BRIS scratches --

[andicap]

Does anyone use brisnet to get their scratches. They are awful.
I used Brisnet one day last week at Saratoga, (maybe Saturday), then double checked it with Equibase. Oy. vay! BRIS left out about 6 horses!!

Anyone else have bad experience with BRIS late scratch report.

[GR1@HTR]

I have found Youbet to be the most accurate. But an excellent alternative is:
http://www.racingchannel.com/restricted/MEN----T.HTM

I agree, brisnet is pathetic when it comes to scratches.

[takeout]

Could it have something to do with them using "DRF data"?

[BillW]

I haven't yet found the "early" late scratch reports very accurate. But the "real time" reports such as GR1 alludes to and brisbet seem to be OK, but are not available till about 1/2 hour before post. (So they don't do you much good the night before)

BTW, takeout ... what other data is there?


Bill

[takeout]

Originally posted by BillW

BTW, takeout ... what other data is there?

I'm glad you asked. This is something that I've been confused about for over a decade now so maybe someone can shed a little more light on it. Here's how I see it.

The only data now is Equibase data. That's why I always put "DRF data" in quotes, because I don't know what it is.

Inside of the first or second page of a hardcopy DRF, they state: "all entries, results, charts and related information provided by Equibase Company". Since Equibase supplies the data to everyone, how can you have "DRF data"? DRF states in its own publication that there's no DRF data.

The reason that I refer to it as "DRF data" is that it's different in a couple of crucial areas (at least to me) like trainer names and stuff being left out of the abbreviated descriptions of certain classes of races. What I don't understand is why DRF doesn't sync-up its operation with Equibase and present the same (correct) trainer names and such. The two companies supposedly buried the hatchet in '98 (after competing with each other since the early '90s) and formed some weird partnership/truce. This was a ridiculous move by both parties IMO, especially Equibase who must've forgotten why it was started in the first place. At any rate, the two companies might as well still be competing because their information still doesn't agree - at least in the two areas mentioned. If they are buddies now, then why doesn't their stuff agree? Why are BRIS and DRF the only two resellers that have different stuff from everybody else? Yep, it's the "DRF data," which, I can only conclude is Equibase data after its been mugged.

A couple of other things I don't understand:

How come other resellers have a morning line in their PPs some 48 hours in advance but not DRF?

How come you have to wait for the little "p" after the date to download PPs from BRIS when at TSN theirs are up two days in advance and when you see the date it's all there? You don't have to look for the little "p".

This one was already mentioned but why do you have to pay for the same Beyer column at DRF that you get for free at washingtonpost.com?

Why do the DRF charts in their paper product (BTW, could they GET any smaller?) have the same wrong abbreviated classes for some races while the ones at their site are right? (They still have the same wrong trainer names as in the PPs though.)

It looks to me like DRF is an "island". When they and Equibase decided to coexist, they should've at least started using the same trainer names. What a positively bizarre situation.

[BillW]

takeout,

I can't disagree. I've been in the middle of transitioning from Bris to TSN (Almost as bizarre a situation as DRF/Equibase :)). The little nit picky things are annoying. The trainer name differences within the same companies database are enough to drive you crazy, not alone from one to the other

I guess if this game were easy ... Hmmm we'd all be losing:eek:


Bill

[takeout]

BillW,

I know what you mean. It's amazing how many discrepancies you see in the trainer names when comparing the Equibase data of TSN (or anyone else) to the "DRF data" of DRF and BRIS. There are countless examples in the DRF stuff of two different spellings for the same trainer and I even have a couple that have three. You just know that has to be messing with their stats and this stuff has been wrong in the DRF database for years now. I even found one guy that was completely wrong. Yep, he and his record didn't belong with the horse that they had him with.

DRF has some good stuff but it's a house of cards until they fix their basic product. It's also a house of cards because they don't archive. That's also an issue with TSN. They don't archive either. As far as I know, ITS is the only source of Equibase data that archives. This "data road" sure has a lot of potholes in it!

[rrbauer]

RE: Scratches

Saratoga scratches & changes are up on their web site about 11:45am ET.

Del Mar scratches are up on their web site about 10:45 to 11 am PT.

All of the major Calif tracks have "scratch lines" that you can call for scratches. SoCal scratches are usually available by 9:30am PT.

RE: Data problems

I agree with everything that has been posted about the DRF/BRIS data problems. I have complained to both repeatedly over the years and get responses that range from "duh" to "we'll have to look into that and get back to you" (read: duh, duh). In fact, for as long as I've been a BRIS customer (something like 14 years) they have always shrugged off data problems as something that they can't do anything about because they get their data from DRF. So I've learned to work around the problems and be alert to those areas where I know they exist. Not a desirable solution, but one that goes with the territory.

[ranchwest]

I've been meaning to post about this, but I never got around to looking up the specific example.

I get Track Master files. A couple of weeks ago, I believe on a Sunday, I think the track was WO. There was a scratch and the saddle cloth numbers were moved up!!! Luckily, I had not opted to wager on that race, as I would have been selecting from the wrong numbers!!!

I've also notice that the Equibase Entries numbers are frequently not the saddle cloth numbers.

[BillW]

Originally posted by rrbauer
RE: Data problems

So I've learned to work around the problems and be alert to those areas where I know they exist. Not a desirable solution, but one that goes with the territory.

I do find it interesting that there is usually a pattern of predictability to which areas of the data are problematic. You would think that would make it easier to fix at the source. Thankfully it makes it easy to fix (or neutralize) at my end.

Bill

[Tom]

There will be peace in the Middle East before we see accuracy and quality control from the Data-Whores. They are cash-focused, not customer focused. As long as we buy, they have no incentive for improvment.