The RMS Rating

[rmania]

What is it?
It is a modified speed rating that incorporates distance, track variant and class.

What is it used for?
It servers as a numerical ranking of the effort displayed by the horse in a given race. And much like a speed rating a single point in difference represents 1 length.

How useful is it?
In most cases, a comparison of the two most recent RMS Ratings WILL provide an accurate estimate as to how a horse will perform in today’s race.

[Kappa]

And it's available at ......

[rmania]

Originally posted by Kappa
And it's available at ......
The RMS Rating has been incorporated into the VirtualView handicapping function of RaceMaker.
In order to utilize this rating (with the method I earlier described) I have also add a fully integrated handicapping screen and a utility called Cap-u-lator which can be used to conduct the rating comparisons.

[Dave Schwartz]

And this commercial message is brought to you by...

[JustRalph]

Originally posted by rmania
In most cases, a comparison of the two most recent RMS Ratings WILL provide an accurate estimate as to how a horse will perform in today’s race.

and why couldn't I do that with a Beyer rating? or similar?

Sounds the same as if I combined the two most recent Beyer figs and averaged it ? Just a thought

[freeneasy]

Cap-u-lator, and it makes coffee too!:D

[rmania]

Originally posted by JustRalph
and why couldn't I do that with a Beyer rating? or similar?

Sounds the same as if I combined the two most recent Beyer figs and averaged it ? Just a thought
If you’ve tried this then you can probably answer the question yourself.

If this method consistently finds the contenders then, by all means, use it.

However, as well known as this method is, I guess my question would have to be - why do betting favorites STILL only win around 30% of the time? Seems as though the percentage should have shot up when Beyer figs hit the scene.

[PaceAdvantage]

rmania,

I will remind you of the user agreement you agreed to when you registered for this board:


Registration to this forum is free! We do insist that you abide by the rules and policies detailed below. If you agree to the terms, please press the Agree button at the end of the page..

Although the administrators and moderators of PaceAdvantage.Com will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this forum, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of PaceAdvantage.Com or Jelsoft Enterprises Limited (developers of vBulletin) will be held responsible for the content of any message.

By clicking the Agree button, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-orientated, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

Unpaid advertising of any kind is not allowed on the message boards without PRIOR consent. By clicking the Agree button, you warrant that you will not post any advertising for any third-party commercial ventures, without the express written consent of PaceAdvantage.Com.

The owners of PaceAdvantage.Com have the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.




==PA

[rmania]

PA

I agree that I violated my agreement when I posted the link to the (now considered) commercial product. And for that I apologize.

As for any discussion I might encourage, is this considered advertising?

As you well know this forum is full of discussions pertaining to commercially available software. Fortunately for the developers of these products (most of which are members) they have other means for getting their message heard.

[PaceAdvantage]

Encouraging a discussion by starting a thread about a proprietary figure contained within your software (and not STATING in the note that you are the owner and seller of this software) is very disingenuous in my opinion.

Nobdody, except for you and your customers, knows what RMS rating stands for. It will beg the questions that will lead to you stating it's a figure in your software.

I will be setting up a vendor's section in the near future. What the rules will be regarding posts in the vendor section are unclear at the moment.

[rmania]

Your point is well taken.

In the furture (or until this other forum materializes) I will check with you ,via the Private Message function, prior to starting any new threads.

Again I apologize...

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally posted by rmania
I will check with you ,via the Private Message function, prior to starting any new threads.


No need to check with me, unless you are STARTING a thread concerning your software. If you are merely answering a question about your software asked by a fellow board member, that's fine. Can you understand that I am not looking to control anyone's posts, nor am I discouraging discussion about software.

What I am trying to do is limit a vendor's opportunity to promote their software on their own....in other word's, free advertising...

I'm sure someone will bring up that I let Dave Schwartz and Barry Meadow post away, but I challenge them to find a note by Dave or Barry that out of the blue solely promotes anything they are selling. Yes, they may respond to questions about their products, but I doubt seriously you will find them starting threads about their products...


==PA

[Dave Schwartz]

... Except on occasion when we have offered a special sale and then I always check with PA first.

Dave Schwartz

[andicap]

This thread would be helpful if I knew what went into the RMS rating. How is it educational if I don't know how what goes into it besides final time (if, that)?

[Derek2U]

Since 2 weeks ago I now DL from DRF formulator. My dad did all
the programming so it was cheap ... hehe ... Anyways let me just
say that its great & all we've done so far is DL ONLY limited kinds
of data & have our "program" do some pace/speed rankings and
"suggest" the horses that "should" NOT Win. My dad is testing
how well 1/2 the field can be Eliminated. If the Rules CANNOT
Eliminate 1/2 the Field --- and myself/dad CANNOT over-ride by
also indicating a horse or 2 to be Eliminated --- then the program
assumes the race is too tough to call. hehe .... here is some data
to think about .... and beleive me this is NOT post facto anaylsis:
my dad obtained a DB of ~ 85,000 past races & he RANDOMLY
had the puter pick 50 samples each consisting of 100 races. And,
drum roll ---- to sum it all up w/ out boring stats, we can throw
out 1/2 field horses SAFELY in 97/100 races over 50 such samples
randomly drawn!! So, I just want to impart this idea ... don't
hesitate to DL and get a DB and Test your ideas on some limited
basis & don't (try & let) the Puter do all the work cause it cant.
(If any1 is V interested E mail me.) Derek

[keilan]

97/100 races -- half the field can be safely eliminated and you’re asking if people are mildly interested. Now either you have gone completely sideways on me or you been keeping a big dark secret all to yourself.

Quick question how many races are “too tough to call” out of 100.

Now I know you’re pretty good at identifying false favourites but to safely eliminate 97% is a lofty number by anyone’s standards.

I will be following this thread closely in the following months. Uhmmmmmm!

D2u don’t tell me you got something to sell to!

[Derek2U]

The FAV is very often NOT eliminated --- it makes the break-off
rating. Yes, K, u know that I do beleive that capping Must begin
with looking at the FAV & all others say 5:2 or less. I think that
horses who win & pay 5:2 or less REALLY are a different sort
from say 6:1 or more. I dont know the exact cut-off but I think
if you say, GRP1 ($7 or less) vs GRP2 ($8 to 11) vs GRP3 ... etc.
In a way, you should rate each horse on "equations" like ...
the $7.00 or Less Equation; the $8-11/Equation ; the $12-16 ...
etc .... they really are different horses basically.