Pick the Winner in this Photo Finish

[Dan H]

http://hollywoodpark.com/images/812.jpg

[garyscpa]

I voted the 1, but only because it looked like his head might still be going down. The 4's head might be coming up.

[RichieP]

Inside horse - looks kinda clear from here :liar:

[Bennie]

My guess would definitely be the 1 horse. Jock is "riding" while the other is one hand riding with whip in hand, probably tiring horse with the 1 horse coming hard. Also the 1 is in full stide while the inside horse has shorter stride.

[andymays]

Outside.

Hollywood had a big problem last year with a race where the camera snapped the shot before they hit the line (It was a Machowsky runner involved on the turf I think). It was a big controversy for about a week. At first glance that looks like what happened here and it may have but I'm guessing outside.

[startngate]

Difficult call from this pic, but the outside horse looks to be on the wire and the inside horse is not.

What makes it more difficult to see in this case is that the image is a JPG file, which means it has been compressed. This alters the image and can make it more difficult to evaluate the result on very close calls.

However, placing judges see the original un-compressed image on a high-res monitor to make their decisions, and likely it would be much easier to tell from that.

Looking at a screen capture from a video would be even worse, but based on the source of the pic, I'd guess it came from the photo finish system, and not from the video feed.

[phatbastard]

looks like :1: was on wire

[startngate]

Outside.

Hollywood had a big problem last year with a race where the camera snapped the shot before they hit the line (It was a Machowsky runner involved on the turf I think). It was a big controversy for about a week. At first glance that looks like what happened here and it may have but I'm guessing outside.
Photo finish camera do not 'snap a shot'. They do not operate like a 'normal' camera.

They are set up on the finish line and the shutter is opened up and stays open for the entire field to pass and then closed. What they do is record every horse passing a single point (the finish line) as they acutally pass that point. The film (or in this case the computer) runs at approximately the same speed as the horses are running, so each horse gets laid down on the image relative to each other as they pass the wire.

There are only two ways that for what you described to have actually occurred.

When evaluating a photo, the placing judges (or the photo finish operator) move the film (or computer image) through a stationary (and square to the image) line which represents the finish line. If they don't actually line up each horse's nose properly on that line there could in theory be an error. I can tell you on close photos there is a lot of care given to this process.

If the photo finish camera was not installed properly 'on the wire'. The camera would still have been accurate as to determining the order of finish at the point it was aimed, it just would not have been the 'true' finish line.

[andymays]

Photo finish camera do not 'snap a shot'. They do not operate like a 'normal' camera.

They are set up on the finish line and the shutter is opened up and stays open for the entire field to pass and then closed. What they do is record every horse passing a single point (the finish line) as they acutally pass that point. The film (or in this case the computer) runs at approximately the same speed as the horses are running, so each horse gets laid down on the image relative to each other as they pass the wire.

There are only two ways that for what you described to have actually occurred.

When evaluating a photo, the placing judges (or the photo finish operator) move the film (or computer image) through a stationary (and square to the image) line which represents the finish line. If they don't actually line up each horse's nose properly on that line there could in theory be an error. I can tell you on close photos there is a lot of care given to this process.

If the photo finish camera was not installed properly 'on the wire'. The camera would still have been accurate as to determining the order of finish at the point it was aimed, it just would not have been the 'true' finish line.


I know all that startngate and I appreciate the breakdown. You may want to search for aricles on the incident last year. It was a big controversy and I believe Mike Machowsky officially contested the photo. It was an unusual occurrence that nobody had seen before. It was also at Hollywood park and they put up photo's and took them down several times on their website after the complaints.

Thanks

[Zman179]

I voted for the 1 and my wife did the same. The 1 horse's nostrils are flared up and that's what made the difference.

[Bochall]

I didnt have a bet on this race so who won the photo is of no consequence to me...i dont care.

[Show Me the Wire]

I know the 1 was declared the winner. To me it looks like the photo is before the wire and neither horse touches the wire.

Frank Miramandi (sp) thought Talamo on the inside horse won, before posting of the results by the placing judges.

[A. Pineda]

Although the :1: was declared the winner, these old eyes see space between both noses before the wire, so it's a dead-heat for me.

[Greyfox]

I'd say :1: .
My problem with photos of this nature is that there is no background reference points. How do you know where this photo was taken and where the line was drawn? I've seen several instances this year when on the simulcast a horse wins by a significant amount and the photo says otherwise.

[Track Collector]

I didnt have a bet on this race so who won the photo is of no consequence to me...i dont care.

But you DID care enough to post on this thread. :confused: And if you choose to respond to this post, we will know you cared enough to continue following this thread too. :confused: Perhaps you care more than you think. :)

BTW, I agree with those other posters who believe that NEITHER horse has reached the finish line in the photo.

[cj]

The technology is very outdated. It could be replaced if racing wasn't so deep in crap they could spend a little money. The Photo Finish camera is probably way, way down on the list of things that need fixing though. We have many larger problems.

[saratoga guy]

My problem with photos of this nature is that there is no background reference points. How do you know where this photo was taken and where the line was drawn?

As startngate pointed out -- a photo finish photo is quite different from a still photo.

A photo finish photo looks at a location over time. EVERYTHING you see in that picture is on the finish line -- as odds as that seems.

The photo finish camera points -- very precisely -- at the finish line, and the film moves along at the speed of the horses (in the digital age it's a little different of course, but the principal is the same).

It can be a hard concept to grasp -- but EVERYTHING you see in that photo above is precisely on the finish line. What makes it different from a normal still photograph is that things on the right side of the photo are "older" than things on the left. The picture is showing a place -- the finish line -- over time (albeit a very brief time).

The stewards/placing judges move the white line until it hits the first nose -- and that's your winner (or a dead-heat if both noses touch the line).

(And to me, above, the #1 is the clear winner.)

Hollywood had a big problem last year with a race where the camera snapped the shot before they hit the line

Actually the Machowsky photo was kind of a non-issue that related to just what I noted above -- that a photo finish picture is different from a normal still picture and it's a hard concept to grasp -- even for trainers!

That situation involved the finish line in the photo being placed a nudge further to the left than it should have been. The trainer then misinterpreted that.

http://www.drf.com/news/article/100392.html

[wisconsin]

BTW, I agree with those other posters who believe that NEITHER horse has reached the finish line in the photo.


But you must understand that there is no finish line in a photo. In days of old, the judge would "draw" a line in, and now it's electronically added. Picture using a T-square to mark a line on the nose furthest in front at the time of photo.

[johnhannibalsmith]

The photo that is provided is not necessarily the image that the judges used to place the horse.

As was pointed out, the camera takes thousands of images per second at a stationary target, essentially the plane along which the mirror lies, which ought to be the wire.

That image is captured in its entirety on a high-res computer screen which can be magnified to such a degree that under normal circumstances, you could tell what color eyes the jock has through a set of goggles.

The person that creates the image that the public views is charged with doing several things in producing an image, one of which is to create an image that gives the best overall picture in terms of relativity.

That person is also usually supposed to be somewhat "artistic", insofar that they are expected to produce a picture that not only demonstrates the relative positions, but does so in an aesthetically pleasing manner. Clearly, this is not the priority if the two are mutually exclusive, so ordinarily in a case like this - one would choose to provide a photo like the one seen above and then hopefully, a more magnified photo of the same two so that there is no doubt that the magnified version is in fact the same image as the one seen at "less magnification".

The photo finish camera, unless it has been somehow tampered with, which is unlikely to say the least since most are stabilized to precision - is as close to infallible as it gets. The margin for error generally lies with those that read the image, but it is fairly difficult to misread an image with the incredible technology at one's hands.

Mistakes do happen, I'm sure - but the old stories about blown photos are a thing of the past with what is used today.

One of my favorite things to do is to invite people - bettors, horsemen, whoever - to watch a race upstairs and view the mechanics of the photo finish camera and the placings. The most grizzled veteran is amazed the first time that he/she sees it in action and usually will join the alliance of those that have faith in the camera and the computer.

The camera uses software that creates images that I can't view without the actual software, otherwise I would provide an example of a "race". That is what you see when you look at the image - the entire race on a lateral slide, with every horse's relative position and a perpendicular line that can be placed anywhere on the overall image created - but remember - the actual "photo" is only being taken on a straight plane to the wire.

It is a somewhat difficult concept to visualize if you can't see it so imagine the following:

You sit on the side of the highway and press a button on a camera that takes thousandes of images per second and shoot straight ahead without changing the focus of your shot (constant shot). You then take all of the 100,000 photos snapped in a matter of seconds and lay them side by side, overlapping the redundant portions to create a solid "panoramic-style" image.

You have taken a picture of the same spot over and over again - only the cars have changed position, but when you put it together - it appears as one fluid image and relative positioning is absolute.

For the record - the one looks a clear winner to me - but I trust fully well that the image was enlarged and the line was placed directly on the tip of the one's nose and the green can clearly be seen between the nose of the rail horse and the line. :)

[saratoga guy]

The technology is very outdated. It could be replaced if racing wasn't so deep in crap they could spend a little money. The Photo Finish camera is probably way, way down on the list of things that need fixing though. We have many larger problems.

Actually I'd argue that photo finish technology is something that works pretty well in racing...

[tzipi]

If you look clearly at noses. The outside horse def has it.

[gm10]

Look at this photo finish from Britain today.
The champion jumper Kauto Star made his seasonal debut (he won the photo).

Btw, you can bet on the results of a photo-finish on Betfair ... Kauto was 2/1.

http://www.racingpost.com/horses/home.sd?story=655684&ac=standard&todT_id=1258830854.6274

[joanied]

I voted dead heat...neither horse has his nose on the wire...but, considering the replies that explain the photo resolution ect....if I had to pick one, it'd be the one horse (outside)

[andymays]

As startngate pointed out -- a photo finish photo is quite different from a still photo.

A photo finish photo looks at a location over time. EVERYTHING you see in that picture is on the finish line -- as odds as that seems.

The photo finish camera points -- very precisely -- at the finish line, and the film moves along at the speed of the horses (in the digital age it's a little different of course, but the principal is the same).

It can be a hard concept to grasp -- but EVERYTHING you see in that photo above is precisely on the finish line. What makes it different from a normal still photograph is that things on the right side of the photo are "older" than things on the left. The picture is showing a place -- the finish line -- over time (albeit a very brief time).

The stewards/placing judges move the white line until it hits the first nose -- and that's your winner (or a dead-heat if both noses touch the line).

(And to me, above, the #1 is the clear winner.)



Actually the Machowsky photo was kind of a non-issue that related to just what I noted above -- that a photo finish picture is different from a normal still picture and it's a hard concept to grasp -- even for trainers!

That situation involved the finish line in the photo being placed a nudge further to the left than it should have been. The trainer then misinterpreted that.

http://www.drf.com/news/article/100392.html


Thanks for the link. It was a big deal when it happened and now that I read the article the other deal was that Talamos' mount was not dq'd but he still got days.

[wisconsin]

I don't know where to find a link or if one even exists, but when Gato Del Sol won the Derby, Sports Illustrated had the entire film "strip" image from the photo finish camera in the story across two pages.

[wisconsin]

One more thing to remember, is the mirror is not always at the actual finish line. When people around me always say so and so "got to the wire", I always remind them it's where the mirror is, not the pole. Some mirrors are actually before or after the pole, like Churchill. The last track I know of that had an actual wire at the finish was Tampa Bay Downs. I don't think anyone has one anymore.

The photo finish eye only reacts to moving objects, which is why a line is drawn on, as opposed to a photo of the old school wire.

[juanepstein]

:1: has him beat by a half an inch.

[Greyfox]

I'll take everyone's word for it, but it seems to me that in a digital age it can't be that hard to make the outside horse win or lose.

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01107/viewed_bauer_1107055c.jpg.

[kenwoodallpromos]

1 won. \If that was the Qarters, no needf to 2nd guess- results are posted in decimal time, not "a nose".

[juanepstein]

I'll take everyone's word for it, but it seems to me that in a digital age it can't be that hard to make the outside horse win or lose.

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01107/viewed_bauer_1107055c.jpg.

thats last years melbourne cup. i had my money on the grey BAUER trained by lucani and ridden by corey brown.heartbreaker! but glad he and i nailed it this year.:ThmbUp:

[BlueShoe]

Besides the close photo,there is a bit more on the #4,Turbulence.When the TVG hosts mentioned that he was a first starter that was being bet,did a little checking,and sure enough,he was 5-1 on the ML and eventually went off the 2-1 favorite.A check of the pools at 5 and 2 minutes before post showed an out of line pool ratio,although they did fill very late as usually happens.All this means is that this runner was heavily bet,most likely by his people,as he was a first starter.Broke real bad and steadied,and would have been much the best with a good trip.Tough,tough loss,and there had to have been some big tickets torn up by those that seriously got down on this horse.

[Greyfox]

Several people at the betting parlor that I attend mentioned that race and that photo.
They said "the result and photo was ridiculous, it wasn't even close."
As they saw it, the inside horse clearly won.
I'm just reporting what they said.
I suspect that the starter of this thread might have thought the same.

The photo which was ultimately presented of course shows otherwise.

[PaceAdvantage]

I didnt have a bet on this race so who won the photo is of no consequence to me...i dont care.That's awesome dude...thanks for sharing!

[Stillriledup]

This photo in question i was 100 percent wrong, it didn't look all that close watching the slow mo.

Btw, the Machowsky photo that people were dicussing on here is from a race on Dec 4, 2008 at Hollywood. KBELLO beat Gooch's Dream (allegedly).

[bildi66]

This reminds me of the time I was at Arlington and bet $40 to win on All Worked Up, a 9-5 favorite with Pat Day up.



http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-3999521.html



My winning ticket paid about $35, as I recall............. :confused:

[CBedo]

I did have a bet on the race on the 1, and I was worried about Turbulence as he was being bet really heavy early in the betting. In a maiden claimer to see a first timer taking so much action, I guessed he had to be live, and as such, I used him with the 1 both ways in the exacta. He got a terrible start before getting into the race and that may have been the difference in the result. Watching the race, I actually thought he got there, and this is the first time I saw the photo. Wow. Personally, I think the photo is correct and if you closely, you see the top of the 1's nose touching the wire, not the 4's.

For what it's worth (not much), I voted for the 1 before realizing what race it was.

[The_Knight_Sky]

I didn't bet this race but I saw The Sarge of TVG make mention of it on another forum. So I went out and made a poll at my blog. I have already voted but not among the three choices listed here. Pace Advantage experts are urged to vote on this inter-forum poll also.


http://i46.tinypic.com/287dnr6.jpg (http://theknightskyracing.blogspot.com)

http://i49.tinypic.com/vrsy1c.jpg (http://answers.polldaddy.com/poll/2289999/)

Everyone at Pace Advantage votes at the host site or at my blog which allows 1 vote per computer.
Thank you for participating. :)

[Joey D]

The :1: horse's nose is touching the line but the backround is almost a perfect match in color to the tip of the nose which makes it look like there is space in between.

[The_Knight_Sky]

The :1: horse's nose is touching the line but the backround
is almost a perfect match in color to the tip of the nose
which makes it look like there is space in between.




This isn't a question of who was put up by the placing judges,
but what do the fans think of that image presented to the public?

I voted: The race isn't over.

There is brown dirt in the gap between #1's nostril and the wire.
I don't see how anyone can vote that #1 clearly has his nose on the wire.
Because he simply isn't there yet.

Neither of the two horses are shown "clearly" touching the wire.
In the next millisecond the rail horse :4: with Talamo and Turbulence
may very well have been seen touching the wire before the #1.

If they're going to have photo finishes presented to the public
at least provide modern equipment that functions in low light and smoggy conditions.
More than $500,000 was wagered on this race around the country.
Imagine the uproar if the race in question was The Kentucky Derby conducted at night.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Return to pages one and two and brush up on how photo finish works. There is no line that they 'reach'. The picture is always of the horses at the wire and the line is drawn as a reference point to compare the positioning of the horses.

[The_Knight_Sky]

The 1 horse's nostrils are flared up and that's what made the difference.




Yep. that's quite a flare-up on Pinocchio's nose below.
This image was available from another forum.

But seriously with today's night-vision technology we can do better than this.
Can we not? Imagine if this was major race and the public was treated to this particular image with $3 million wagered on the race, heck riots would break out !

No one would make it out of Inglewood alive ! :D

http://i47.tinypic.com/2h64jeg.jpg

[Frank Angst]

It would be great if someone with better searching capabilities than my own could find the photo that circulated on the Internet of Star Dabbler apparently winning the 2006 Indiana Derby in a race that was declared a dead heat. I actually had Cielo Gold in that race so it helped me out but decision appeared to be wrong.
A protest by the connections of Star Dabbler did not produce any change in the DH result.

[The_Knight_Sky]

A protest by the connections of Star Dabbler
did not produce any change in the DH result.



Frank -
I remember watching that race at The Meadowlands.
In fact I was searching for the photo around the web last year but to no avail.
I'll keep an eye out for it still.

JohnhannibalSmith -
I know you mean well and but if anyone is going to draw that perpendicular line, at least make it look like it is incontrovertible and indisputable evidence that the horse's nose is directly on the marked line on the image.

As it stands there's a lot of smudge between that nose and the wire. :ThmbDown:
If the background was green I'd say there's about at least a 1/2 inch left to reach that drawn perpendicular line.
As a result horse racing fans around the web are not sold.
The second choice has almost caught up with the top choice as of late Monday afternoon.

http://i45.tinypic.com/1zb3nkp.jpg

vote now (http://www.theknightskyracing.blogspot.com/)

[saratoga guy]

It would be great if someone with better searching capabilities than my own could find the photo that circulated on the Internet of Star Dabbler apparently winning the 2006 Indiana Derby in a race that was declared a dead heat. I actually had Cielo Gold in that race so it helped me out but decision appeared to be wrong.

The decision wasn't wrong -- the photo that circulated on the internet immediately after the race was a screen capture from video. The poor quality of that image was what prompted the owners to appeal.

http://www.equidaily.com/images/2006/indyphto.jpg

However, the appeal wasn't denied -- it was dropped after Hoosier released the actual photo which was clearer.

http://www.equidaily.com/images/2006/indphtob.jpg

[46zilzal]

No self respecting photo finish camera would send out such a poor quality shot. YOU HAVE to HAVE the line On at least one of the noses. Poor poor quality shot.

Also with digital photos, once you get above 250% magnification, pixels start becoming larger than contours and will negate real differences.

Our contract with the Canadian Parimutuel Agency will not allow any image to leave the local system and I am not allowed to make any prints that could be recognized as coming from any particular race.

[46zilzal]

We use Finish Lynx photo finish equipment and OF COURSE it is designed for all manner or lighting situations.

In daytime, when there are no harsh shadows mixed with bright spots at the edge of the grandstand shadow, the system is set on automatic gain which compensates for clouds and shadows that might crop up in the midst of an exposure. It really is a bitch when those harsh conditions come up because we have to go manually with multiple neutral density filters to account for the 5 to 6 F stops between exposure in the light and dark. These change minute to minute and require changing right up until exposure.

NIGHT shots are the easiest. Once it gets dark, the combination of lights from the track/stands, are CONSTANT and so are our flood light panel that we activate when the field hits the far turn, so exposure race to race is EASIEST at night since WE control all the variables. The only alterantions occur when it is getting dark and while balancing out the yellow tones and adjusting the final image for contrast and gamma are all that are done and once you know the system, these are consistent race to race.

[cmoore]

The :4: Turbulence was a first time starter who broke slow and came a running down the stretch. If the 4 had won, I would of gotten the 10 cents super 4x. Closest photo I've lost..

[Greyfox]

I've just watched the replay at http://www.calracing.com

Vic Stauffer called "Turbulence!#4" maybe in the last jump.
But went on to say that this is extremely close, maybe too close to tell.
Visually I thought # 4 caught the # 1 in the last stride, but once again
if we don't know exactly where the camera takes the photo who knows.
Certainly after the line Turbulence was ahead.

[johnhannibalsmith]

We use Finish Lynx photo finish equipment and OF COURSE it is designed for all manner or lighting situations.

In daytime, when there are no harsh shadows mixed with bright spots at the edge of the grandstand shadow, the system is set on automatic gain which compensates for clouds and shadows that might crop up in the midst of an exposure. It really is a bitch when those harsh conditions come up because we have to go manually with multiple neutral density filters to account for the 5 to 6 F stops between exposure in the light and dark. These change minute to minute and require changing right up until exposure.

NIGHT shots are the easiest. Once it gets dark, the combination of lights from the track/stands, are CONSTANT and so are our flood light panel that we activate when the field hits the far turn, so exposure race to race is EASIEST at night since WE control all the variables. The only alterantions occur when it is getting dark and while balancing out the yellow tones and adjusting the final image for contrast and gamma are all that are done and once you know the system, these are consistent race to race.

Good post... :ThmbUp:

The only flaw with FinishLynx is the AutoGain setting (in my opinion) when the light becomes inconsistent due to fluctuating cloudiness or shadowing that deceives the camera (where it sets as opposed to where it captures).

There's just a brief enough pause in the self-adjustment that in the middle of summer, where the sky goes from ultra-sunny to ultra-cloudy on some days, that I wish I could stick with manual confidently.

I would love it if the manual gain settings were easier to adjust 'on the fly' - as it is, capturing an image mid-race to gauge the lighting and trying to adjust accurately before they approach the finish is often, well, wish-and-a-hopin'.

But overall, it is fantastic software.

[46zilzal]

The only flaw with FinishLynx is the AutoGain setting (in my opinion) when the light becomes inconsistent due to fluctuating cloudiness or shadowing that deceives the camera (where it sets as opposed to where it captures).
.
Never found that a problem since exposure resets over and over as the light changes. You can see the image density changes as vertical lines in the overall image background. The trick is allowing (like standard photography) enough latitude on either side of a theoretical MID RANGE exposure: i.e. I set auto gain at around 60 so the system can vary down to 20 or up to 100 and still capture a good image no matter how much the light changes in a single exposure

With the manual over ride image adjustments and the ability to change those in operator directed horizontal "zones" one can come up with a very respectable image.

[johnhannibalsmith]

I'd be interested in learning more from you - this isn't something that I have to deal with full-time, but it is (just) one of those things that I DO need to be able to do. I actually really enjoy when I have (get) to operate the photo-finish equipment and I try to keep up on the mechanics so I can teach others effectively.

I've always assumed that my problems with auto-gain during erratic sky lighting were due to the fact that the camera set in the shadow, while the capture wasn't in the shadow and the software had difficulty assessing the 'true' lighting or there was a lag-time in the communication from the camera to the software itself.

Admittedly, I've always been a little afraid to tinker with too many of the manual settings on the new Lynx software and I never have had a good bit of documentation to guide me. I appreciate your insight. :ThmbUp:

[Greyfox]

I've said earlier that I have a problem with photo's without back drops.

I've said earlier that in the digital age, who knows what is going on.
Photos, even with backdrops, can be modified.

I've said earlier that even Vic called Turbulence visually, as it appears at
on the replay site I suggested.

This is magnified whenever money is involved and thorougbreds are

Dancing with the Stars.


http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/7/z/O/2/obama-palin-dancing-stars.jpg (http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/z/O/2/obama-palin-dancing-stars.jpg).

I rest my case.

[Greyfox]

The fact is, I "Joe Public" want to see my horse actually beaten at a wire
so that I know it was actually beaten at it.

Showing a bunch of blurry lines in the background, and telling me about the high technology of how the photo was taken with every horse getting a photo at the finish line does zilch to me.

"Show me the money. No show me the finish line!" as I see it when I watch a race. It's just that simple.

Crap on this high tech finish line stuff.

[Show Me the Wire]

Another problem is the angle shown in photo finish pictures. Photos from the same track on the same day have different angles of the finish line. Some are a view from higher9 looking down) and others more horizantal. How can this happen from a camera in a fixed position?

Put me in the camp of I want to see the finish line too.

[46zilzal]

Admittedly, I've always been a little afraid to tinker with too many of the manual settings on the new Lynx software and I never have had a good bit of documentation to guide me. I appreciate your insight.
Finish Lynx has a on line manual at their site.

Being a very old silver based cameraman, I like to tinker with manual settings.

Like this one of Slew O'Gold before the inaugural B.C. Classic

[johnhannibalsmith]

Finish Lynx has a on line manual at their site.

Excellent! Thank you much :ThmbUp:

[maxwell]

That's one iffy photo.

I don't see the #1's nose on the line; it looks like backdrop color. You wouldn't see a horse's nostril flare out like that from a profile angle, that's something you would see in a 3/4 angle.

I could say it's a dead-heat. Or I could say I really don't care. :D