DRF error

[cj]

Seen this one a lot lately, I can only assume for horses re-using an old name.

In the 4th at Aqu tomorrow, the 3 horse, hold that smile is a 3 you colt. He has PPs listed from 1992 at CRC and 1994 at GP. It wouldn't seem to hard to write some code that weeds out running lines that are older than the damn horse! Marc at DRF, what is going on with these? Like I said, not the first time this has happened!

CJ

[takeout]

Interesting.

Sounds like a similar phenom to that of the trainer names that don't match the ones in the Equibase files.

[Suff]

I guess her sire? although the most recent Stats says he's sired 16 and none of them are Named "Hold that smile".... But Just the same...

He won 4 times from 10 starts... 9 of 10 ITM ... Won a Grade 1 in England..... Won Two Grade 3's Grade 1 placed twice.

Was Third to Silver Charm and Swain in the Grade 1 Dubai World Cup. Was Champion Miler in France at age 3...

This one Probably going to been routing soon... or on the Grass.

This one's also a Colt... and his best have been Filly's

From 10 Fillies ... Average Sales Price $54,000
From 6 colts Average sales Price $15,000

His Mare... Smiling and Speedy.... Her Sire was Hello Georgous who was a Mr. Prospector Foal.... So that's where He may be able to work with 6 Furlongs.... She herself was unraced

Mare record says she Studded to Loup Savage in 2001. She had a Foal Die at Birth in 2000.... Before that was inactive for 4 years or so,,,, here's her Production


Produce Record:
1989 Dancehall Gal, f. by Yukon. Placed at 3, $915.
1990 Miracle Line, f. by Bounding Basque. 10 wins, 2 to 4 in NA, $73,763; At
6 Sent To Jamaica.
1991 Unnamed dk B/, c, by Trapp Mountain.
1992 Speedy Hope, c. by Moment Of Hope. 14 wins, 3 to 7, $68,441.
1993 INLET CREEK, f. by Tricky Creek. 5 wins at 4 and 5, $113,970, Vineland
Handicap [L] (GS, $30,000).
1994 no report.
1995 no report.
1996 no report.
1997 no report.
1998 no report.
1999 no report.
2000 Unnamed ch, c, by Loup Sauvage.
2002 Unnamed, b., c. by Doneraile Court


attractive mare by Hello Gorgeous is a producer of 3 winners of 4 to race including INLET CREEK stakes winner of $113,970. Exported out of the country from 94 thru 99. She has a Loup Sauvage 2 yr. old and a 2002 foal, born 3/10/02, by the good Seattle Slew miler DONERAILE COURT. DONERAILE COURT is one of two Kentucky based stallions who won graded stakes at two and three, the other is A.P.INDY. DONERAILE COURT was a front running miler with early speed. He had beyers of 107, and could sprint 7 furlongs in 1:21 4/5. He ran a mile at Belmont in 1:33, and was a $1,000,000. summer yearling. His 2001 in-foal average was $28,700. An extremely nice stakes producer in foal to a hot young sire.

[takeout]

CJ,

Where did you see that, in the print edition?

[cj]

It shows up in the Formulator editions.

CJ

[takeout]

Hmmm... I guess it's probably unique to Formulator, although I haven't seen a print edition.

[WINMANWIN]

CJ, I have the print edition from news stand and it
doesn't have the 92 or 1994 race like formulator does.
I sent drf an E-mail, But I doubt they will even say tks.
Hold that Smile was 1 of my many losers today. :mad:

P.S. What nice info.... SUFF..... You the stat man
You My pedigree man. Just wish I keyed your 1ster last nite at Sam, Nice longshot, and huge exacta..... Big CASHOLA !

[Marc At DRF]

Ugh. All apologies.

It has to do with the way the data is processed here (very cutting edge... for 1994 or so).

I've said this before, and I'll say it again: When database re-engineering is complete this summer, mistakes like this will be a thing of the past. They just won't be possible anymore...

For now, we rely on human QA to catch these things when they do pop up-- and they almost always do catch them in print editions, but once in a while they slip through on Formulator.

Not that this is any sort of defense, but the PP was accurate for the 1 start the horse has indeed run-- the one shown from mid-feb. Everything before that, obviously, is bad news...

Again, all apologies.

[cj]

Thanks again Marc, isn't really that big a deal, it was obvious they didn't belong there.

CJ

[Tom]

Speaking of DRF.....
Anyone get a copy of Sim Weekly for last week? Mine never came and they never got them in the only store around here that sells them. I would like know if I missed it or it was late - calling DRF customer service is always an infuriating experience I try to avoid.

[Dave Schwartz]

Tom,

Generally we order the Simulcast Weeklies in bunches and we have found the customer support to be most helpful. Perhaps give them another try.

Dave

[cj]

Originally posted by Tom
Speaking of DRF.....
Anyone get a copy of Sim Weekly for last week? Mine never came and they never got them in the only store around here that sells them. I would like know if I missed it or it was late - calling DRF customer service is always an infuriating experience I try to avoid.

Tom,

I got mine at the same store I usually do, but it did come in late Friday due to the weather. Still faster than when I lived in Wyoming and had to rely in the old USPS!

If you have trouble getting it, email me your address and I'll send ya one.

CJ

[Suff]

Originally posted by Marc At DRF
Ugh. All apologies.

It has to do with the way the data is processed here (very cutting edge... for 1994 or so).


Again, all apologies.

Hi Marc... Would or could you check on one more and see what you come up with...

3rd race... NY State Bred race on 2-19-03

"DOn't Know why"... DRF had it as a Kentucky Bred... Bred at Hermitage Farms in Kentucy. I was curious about this.. so I called Dan Mallory the Consigner..He was in Kentucky.. and with the storms down there.. he had no computer.. but off the top ofhis head he said he was pretty sure the Horse was Bred at Hermitage by Carl Polard in Kentucky. ... Neither her Dam or Sire was NY bred.... I'm really curious how she was entered in this race...

her sire was Party Manners and Dam was "Con-play"

I went so far as to call fasig-tipton... they said the Registration Papers were Stamped NYBRED... DRF had her listed as Ky Bred.

Could you check on that?

Thanks

SUFF

[Marc At DRF]

Suff,

The breeder info was indeed wrong. There's a Hermitage division in NY as well, and that's what it should have read.

Database re-engineering, counting down the days 'til completion...

[Suff]

Thanks for taking the time to look into it. and your prompt reply.

SUFF

[Derek2U]

SuFF ... why are you bombarding Marc with all this detail?
U wanna see him in the witness protection program? Face it,
the DRF should still be the flagship, after all, who really cares
about Equibase? What really bothers me is this: Why isn't
Equi-DRF more generous with its data? If I want last season's
PPs for the Monmouth season, why can't I get them for a fee?
A CD appears & presto, I got instant data. Some Day, in some
way, a competitor will appear & the way law goes, they will
miss out. There will be some alternative to getting this data even
though I dont know How right now. But if "they" really want
to reach mass market appeal, they should tease new fans
with the basic information --- its data.

[takeout]

Originally posted by Derek2U
Face it, the DRF should still be the flagship, after all, who really cares about Equibase?

Uh, all of the resellers? :)

BRIS and ITS both archive. ITS has Equibase files and BRIS has DRF files. BRIS also has an irksome $20 minimum.

IMO, the most ridiculous thing that is going on in the PP industry, and has been for over a decade now, is the fact that there are both EQ & DRF files out there. How can you have two different sources for files when you only have one data collector?

[WINMANWIN]

Originally posted by takeout
Uh, all of the resellers? :)

BRIS and ITS both archive. ITS has Equibase files and BRIS has DRF files. BRIS also has an irksome $20 minimum.

IMO, the most ridiculous thing that is going on in the PP industry, and has been for over a decade now, is the fact that there are both EQ & DRF files out there. How can you have two different sources for files when you only have one data collector?

Someone on this board stated that some yrs ago, The resellers all
agreed that Equibase would be the only source of
throurbred horse racing. I was under the assumption that this was correct. Marc can you clarify if possible tks........:confused:

[Marc At DRF]

Hi guys,

Various responses:

"U wanna see him in the witness protection program?"

When I came to the DRF 30-some months ago, one of the things we (me and my employers) agreed was that the reputation of the Form, both on sites that discuss handicapping/racing and amongst DRF's customers in general, was not nearly as positive as it should be, given that from the executive level on down there's a genuine enthusiasm here for making life better for horseplayers. So it was agreed that we should try to turn that around, at least partially by being much, much better communicators with our customers. Truth be told, our outsourced customer service division will rarely have the wherewithall to answer the sort of questions typical of Paceadvantage contributors, but that's why I'm here. And I am always trying to have our customers/users better understand where we're coming from-- and part of it is acknowledging that we're not perfect. In other words, I won't have to enter witness protection anytime soon!


"and has been for over a decade now, is the fact that there are both EQ & DRF files out there. How can you have two different sources for files when you only have one data collector?"

This hasn't been going on for a decade. Since '98 or '99, I think. Anyway, we've both in the business of selling this data, so we both continue to be. That's the short answer, at least.

"Someone on this board stated that some yrs ago, The resellers all agreed that Equibase would be the only source of
throurbred horse racing. I was under the assumption that this was correct. Marc can you clarify if possible tks........ "

Equibase and DRF merged data gathering operations a few years ago, and they now feed the data to us, yes.

"Why isn't
Equi-DRF more generous with its data? If I want last season's
PPs for the Monmouth season, why can't I get them for a fee?"

1) Archived data, I believe that will be easier once the database is re-engineered, I'll check on it.
2) I believe the size of this market (miniscule) is part of the reason we have not developed the products to service it, so far.

Slightly related: There was an interesting discussion elsewhere on this board about handicapping via PDAs... With the sentiment expressed that this was a great idea and the industry should be much farther along on this. IMO, the market for this is way too small right now to compel the industry to move forward on this. And I don't think current PDA hardware gels with horseplayer needs well at all.

I guess what I'm getting at is: If you wonder why a product doesn't exist, more often than you might think, the product may have been considered but the market is just too small to make it a good way for an industry to spend its time and money...

[takeout]

Originally posted by Marc At DRF
This hasn't been going on for a decade. Since '98 or '99, I think. Anyway, we've both in the business of selling this data, so we both continue to be. That's the short answer, at least.

Equibase and DRF merged data gathering operations a few years ago, and they now feed the data to us, yes.

They feed the data to everyone else too. So why does DRF claim them as their files when no one else does - or can?

Granted, DRF's current ownership has only owned it since '98 but this two different file mess has been going on since Equibase's inception in '91.

DRF's company history
http://www.drf.com/about/about_history.html

EQ's company history
http://www.equibase.com/about/history.cfm

I'm also confused as to the merging of the data gathering operations between the two companies. EQ says in their company history that they employ approximately 90 chartcallers across North America. To the best of my knowledge, although I'm sure that many of these used to be DRF employees, DRF now employs none. What is constituting DRF's part in the data gathering operations?

[Marc At DRF]

"They feed the data to everyone else too. So why does DRF claim them as their files when no one else does - or can?"

Because we used to sell them on our own, and as part of the agreement to merge data gathering operations, we continue to sell them with our name on them, since so many of the same people are involved with the data gathering. As far as I know (head of operations is on vacation this week), there is no difference between Equibase and DRf data files.

"Granted, DRF's current ownership has only owned it since '98 but this two different file mess has been going on since Equibase's inception in '91."

From '91 until the merger in data gathering operations, these were two different sets of files. They're not anymore.

"What is constituting DRF's part in the data gathering operations?"

This was a merger of operations, so many of the people who chart-called for DRF remain involved, as I mentioned.

[WINMANWIN]

Mark, Tks for your sound input. Now for the $64 k question.
How come some BLINKER changes are not noted changes
on some horses, and published in the drf or bris, but other cappers have told me, The changes were present on track programs or other racing data.obviously they are not late changes
because the track announcer or change board doesn't have the info. Tks for the info ! As the past 3 mths or so, I have seen this
happen at Aque often, and it has cost me so cashola, not having the blinker ON/ OFF CHANGES !:mad:

[cj]

I hope I'm not butting in for Marc, but I think the answer is that this information is provided by the racetracks. DRF can only report what is given to them. If the tracks don't issue the info til the day before or day of the race, that's how it shows up in the program and not in the DRF.

CJ

[WINMANWIN]

Originally posted by cjmilkowski
I hope I'm not butting in for Marc, but I think the answer is that this information is provided by the racetracks. DRF can only report what is given to them. If the tracks don't issue the info til the day before or day of the race, that's how it shows up in the program and not in the DRF.

CJ
Yes CJ, good point, I can understand Late equipment changes being in the track program, and not published in the drf or bris,
Do to late changes, But I have discussed this on the board,
The blinker changes were noted sometimes in the track program and sometimes not. But, The question really is, Some players have ITS data or htw figs or whatever they use.How come they reported the blinker ON OR OFF,ON THE HORSES IN approx 6 races over 2 mths and DRF AND BRIS didn't have the BLINKER CHANGES ?:confused:

[BillW]

WINMANWIN,

Probably has to do when the distributers get the data. I know for instance, Bris files come out before the ML (and get refreshed after ML is available indicating differing degrees of currency in DRF files based on when data is obtained) and TSN (same company) always has the ML. Look at when Bris files are available vs. ITS. maybe the solution is that Bris get their data later resulting in a more up-to-date file.

Bill

[Aussieplayer]

Question:

Have I read things correctly?

If you want a db of (say) all races run in the US for the past (say) 4 or 5 years (or 10 years!), you cannot purchase this???

Weird!!!

AP

[BillW]

Originally posted by Aussieplayer
Question:

Have I read things correctly?

If you want a db of (say) all races run in the US for the past (say) 4 or 5 years (or 10 years!), you cannot purchase this???

Weird!!!

AP

I don't believe so directly from DRF. Bris has an archive of files at full list price ($1.00/card, $0.25/Results file). Pretty expensive, but can be done.

Bill

[takeout]

Originally posted by Marc AtDRF
As far as I know (head of operations is on vacation this week), there is no difference between Equibase and DRf data files.
The two files are different insofar as many of the trainer names are concerned. We had a thread on that not too long ago. Set up a program by trainer names, use both EQ & DRF files, and you've got a helluva mess. One learns the hard way in this situation that he has to decide on one type of file or the other, either BRIS/DRF or virtually anyone else.

The class designation in the horses' PPs for [nonwinners of so many in so many months] is all lumped into a year in the DRF files as opposed to being what they really are in the EQ files.

DRF is getting the same data from EQ like everyone else so why these kinds of differences? I don't care what any of the resellers want call their files as long as I can trust that the basic data will be the same amongst all of them. And it is, except for DRF/BRIS. Will this situation ever be remedied? Please tell me that the database being "re-engineered" means that DRF and EQ will finally be on the same page when it comes to things like the differences described.

[takeout]

Originally posted by BillW
I don't believe so directly from DRF. Bris has an archive of files at full list price ($1.00/card, $0.25/Results file). Pretty expensive, but can be done.

And don't forget that the BRIS/DRF files that were never gotten because of the September 11th terrorists attacks will not be there. You would have to buy those days from someone that archives and uses Equibase data instead of DRF data because DRF never replaced them after they got up and running again. So, since BRIS uses DRF data, they never got them. How's that for a house of cards?

Talk about weird. You've got BRIS archiving files from a company that it can't go back to and get file replacements from (if needed) after the fact. Scary isn't it? This type of thing offers a little more insight into why TSN may have been created. Trouble is, they don't archive either.

The one that should be archiving is EQ. They are the data source. Strange business isn't it?

[BillW]

takeout,

which files are you missing?

Bill

[takeout]

BillW,

September 13th, 14th & 15th of 2001

[takeout]

Originally posted by BillW
Look at when Bris files are available vs. ITS. maybe the solution is that Bris get their data later resulting in a more up-to-date file.

I think the solution is that DRF & BRIS (BRIS being guilty by association) quit screwing with the basic data that they get from EQ. None of the other resellers change it like that.

EQ has been the only data source now for a l-o-n-g time (years) and this continuing charade of DRF's (implying that they actually have anything to do with data collection by having files sold only by them and BRIS labeled as being made with "DRF data") is a complete farce. Hell, they even state it on the inside of the first page of their print product and have for many years now:

"All entries, results, charts and related information provided by EQUIBASE company"

Who cares about Equibase? DRF and all of the other resellers. Without EQ they would all be out of business.

So, my original question stands. Why is there an EQ versus DRF file?

I know it sounds like I'm bashing DRF but I'm not really. It's one of those "if the shoe fits" things. I could care less about their success or failure and I'm not tied to the industry in any way. What irks me is that the deception seems intentional and ultimately it's the customer who pays the price as usual. This EQ-file versus DRF-file "thing" has already cost me a boatload of time as well as some dollars and I hold EQ no less responsible for this ridiculous charade on the PP buying public. Obviously EQ had to sign off on this insanity or DRF wouldn't be able to get away with this flimflam.

At a little after 3PM today (Sunday) I saw files at TSN and ITS that were already up for tracks running Wednesday night cards. Heck, Lrl is already up for Thursday! Evidently it's a lot faster to get an EQ file from EQ resellers than it is to get an EQ file from the DRF & BRIS resellers. As I say, I also blame EQ heavily for this nonsense. How else could DRF copyright result charts that it doesn't even make?

EQ and DRF should get a divorce as soon as possible. It was a bad marriage to begin with and now the kids are grown so it's time to stop the act. DRF is obviously out of the data loop and has been for ages.

EQ was started for the express reason of having a database that was industry-owned and out of the hands of third party companies that may not have racing's interest as their top priority. This objective will not be met as long as DRF is any part of the EQ equation.