TPR ratings

[jeebus1083]

Can the BRIS E2 and LP ratings effectively be converted to TPR?

According to PMTR (Pace Makes The Race), 44.0 at sprint and 1:09 at route equals 100, with 1/5th (1 length approx.) equaling 1 point up and down. BRIS pace figures are on a 2 points per 1 length scale. So assuming there is an E2-LP relationship of say 95-88, could I subtract those numbers both by 100, divide by 2 and add 100 (in which case, the new rating would be 97.5-94) to each to get a reasonable ballpark E2 and LP rating scaled to PMTR?

[JohnGalt1]

I wouldn't do that.

Since the Hambleton pace figures are so easy to make--with practice and repetition--do them yourself.

I do.

Plus you will know how the figures were comprised and will get a better feel for the race.

[jeebus1083]

I wouldn't do that.

Since the Hambleton pace figures are so easy to make--with practice and repetition--do them yourself.

I do.

Plus you will know how the figures were comprised and will get a better feel for the race.

Thanks John. Main reason I was looking to make a conversion was because a variant is already built into the BRIS numbers.

[JohnGalt1]

I use the variant guide that William Scott published in his books, which I may have modified.

DRF variant 16-18 is no adjustment.

19-20 adjust one tick faster, 21-21 two ticks faster and so on.

His change was for a faster track.

14-15 adjust one tick slower

12-13 two ticks

10-11 3 ticks

8-9 4 ticks

6-7 5 ticks

4-5 6 ticks-------then

3 7 ticks

2 8 ticks

1 9 ticks

if no variant because of a track record or a negative variant 10 ticks


I adjust more for second call in sprints than routes. Example if variant is 3, for the 7 tick adjustment I deduct 5 from EPR and 2 from FFR, and if a route 4 and 3.

I don't use variants for turf races since at most track so few are run that they are worthless.

I use a par book and use 10k open claiming races for track to track comparison. Some advise using track records for this. That makes no sense since there are now par books for more accurate comparisons.

I want to do the work myself so I know how the figures were made and because it's my money I'm betting.

[bobphilo]

I use the variant guide that William Scott published in his books, which I may have modified.

DRF variant 16-18 is no adjustment.

19-20 adjust one tick faster, 21-21 two ticks faster and so on.

His change was for a faster track.

14-15 adjust one tick slower

12-13 two ticks

10-11 3 ticks

8-9 4 ticks

6-7 5 ticks

4-5 6 ticks-------then

3 7 ticks

2 8 ticks

1 9 ticks

if no variant because of a track record or a negative variant 10 ticks


I adjust more for second call in sprints than routes. Example if variant is 3, for the 7 tick adjustment I deduct 5 from EPR and 2 from FFR, and if a route 4 and 3.

I don't use variants for turf races since at most track so few are run that they are worthless.

I use a par book and use 10k open claiming races for track to track comparison. Some advise using track records for this. That makes no sense since there are now par books for more accurate comparisons.

I want to do the work myself so I know how the figures were made and because it's my money I'm betting.

Unfortunately the DRF variants are deeply flawed. In his first book Scott recommends ignoring them though he later admitted they were better than nothing and recommend using them but came up with the table you posted which minimizes the problem of using them as they are.
This was before the DRF started including the Beyer figures which included a far better variant so he gave people a fairly decent way to work with what they had.

Not trying to put down your methods. If they work for you, go for it.
Good luck.

[jeebus1083]

TimeformUS provides individual fractional race times adjusted for variant. Of course, they also have their pace figures.

[Tom]

TimeformUS provides individual fractional race times adjusted for variant. Of course, they also have their pace figures.

Those adjusted times work very well in the Sartin programs.
You might want to re-write in Excel or some other spreadsheet, so that you can take advantage of the 1/100s timing rather than the 1/5s most of the older programs use.