there is a problem is if the nose of a horse not declared the winner is the one on the wire. I can't say I've ever seen that happen.

I think the 64 dollar question is why would THEY not do this for us? Do they not know how? This is what i'm struggling with as to why they would put out a photo for public consumption with the winning nose not on their "theoretical" line.

[wiffleball whizz]

There's a long precedent in horse racing that all photos are showed with the "visual aid". Just show the photo with the winner on the line.

Racing is on thin ice these days in the integrity, perception and transparency department. Just show the winning picture....this is 2014, we're not asking them to solve time and space dimensions in the universe.

This guy gets it :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp: :ThmbUp:

[wiffleball whizz]

Do people still not get this? The picture is the wire.

Try this, imagine the photo is mailed to you at home. You would take a ruler and try to figure out which nose is the wire. It really doesn't matter where they show the wire on the photo, though obviously they should do it better than some I've seen recently.

The only way there is a problem is if the nose of a horse not declared the winner is the one on the wire. I can't say I've ever seen that happen.

Yes cj......the 72 people on the bottom floor of pimlico at 6pm with their case cash on this race know exactly what your saying...

If this happens again and I'm there I'm turning a garbage can upside down and saying your post word for word like the win one for the gipper speech

I'm sure everybody who won't be eating that night will like the answer and vacate the premises :lol: :lol: :lol:

[cj]

I'm certainly not making excuses for somebody doing sloppy work. I just know there isn't anybody being ripped off because of it.

Wouldn't the easy answer just be to have the line already in place and not need to be adjusted?

[Saratoga_Mike]

Another false controversy - although I hand it to Wiz for his sharp eye. I suspect the other 71 people in attendance didn't see a thing wrong with the photo.

[EMD4ME]

I keep hearing that the photo is the wire.

I am expected to believe that there is 1 photo and that 1 singular photo is a clear and definite piece of evidence that shows who won (with the aid of a super imposed line).

To those that keep repeating all this....

Are there not 19,000 pics taken in a nanosecond as they cross the "wire" (there is no wire at 95% of tracks and boy do I miss the steal beams that many tracks used to utilize).

So, who's to say that shady judges or motivated judges don't use the 14th of 19,000 pics to their benefit as that is the one pic that shows the horse that they want to win?

Answer that one question with irrefutable logic, definitive proof and I will NEVER question this crooked photo system again.

I dare you.

P.S. why eliminate the steel rod? The actual steel rod that was in place at most tracks for years? Why eliminate absolute definitive proof of who won???

All I know is, it looks shady and opens the door for criticism.

Could you ever imagine 100M dashes decided with this retarded system?

[wiffleball whizz]

I keep hearing that the photo is the wire.

I am expected to believe that there is 1 photo and that 1 singular photo is a clear and definite piece of evidence that shows who won (with the aid of a super imposed line).

To those that keep repeating all this....

Are there not 19,000 pics taken in a nanosecond as they cross the "wire" (there is no wire at 95% of tracks and boy do I miss the steal beams that many tracks used to utilize).

So, who's to say that shady judges or motivated judges don't use the 14th of 19,000 pics to their benefit as that is the one pic that shows the horse that they want to win?

Answer that one question with irrefutable logic, definitive proof and I will NEVER question this crooked photo system again.

I dare you.

P.S. why eliminate the steel rod? The actual steel rod that was in place at most tracks for years? Why eliminate absolute definitive proof of who won???

All I know is, it looks shady and opens the door for criticism.

Could you ever imagine 100M dashes decided with this retarded system?


Agree 100 percent..... Bring back the steel beams....

[Stillriledup]

I keep hearing that the photo is the wire.

I am expected to believe that there is 1 photo and that 1 singular photo is a clear and definite piece of evidence that shows who won (with the aid of a super imposed line).

To those that keep repeating all this....

Are there not 19,000 pics taken in a nanosecond as they cross the "wire" (there is no wire at 95% of tracks and boy do I miss the steal beams that many tracks used to utilize).

So, who's to say that shady judges or motivated judges don't use the 14th of 19,000 pics to their benefit as that is the one pic that shows the horse that they want to win?

Answer that one question with irrefutable logic, definitive proof and I will NEVER question this crooked photo system again.

I dare you.

P.S. why eliminate the steel rod? The actual steel rod that was in place at most tracks for years? Why eliminate absolute definitive proof of who won???

All I know is, it looks shady and opens the door for criticism.

Could you ever imagine 100M dashes decided with this retarded system?


This guy "gets it!" :ThmbUp:

[Stillriledup]

Another false controversy - although I hand it to Wiz for his sharp eye. I suspect the other 71 people in attendance didn't see a thing wrong with the photo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gNVhQz62RU

[gillenr]

But the #3 horse's nose is on the wire. The picture IS the wire. It can't be any other way.

If you can't see by the photo you posted that the 3 is clearly in front of the outside horse, then I don't know what else to tell you. Forget about the line. You don't need a line in this instance to see the 3 is in front.

Once you accept that the photo you posted IS THE FINISH, then you'll realize what I'm saying.

Everything else is just flawed perception.

But hey, what the hell do I know? I'm currently 0 for my last 19 in posted picks on this board.

PA, you're trying to educate the uneducatable. Just for fun, search for the link that will explain how they can take it down to the pixel level, & how it is called a DH if there is only one pixel between them. I searched some years ago and it was informative

[PaceAdvantage]

Could you ever imagine 100M dashes decided with this retarded system?That's exactly what they use...and don't use the word retarded unless you're prepared to look in the mirror.

[PaceAdvantage]

This guy "gets it!" :ThmbUp:Glad you give the thumbs up to the use of the word retard.

You're another who needs to look in mirror if you're gonna endorse that kind of wordage.

Because I have to tell you, those here still arguing that photos are fixed and they do it in such a way THAT WHIFF WHIZZ and SRU and the guy in the harness section ARE ABLE TO DETECT THE FIX with a quick glance at the evidence...

Yeah, makes tons of sense.

[Stillriledup]

Glad you give the thumbs up to the use of the word retard.

You're another who needs to look in mirror if you're gonna endorse that kind of wordage.

Because I have to tell you, those here still arguing that photos are fixed and they do it in such a way THAT WHIFF WHIZZ and SRU and the guy in the harness section ARE ABLE TO DETECT THE FIX with a quick glance at the evidence...

Yeah, makes tons of sense.

First of all, i'm not giving the thumbs up to the word usage, rather than the jist of the post. I don't approve of that word, its politically incorrect and EDM shouldnt use it and should apologize for using it. With that said, this is a post about photo finishes, not a class on politically correct speech.

You need to read all the posts here carefully, this isnt about a "fix" its about perception and getting things right. Its also not about pixels and how photo finish cameras work, its about 99.99999 percent of all photos that are shown by racetracks around the globe have the winning horse's nose on the wire, except this one. THAT is what the discussion is about.

[PaceAdvantage]

First of all, i'm not giving the thumbs up to the word usage, rather than the jist of the post. I don't approve of that word, its politically incorrect and EDM shouldnt use it and should apologize for using it. With that said, this is a post about photo finishes, not a class on politically correct speech.

You need to read all the posts here carefully, this isnt about a "fix" its about perception and getting things right. Its also not about pixels and how photo finish cameras work, its about 99.99999 percent of all photos that are shown by racetracks around the globe have the winning horse's nose on the wire, except this one. THAT is what the discussion is about.Yeah, and we all pretty much agreed (including myself), that this was a schlock job by the judges in presenting the photo in this instance.

So why are we still arguing?

[Stillriledup]

Yeah, and we all pretty much agreed (including myself), that this was a schlock job by the judges in presenting the photo in this instance.

So why are we still arguing?

I don't argue. I discuss. ;)

[Mad Scientist]

I have go agree .... Looks clearly like the 3 to me. ....

[Jeff P]

That's exactly what they use...and don't use the word retarded unless you're prepared to look in the mirror.It's nowhere close to the same fan experience...

In Olympic (or NCAA) track and field with medals and future product endorsement contracts on the line:

1. There is a high speed replay camera mounted at a direct right angle to the finish line.

2. The finish line itself is very clearly marked. Everybody watching knows exactly where the finish line is and the finish line is clearly visible in the video.

3. The video itself, including the frame by frame slow motion replay, shows each runner breaking the plane of the very clearly marked finish line.

4. The final frame of the video is of high enough quality that it can be shown to the public as a "photo." Everybody who sees it knows who the winner is.

5. The entire presentation is very intuituitive and easy to grasp. Upon seeing item #4 above, 99.99% of everyone watching has the ability to determine the order of finish. (Seeing is believing.)


In Thoroughbred Racing with billions of dollars a year in purse money and mutuel payoffs on the line - and especially this time of year with breeding contracts and history on the line:

1. The pan shot and replay cameras at almost every track in North America are mounted several feet to the left or several feet to the right of where the actual finish line is.

2. At almost every track in North America the physical object located closest to the theoretical point in space where the actual finish line is lcoated is a mirror. Many tracks have a pole bearing lettering that says "FINISH." However, placement of these poles varies from one track to another. Some tracks locate their poles a few feet to the left of or before the finish line. Others locate the pole a few feet to the right or after the finish line. Knowing where the finish line is takes experience/local knowledge of the track where the race is being conducted.

3. When there is a close finish, because replay cameras are almost never mounted at a direct right angle to the finish line, determining the order of finish by watching a slow motion replay of the race finish is problematic at best. (Thus the need for a separate photo finish camera.)

4. The final frame of the video replay may be of high enough quality to produce a clear image of the race winner, but again, because the camera is not mounted at a direct right angle to the finish line, the image produced by the final frame of the race replay cannot be used as a "photo" for purposes of judging the official order of finish. (Thus the need for a separate photo finish camera.)

5. The video presentation (when compared to other sports) leaves me wanting. I've been betting on races and watching them since 1981. Yet, there are still several races each week where even after watching the replay I don't have sufficient information to determine the order of finish. (Thus the need for a separate photo finish camera.)

6. In thoroughbred racing there is a separate photo finish camera that is used to produce a "photo." FYI I've been fortunate enough to have track personnel take the time to give me a tour and thoroughly demonstrate how the photo finish camera works. I'm convinced that the "photos" and the placing judges get it right an extremely high percentage of the time. (However, the idea that a cartooned in finish line has to be added because a physical object denoting the actual finish line is not visible in official photos still bothers me.)

In my opinion, racing could improve the video replay experience for its fans immensely by implementing three simple changes:

1. Mount a replay camera at a direct right angle to the finish line.

2. Provide a clearly marked finish line.

3. Post the final frame of the video replay showing the nose of each runner involved in a close finish breaking the plane of the clearly marked finish line on the track website along with the official placing "photo" that the judges used to determine the oder of finish. (The official "photo" is still used by the placing judges. The final frame of the video provides supporting evidence that the placing judges got it right.)

Had Pimlico and other tracks already been doing this, nobody would be calling the order of race finishes (and racing's integrity) into question.



-jp

.

[iceknight]

It's nowhere close to the same fan experience...

In Olympic (or NCAA) track and field with medals and future product endorsement contracts on the line:

.Usually you make lot of good comments, but this one is a little overboard in comparison for this thread. Olympics and Pimlico R9 on a random Sunday?

First, the image posted by Whizz has no back links to it. So we have to tkae his word that this is the highest available resolution or if it is a screenshot from his computer Xpressbet replay (or any adw).

Ok, now if you do look at the Travers race http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1315403/Travers_Dead_Heat.jpg

the resolution is higher.

Regards "having a white line" .. do you want to draw that line on the sandy belmont track. or. ... If you go back into the history, they actually used thin wires both for the start time trigger (run up) and for the finish. Now they use light or laser beams and when that is broken, by the first horse they start the time as well as decide the winner.

Racing has not done a good job of clearly explaning the slit camera procedure and the width of the wire etc.. but this is hardly the place to bash racing just because mr-I-am-too-sleepy but will start a thread anyway and SRU start going at it gung ho. Geez, these guys cannot bother to do some search and read about it.

They just quickly come here and post bullshit and then act upset when people do not agree with them.

Improvements you suggest are good, but the model to look for is Hong Kong racing, not the Olympics.

[kmac1470]

http://www.nyra.com/assets/5/27/SAR_20130808_10_2.jpg
http://www.nyra.com/assets/5/27/SAR_20130808_10_4.jpg

Not sure how to post pictures on here but take a look at these two photos from the same race at Saratoga in 2013.

Notice the rider on the number 9 horse in both photos. He has not moved from the place photo to the fourth place photo.

The reason....

There is only one photo per race and it is of the horses as they cross the narrow strip defined as the finish line. Each image you see is of the horse as it crosses the finish. The distance between the horses is the amount that the film (nowadays digital) moved.

Haven't you ever wondered why horse's legs can be so badly distorted in a photo? It I because they are moving at a different speed than the photo finish camera expects. i.e. the film moves at approximately the same speed as the horse itself.

NO controversy, No shenanigans, NO skullduggery...

Got it now?

[kmac1470]

http://www.nyra.com/assets/5/27/SAR_20130816_1_1.jpg
http://www.nyra.com/assets/5/27/SAR_20130816_1_4.jpg

Another example...the 7 and his rider have not moved from the win photo to the fourth place photo. The reason...

There is one photo per race Each image is the horse as it hits the finish line.

NO chicanery...NO underhandedness...NO conspiracy....

[toddbowker]

Inline responses from someone who has placed more races than I can remember during my 10+ year previous career as a placing judge.

It's nowhere close to the same fan experience...

In Olympic (or NCAA) track and field with medals and future product endorsement contracts on the line:

1. There is a high speed replay camera mounted at a direct right angle to the finish line.

In horse racing, that's the perfect description of the photo finish camera.

2. The finish line itself is very clearly marked. Everybody watching knows exactly where the finish line is and the finish line is clearly visible in the video.

Well, technically it is (the mirror is the finish line). It would be impossible to clearly mark a finish line in dirt that has tractors going over it every race, or when it rains, or on grass. We aren't talking about a concrete or asphalt surface that can be permanently marked and is not affected by weather or maintenance.

3. The video itself, including the frame by frame slow motion replay, shows each runner breaking the plane of the very clearly marked finish line.

That's how it works in horse racing, other than we would disagree on 'clearly marked finish line'.

4. The final frame of the video is of high enough quality that it can be shown to the public as a "photo." Everybody who sees it knows who the winner is.

The final frame we see as a placing judge easily meets that criteria. The only difference is that when it comes to distributing what we saw to do the placing, with most tracks you are not dealing in Hi-Def, and depending on the track you might be seeing an ink-jet or color laser print shot by a video camera and compressed and decompressed a couple of times for transmission. This is something that could be fixed if the tracks want to spend the money.

5. The entire presentation is very intuituitive and easy to grasp. Upon seeing item #4 above, 99.99% of everyone watching has the ability to determine the order of finish. (Seeing is believing.)

As others have said, the photo is the finish, and the process that is used for track and field is exactly the same as the process used for horse racing. The only thing that might not be intuitive is that the tracks probably don't communicate where the 'real' finish line is very well to the customers.


In Thoroughbred Racing with billions of dollars a year in purse money and mutuel payoffs on the line - and especially this time of year with breeding contracts and history on the line:

1. The pan shot and replay cameras at almost every track in North America are mounted several feet to the left or several feet to the right of where the actual finish line is.

This is done for one reason, and one reason only. The photo finish camera has to be on the actual finish line. At most tracks, with a 2 story press box, the photo finish cameras are on the second floor, immediately above the placing judges stand (which is also on the finish line). The pan camera is normally also on the second floor, either to the right or left of the photo finish booth. The angles necessary to cover an 80+ foot wide racetrack surface are substantially different than an 8 lane track and field track. This is also why the announcer is not on the finish line, and why they can be wrong if they try to split horses that are finishing too close together.

2. At almost every track in North America the physical object located closest to the theoretical point in space where the actual finish line is lcoated is a mirror. Many tracks have a pole bearing lettering that says "FINISH." However, placement of these poles varies from one track to another. Some tracks locate their poles a few feet to the left of or before the finish line. Others locate the pole a few feet to the right or after the finish line. Knowing where the finish line is takes experience/local knowledge of the track where the race is being conducted.

Yes, the mirror will always represent the 'true' finish line. The reason the poles are not always directly on the actual finish line is because at tracks with multiple courses, if you put the pole on the finish line, it blocks the photo finish camera's view of the inner tracks.

3. When there is a close finish, because replay cameras are almost never mounted at a direct right angle to the finish line, determining the order of finish by watching a slow motion replay of the race finish is problematic at best. (Thus the need for a separate photo finish camera.)

Not only is it problematic because of the placement of the pan camera. It's also problematic because the quality of the pan cameras are rarely as good as the quality of the photo finish cameras, and again, in most cases you aren't looking at HD, and if you are at a remote site the SD picture has been compressed and decompressed a couple of times. This adds 'noise' to the video. It gets even worse when you watch a streaming video replay which is compressed and decompressed twice more before you see it.

4. The final frame of the video replay may be of high enough quality to produce a clear image of the race winner, but again, because the camera is not mounted at a direct right angle to the finish line, the image produced by the final frame of the race replay cannot be used as a "photo" for purposes of judging the official order of finish. (Thus the need for a separate photo finish camera.)

True, but as mentioned, it is rarely of high enough quality.

5. The video presentation (when compared to other sports) leaves me wanting. I've been betting on races and watching them since 1981. Yet, there are still several races each week where even after watching the replay I don't have sufficient information to determine the order of finish. (Thus the need for a separate photo finish camera.)

No argument here on video presentation. I wish all tracks were HD, and that the satellite uplinking system did not compress the video to share multiple tracks on the same transponder.

6. In thoroughbred racing there is a separate photo finish camera that is used to produce a "photo." FYI I've been fortunate enough to have track personnel take the time to give me a tour and thoroughly demonstrate how the photo finish camera works. I'm convinced that the "photos" and the placing judges get it right an extremely high percentage of the time. (However, the idea that a cartooned in finish line has to be added because a physical object denoting the actual finish line is not visible in official photos still bothers me.)

Assuming they aren't blind or grossly incompetent (meaning all three placing judges at the same time), they should get it right every time. In my entire career, I never hung a bad number, and was never less than 100% sure in the decision I made about an order of finish. Also, for history buffs, back in the old days when some tracks actually stretched a metal cable across the track (which is where the term 'the wire' comes from), when you saw a photo finish photo, you weren't actually seeing that cable in the photo, you were still seeing a 'cartooned' finish line in the photo.

In my opinion, racing could improve the video replay experience for its fans immensely by implementing three simple changes:

1. Mount a replay camera at a direct right angle to the finish line.

The tracks could mount another camera (well actually they do, every photo finish system has a backup camera) but it may or may not be helpful (see below).

2. Provide a clearly marked finish line.

As mentioned above, I'm not sure how to do this given the various track surfaces are not conducive to doing it. The mirror is there, and that's the clearly marked finish line (although perhaps the tracks should do a better job explaining it).

3. Post the final frame of the video replay showing the nose of each runner involved in a close finish breaking the plane of the clearly marked finish line on the track website along with the official placing "photo" that the judges used to determine the oder of finish. (The official "photo" is still used by the placing judges. The final frame of the video provides supporting evidence that the placing judges got it right.)

The final frame of the video may or may not confirm the photo finish camera. The two cameras would need to be perfectly aligned to each other, would have to be the same resolution and quality, and the 'final' frame of the video replay would have to be at the exact millisecond of the photo finish frame that was used. Anything else could cause a lot more problems with the public.

Had Pimlico and other tracks already been doing this, nobody would be calling the order of race finishes (and racing's integrity) into question.

Yes they still would. Just like all the people here that refuse to believe that the photo finish camera only captures 'the wire'. I've had people up to my placing judge's stand look at a hi-res monitor I used to make the call, and tell me it didn't look like what they saw on TV, so I must be 'in cahoots' with someone who cashed a ticket and what I was showing them must have been altered. That will never change with some people, and if the two cameras weren't perfectly aligned people would go far crazier than they do now if the two pictures didn't confirm each other. For the record, this is also why placing judges don't (or shouldn't) use the mirror to place horses. You can never guarantee that the mirror is in perfect alignment to the camera.

-jp

.

Having said all of this, the customer experience (as it were) could be improved. Unfortunately, the cost of doing it the way you are requesting is prohibitive for most tracks. To get where you would like to be, the tracks would need to do the following:

1) Use an HD camera for the Pan Camera.
2) Each track would have to broadcast their signals in HD.
3) There would need to be a direct output from the photo finish system to the TV control room.
4) Stop compressing the video for uplinking and downlinking.
5) Have every guest outlet install HD switching equipment.
6) Have every guest outlet install HD TV's everywhere in their facilities.
7) Take uncompressed feeds directly from the host feed and convert them to 1080 equivalent video streams.
8) Everyone watching streams would need to have sufficient bandwidth to view them.
9) Everyone providing streams would have to have enough headroom to supply the streams to everyone watching.

It could be done, but I'd hate to try to guess the cost.

[PaceAdvantage]

It's nowhere close to the same fan experience...Does the photo finish equipment at a 100M Olympic (or Olympic trial) dash operate in the same way, or in a different way, FUNDAMENTALLY, then horse racing?

[JustRalph]

Todd, where you been.....? Appreciate your input....... :ThmbUp:

[Jeff P]

Todd, lots of great info in your post. I do understand what you are saying about the cost of HD being prohibitive.

That said, Hawthorne's replay presentation comes pretty close to what I am talking about.

Here's a link to a replay of the 2014 IL Derby available at the Bloodhorse.com site:
http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-racing/race/race-results?startDate=4%2F1%2F2014&endDate=4%2F30%2F2014&trackLookupId=826&type=GradedStakes&statesBred=&searchStateBredPlacers=false

The part of the replay I am talking about cuts in at about the 2:26 mark:

1. The mirror is the only object in the vicinity of the finish line. There's also red paint on the rail that ends where the mirror begins. The slow motion replay freezes when the the winner's nose breaks the plane of the mirror. Therefore, intuitively, the mirror has to be the finish line.

2. I haven't been to Hawthorne recently so I don't know if the replay camera is mounted at an exact direct right angle to the finish line or not. But based on what I see from the replay, the replay camera at Hawthorne is mounted close enough to a direct right angle to the finish line that they create the shot I am looking for - a shot where the final frame makes it possible for the viewer to see the order of finish (and be right about it) a very high percentage of the time. Also, the camera angle itself appears to be at the right height above ground level that the viewer is afforded a very good view (relative to other tracks) of the horses as they reach the wire.

The effect I'm looking for?

1. A clearly marked finish line.

2. A replay camera mounted on (not to the side of) the finish line.


-jp

.

[Jeff P]

Does the photo finish equipment at a 100M Olympic (or Olympic trial) dash operate in the same way, or in a different way, FUNDAMENTALLY, then horse racing?I posted the rant that I did because I thought you were suggesting the video presentation of horse racing was on par with that of the Olympics. I realize now that's not what you posted. You were referring strictly to photo finish cameras.

-jp

.

[EMD4ME]

That's exactly what they use...and don't use the word retarded unless you're prepared to look in the mirror.

My sincerest apologies for using that word. I know and care about many challenged individuals. It's an old habit that I need to eliminate.

Outside of that, I stand by what I stated earlier.

[EMD4ME]

First of all, i'm not giving the thumbs up to the word usage, rather than the jist of the post. I don't approve of that word, its politically incorrect and EDM shouldnt use it and should apologize for using it. With that said, this is a post about photo finishes, not a class on politically correct speech.

You need to read all the posts here carefully, this isnt about a "fix" its about perception and getting things right. Its also not about pixels and how photo finish cameras work, its about 99.99999 percent of all photos that are shown by racetracks around the globe have the winning horse's nose on the wire, except this one. THAT is what the discussion is about.


You are 100% correct, I do need to apologize for my poor language. I did in my prior post and I mean it sincerely. No buts to that.

[Stillriledup]

You are 100% correct, I do need to apologize for my poor language. I did in my prior post and I mean it sincerely. No buts to that.

Good stuff, way to man up. :ThmbUp:

[EMD4ME]

Why do we not have a clear and visible finish line (steal rod, beam etc.) with the camera lined up behind & above it, like we used to at most tracks?

That is my main question.

The only track that I can think of that does it (I'm sure there are more) is Tampa Bay.

It just looks shady.

Am I incorrect in what I'm asking?

Finally, doesn't the photo finish camera take thousands of pictures in a second? I'm serious in asking all these questions. What are the answers?

If yes (thousands of pics per second), then what is there to stop a placing judge from using the pic that they want (amongst the thousands available)???

This is why I miss the beam/rod etc. I never had a doubt who won in a photo. Now I do.

As a wagering client, why am I subjected to an additional layer of potential fraud in a game already riddled with fraud?

Not giving a rant. Just asking a series of questions to many knowledgeable people and would humbly appreciate some answers.

Regards

[EMD4ME]

Good stuff, way to man up. :ThmbUp:

Won't say thank you as I was out of line. As a kid, many kids used to use that word. Old habits die hard but like I said, no excuse and I am 100% wrong.

This thread will engrain in my half empty brain, how I need to stop using that word.

[wisconsin]

If yes (thousands of pics per second), then what is there to stop a placing judge from using the pic that they want (amongst the thousands available)???

The pictures are taken through a thin slit. They are compiled one after another. The first slit shot is the tip of the first horse's nostril as it breaks the plane. That is what hits the "line" first. Add up the thousands of pictures and you get the entire field one long strip. THERE IS NO PICTURE WHERE THEIR IS NO HORSE. It's impossible for the first picture to be anything except the horse in front (or horses, in the case of a dead heat).

It's just not difficult.

[wiffleball whizz]

The pictures are taken through a thin slit. They are compiled one after another. The first slit shot is the tip of the first horse's nostril as it breaks the plane. That is what hits the "line" first. Add up the thousands of pictures and you get the entire field one long strip. THERE IS NO PICTURE WHERE THEIR IS NO HORSE. It's impossible for the first picture to be anything except the horse in front (or horses, in the case of a dead heat).

It's just not difficult.

This is the most accurate post of the thread....the slit is the key word

[PaceAdvantage]

Also, this talk of the old "steel wire" going across the track...did that even show up in the photo? Or was that used to line up the camera? Or what?

I have a feeling that old "steel wire" never even made it into the actual old-time photos, and again, they had to superimpose a finish line, even onto those photos back in the old days.

Didn't someone even state this in this very thread (too busy to go back and look at this moment in time).

If I'm wrong, I'm sure somebody will let me know...

[cordep17]

How many times do I have to say the same thing?

THE PHOTO IS THE WIRE.

That picture you see IS THE FINISH AT THE "WIRE"

That's it. There is no other photo. That's THE photo. You're LOOKING AT THE ACTUAL FINISH.

The "wire" or computer generated line, is simply an AID to help determine (in a close finish), who is in front. So, your question "how do we know where the real wire is" is meaningless, because THE PHOTO IS THE WIRE. I'll say it again. THE PHOTO IS THE WIRE.

You can move that computer generated line all you want, it DOESN'T CHANGE THE OUTCOME OF THE PHOTO. The PHOTO is the FINISH.

I don't need a line to see the 3 is in front. But they put a line on there to help you see it...there is no LINE in the actual photo...the line is put there AFTER THE FACT.

How is it that people who have supposedly been playing this game for years, and been on this board for years (where this has been explained MANY times) still fail to grasp this rather simple concept?

Ut0nKdLCAEo

If it's the same picture every time, why bother ever moving the line. If I'm getting you right, why is the line ever moved. a horse's nose should be right on it if you never moved it.

[EMD4ME]

Also, this talk of the old "steel wire" going across the track...did that even show up in the photo? Or was that used to line up the camera? Or what?

I have a feeling that old "steel wire" never even made it into the actual old-time photos, and again, they had to superimpose a finish line, even onto those photos back in the old days.

Didn't someone even state this in this very thread (too busy to go back and look at this moment in time).

If I'm wrong, I'm sure somebody will let me know...

To be frank, I'm not sure if it did but I believe the steal beam did show up on the picture.

In theory, if the camera was placed on the 2nd floor, right above the beam, yes, the picture would encompass the beam, hence zero doubt as to who won and what picture was used.

[Stillriledup]

Won't say thank you as I was out of line. As a kid, many kids used to use that word. Old habits die hard but like I said, no excuse and I am 100% wrong.

This thread will engrain in my half empty brain, how I need to stop using that word.

I think you're right, we used use that word back in the day to describe "dumb" behavior, but now, in this more sensitive and PC world, we can't even use it in a medical sense, i'm not sure what the new word is, but i know this word is a no no.

[EMD4ME]

The pictures are taken through a thin slit. They are compiled one after another. The first slit shot is the tip of the first horse's nostril as it breaks the plane. That is what hits the "line" first. Add up the thousands of pictures and you get the entire field one long strip. THERE IS NO PICTURE WHERE THEIR IS NO HORSE. It's impossible for the first picture to be anything except the horse in front (or horses, in the case of a dead heat).

It's just not difficult.

Thank you, I appreciate your detailed response. Not debating you, just trying to understand some details. You say 'the first slit shot' is the tip of the horse's nostril as it breaks the plane.

My question is this, to be more specific: the reverse angle mirror is about 9 inches long. So I assume the slit in the main camera view is also 9 inches long. Isn't it possible that there are thousands of pics amongst the 9 inches? Isn't possible that any one of those pics can be used as the "photo" ?

That scares the crap out of me....

[wiffleball whizz]

Thank you, I appreciate your detailed response. Not debating you, just trying to understand some details. You say 'the first slit shot' is the tip of the horse's nostril as it breaks the plane.

My question is this, to be more specific: the reverse angle mirror is about 9 inches long. So I assume the slit in the main camera view is also 9 inches long. Isn't it possible that there are thousands of pics amongst the 9 inches? Isn't possible that any one of those pics can be used as the "photo" ?

That scares the crap out of me....

That is correct......they can do whatever they want if they want to

[EMD4ME]

That is correct......they can do whatever they want if they want to

Without sounding facetious or obnoxious... that is exactly what I've been complaining about this for 9 years as I walk through Belmont, Aqueduct and sometimes Saratoga. Every person I speak to on here has avoided that question. If I get a logical and technical response to that question that definitively puts my concerns at ease, I will cease my argument.

Until then, I will question every questionable photo at Aqueduct, Belmont, Saratoga and everywhere else that doesn't have a steal rod/beam etc.

And... I feel like I am 100% logical and righteous in feeling that way. Not because I am some conspiracy theory guy but because my questions are of a sound core and built upon logical substance.

[iceknight]

Without sounding facetious or obnoxious... that is exactly what I've been complaining about this for 9 years as I walk through Belmont, Aqueduct and sometimes Saratoga. Every person I speak to on here has avoided that question. If I get a logical and technical response to that question that definitively puts my concerns at ease, I will cease my argument.

Until then, I will question every questionable photo at Aqueduct, Belmont, Saratoga and everywhere else that doesn't have a steal rod/beam etc.

And... I feel like I am 100% logical and righteous in feeling that way. Not because I am some conspiracy theory guy but because my questions are of a sound core and built upon logical substance. Once the first horse crosses the "line" are they able to retract their nose in a flash so that the second horse's nose can now appear in front (by the 2nd or 3rd frame picture taken from the slit?) if that is possible, that is the *only* way you can "take whatever pic you want".. otherwise, if horses are moving forward the only way this has any chance of manipulation is the head bob or head jerking up to pull the nose back..

[therussmeister]

If it's the same picture every time, why bother ever moving the line. If I'm getting you right, why is the line ever moved. a horse's nose should be right on it if you never moved it.
Because there is no line. It does not exist in the real world, only on the photo and is put there only after the photo is created and only to facilitate judging which horse has its nose in front. It is the equivalent of taking a pen and drawing a line on an already developed photo except it is done digitally with a computer to make sure it is precisely perpendicular to the rail.

[therussmeister]

Thank you, I appreciate your detailed response. Not debating you, just trying to understand some details. You say 'the first slit shot' is the tip of the horse's nostril as it breaks the plane.

My question is this, to be more specific: the reverse angle mirror is about 9 inches long. So I assume the slit in the main camera view is also 9 inches long. Isn't it possible that there are thousands of pics amongst the 9 inches? Isn't possible that any one of those pics can be used as the "photo" ?

That scares the crap out of me....
This is, in one way like the Monty Hall Problem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem).
Specifically I read that if a person receives an explanation for the Monty Hall Problem solution and does not understand it, they will never understand it regardless of how many different ways it is explained to them.

It seems to me that is true too for understanding how a photo finish camera works. Some people just flat out don't understand it, and I don't know what more could be said to explain it to them.

[EMD4ME]

This is, in one way like the Monty Hall Problem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem).
Specifically I read that if a person receives an explanation for the Monty Hall Problem solution and does not understand it, they will never understand it regardless of how many different ways it is explained to them.

It seems to me that is true too for understanding how a photo finish camera works. Some people just flat out don't understand it, and I don't know what more could be said to explain it to them.

I can appreciate that to me but it yet again does not answer the specific questions...

Can you take 19000 pics in a nanosecond during the 9 inches of pictures? Can you not use any one of them?

I'm sorry but spins and 'you just dont get it emerald' are not good enough for this 'Spock'. I like indisputable logic and evidence.

And before anyone says ' hey Spock give me your evidence against what we're saying', ill say this... I don't need proof to stand by my questions. My questions are valid. Where is the proof that a photo is "THE photo" and not "A photo of 19,000"?

[johnhannibalsmith]

I can appreciate that to me but it yet again does not answer the specific questions...

Can you take 19000 pics in a nanosecond during the 9 inches of pictures? Can you not use any one of them?

...

Under any system that I have used, no it is not possible.

This tens of thousands of "pics" is a singular image composed of that many iterations of the lens repeatedly shooting the same exact location from the time the plunger is pressed until it is released. If I look at the file for "Race 4", it is a single file. Not 9,000 or 19,000 or 190,000. Even if I had some fancy decompression utility to separate the images, I'd probably play hell trying to recreate the image nearly fast enough nor even in a sequence that makes sense...

... because...

... allow this scenario for a moment. I'm taking you at your word, unlike another chap in your corner who I'm pretty sure just likes egging others on at this point because there's no way that he doesn't grasp this yet... :D

You are sitting on the shoulder of the highway.

You take out your really fast camera and place it on a tripod and point it at a spot on the opposite guardrail and the focus of the image is not even the length of a small car or motorcycle.

As traffic passes for a few seconds, you snap the thousands of pictures of that one point on the guardrail.

These 19,000 "pics" that you now have are laid down from first to last and what you wind up with is a one long image that appears to show a line of cars. When the images are placed end to end they make what appears to be one continuous image of everything you snapped as it crossed in front of your camera.

If your goal is to identify which cars passed the spot that you chose along the guardrail and when, you have, in effect, the entire sequence of every thing that passed that one spot over a specific amount of time with everything relative to one another at that point.

That somewhat analogous more real world concept might make the premise of how this whole thing works a little easier.

If the 3 never crossed the wire in front of the 5, there will never be a photo of the 3 in front of the 5, even if the 3 opened up fifteen at the gate and was in a win photo at the wire.

[luisbe]

There's a long precedent in horse racing that all photos are showed with the "visual aid". Just show the photo with the winner on the line.

Racing is on thin ice these days in the integrity, perception and transparency department. Just show the winning picture....this is 2014, we're not asking them to solve time and space dimensions in the universe.

Although you're right, in this particular photo wouldn't matter if the "aid" line was 3 feet away from the noses because is hugely clear the 3 won.

[PaceAdvantage]

If it's the same picture every time, why bother ever moving the line. If I'm getting you right, why is the line ever moved. a horse's nose should be right on it if you never moved it.I give up.

[PaceAdvantage]

To be frank, I'm not sure if it did but I believe the steal beam did show up on the picture.

In theory, if the camera was placed on the 2nd floor, right above the beam, yes, the picture would encompass the beam, hence zero doubt as to who won and what picture was used.If the focus is on the finish line down on the track, how can the beam, which is high up in the air, and closer to the camera, also be in focus?

[PaceAdvantage]

That is correct......they can do whatever they want if they want toYes, they're up there manipulating photos all day long in the few minutes they have between the time the horses cross the line and the time the official lamp goes on...

It's a whole alternate realty, time warp, MATRIX thing happening...only at the races...

[PaceAdvantage]

Not because I am some conspiracy theory guy but because my questions are of a sound core and built upon logical substance.Wow.

[PaceAdvantage]

I can appreciate that to me but it yet again does not answer the specific questions...

Can you take 19000 pics in a nanosecond during the 9 inches of pictures? Can you not use any one of them?

I'm sorry but spins and 'you just dont get it emerald' are not good enough for this 'Spock'. I like indisputable logic and evidence.

And before anyone says ' hey Spock give me your evidence against what we're saying', ill say this... I don't need proof to stand by my questions. My questions are valid. Where is the proof that a photo is "THE photo" and not "A photo of 19,000"?What is this 9 inches you speak of? I know I'm going to get in trouble for talking about 9 inches and slits in the same paragraph, but seriously, what is this 9 inches?

Instead of continuously spewing forth words from your keyboard, take time out and go over some of the posts and links and videos presented in this thread, and try and educate yourself about what exactly is happening to create the photo.

Then you should come back here and thank all of us for spending an inordinate amount of time in trying to cure you of your photo finish ignorance.

Imagine the stress that will be lifted from your soul when you no longer have to worry about people cheating you out of every photo finish from here on out.

You can actually worry about the stuff they ARE cheating you with...

[johnhannibalsmith]

...You can actually worry about the stuff they ARE cheating you with...

And that's really the best argument I can make to most people.

I doubted a few photos before I worked the job and I used to enjoy bringing people up, old time race trackers and hardened bettors mostly, and show them how it all works. Most were astounded, like me at first, didn't realize at all that it was nearly impossible to get it wrong. Many came up a second, third time under the pretense that they were trying to explain it to some other doubter and wanted them to see, but you could see them piecing it together one last time.

With all of the attention the photo finish gets and the general mystery surrounding how it works, I've always wondered why TVG doesn't just do one of those dopey five minute vignettes to run ten times a day showing how it all works. It's pretty interesting and cool really. And most people enjoy learning about it and it cements some confidence in their willingness to wager once they grasp that they can tune their concerns to more useful events.

[iceknight]

What is this 9 inches you speak of? I know I'm going to get in trouble for talking about 9 inches and slits in the same paragraph, but seriously, what is this 9 inches? :lol:

Instead of continuously spewing forth words from your keyboard, take time out and go over some of the posts and links and videos presented in this thread, and try and educate yourself about what exactly is happening to create the photo.

Then you should come back here and thank all of us for spending an inordinate amount of time in trying to cure you of your photo finish ignorance.

Imagine the stress that will be lifted from your soul when you no longer have to worry about people cheating you out of every photo finish from here on out.

You can actually worry about the stuff they ARE cheating you with...When Victory Gallop won the Belmont did they use this technology or did Visa did some trickery to avoid paying out the 5 mill.

Never mind, it looks like it was different tech..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLV7xZPwvM0 the photo finish is shown close to 4min 13 sec.

Unbelievable. This has to be the closest Belmont margin

[jk3521]

I give up.

Is this thread ever gonna end? Please!!! :bang:

Just tell those guys yeah, yer right ! ;)

[wiffleball whizz]

Bump

[wiffleball whizz]

When Victory Gallop won the Belmont did they use this technology or did Visa did some trickery to avoid paying out the 5 mill.

Never mind, it looks like it was different tech..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLV7xZPwvM0 the photo finish is shown close to 4min 13 sec.

Unbelievable. This has to be the closest Belmont margin

At least Belmont had the steel beam

[precocity]

Bump
whizz think social inclusion and CC WILL BE LIKE THAT PICK YOU POSTED BUT SI IS THE :3: :sleeping:

[wiffleball whizz]

Out of curiosity what would happen if CC is the 5 in the photo and they show the photo of the 3 winning....racing would be the laughing stock of America more then it is now

[PaceAdvantage]

Out of curiosity what would happen if CC is the 5 in the photo and they show the photo of the 3 winning....racing would be the laughing stock of America more then it is nowWhat are you mumbling about now? The 3 is the clear winner in that photo, at least to everyone with a normal set of eyes.

[PaceAdvantage]

At least Belmont had the steel beamI can think of something else that could use a steel beam right about now. :lol:

Whack some sense into you... :lol: :lol: :lol:

[wiffleball whizz]

I can think of something else that could use a steel beam right about now. :lol:

Whack some sense into you... :lol: :lol: :lol:


Close the thread already and put it out of it's misery......flex some power around here :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[precocity]

good to see whizz back always starting crazy threads. :ThmbUp: and bumping them up! :D

[cj]

Close the thread already and put it out of it's misery......flex some power around here :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Done!