Must see this chart : Hawthorne Today : Can't recall anything better

[BeatTheChalk]

http://www.brisnet.com/cgi-bin/instant_pdf.cgi?type=inc&country=USA&track=HAW&date=2009-04-20&race=9
:ThmbUp: :cool: :kiss:
I did get a kick out of the " 3/4 " of a length accuracy :bang: :lol:

[andicap]

The horse won by 32 and 3/4 lengths?
Not 32 1/2. Not 33. Wow, the chart-caller must have spent hours going over the replay to get that kind of accuracy.

:D

[Red Knave]

Do they not use the replay to get the time it takes for the next horse to cross the finish line and then use the old standard 1/5 of a second per length? I have seen replay film as the horses go past the mirror that also shows the passing fractions of a second. If the timer is in hundredths and the hundredths are visible on the tape, then if the second horse is, say, 6.55 seconds behind the winner, you get 6.55 * 5 = 32.75 lengths.
The inaccurate part, many say, is the 5 lengths per second.

[jballscalls]

there is an old story about the chart caller who called secretariats race and said when he hit the wire "Secretariat 30 lengths, wait, make that 31" right on the money!!

[startngate]

Do they not use the replay to get the time it takes for the next horse to cross the finish line and then use the old standard 1/5 of a second per length? I have seen replay film as the horses go past the mirror that also shows the passing fractions of a second. If the timer is in hundredths and the hundredths are visible on the tape, then if the second horse is, say, 6.55 seconds behind the winner, you get 6.55 * 5 = 32.75 lengths.
The inaccurate part, many say, is the 5 lengths per second.Actually, the chart caller doesn't determine finish lenghts at all. They get them from the photo finish operator. Nearly everywhere it's now done with computer video capture as opposed to film, but the principle is the same.

[DJofSD]

And 3rd place beat out the 4th place horse by 24 lengths!

The jocks on the last two runners must have stopped at Starbucks for some coffee.

[Steve 'StatMan']

Off the turf, in the mud, turf racing at Arlinton in a couple two-three weeks when their next turf start might be, pretty much a Stagger Derby after the winner. Secertariat Belmont-Like winning margin, Secretariat Belmont-Like field size (5), but more like Secretary Ack race vs Ack Cough Wheeze and Ahphooey Newtime by the end.

[Spectacular Sid]

Only are the internal points of call estimated by a chart caller. You'd think there would be a better system after all these years.

[BillW]

Do they not use the replay to get the time it takes for the next horse to cross the finish line and then use the old standard 1/5 of a second per length? I have seen replay film as the horses go past the mirror that also shows the passing fractions of a second. If the timer is in hundredths and the hundredths are visible on the tape, then if the second horse is, say, 6.55 seconds behind the winner, you get 6.55 * 5 = 32.75 lengths.
The inaccurate part, many say, is the 5 lengths per second.

The system I've seen they simply scroll along the photo and touch the nose of each horse with a stylus (light pen?). The program then prompts the operator for the saddle cloth number. In the end it spits out a finish report that is passed on to the chartcaller. I remember that the user could specify the number of feet that made up a length - they were using 10 on the system that I saw.