question for D. Schwartz

[thelyingthief]

Hi:

I would like some clarification on the female adjustment: usually this number is aggregated by alw and claiming, sprint and route. How does this adjustment differ?

Also, you show no adjustment for state breds in Woodbine. Is this a fact?

The track pars for PARX are missing (this is the old philly track, I think).

thanks,
tlt-

[Dave Schwartz]

I would like some clarification on the female adjustment: usually this number is aggregated by alw and claiming, sprint and route. How does this adjustment differ?

It is a blanket female adjustment.

In a perfect world, I would simply build pars for every single class. That was actually my goal several years ago, then I woke up.

If I did that, the book would be 1,200 pages (instead of about 175), it would cost us about $80 per book to print, and another $35+ to ship. It just is not feasible.

Our "track" par is for male claimers, older, $10,000. In the class book, all of the pars are designed to be for male races at the specific class levels, even though the track might not actually run that level for males! The female adjustments are adjustments to THAT par, as are the statebred, N2L and N3L adjustments.

It is the best compromise of accuracy and practicality I could come up with.


Also, you show no adjustment for state breds in Woodbine. Is this a fact?

I will revisit this but as I recall, the statbred races at WO are also conditioned in another way as well. (I could be wrong, but that is what I recall.)

In other words, in order to determine what the "statebred" adjustment is I must have a group of male, open races to compare to. In addition, the statebred races without restriction (including females). So, imagine if the only statebred races I have also have other conditions such as NW of a race at this distance in this time period. As I recall, the statebred races also carry other conditions which makes it impossible to isolate the value of the statebred adjustment.



The track pars for PARX are missing (this is the old philly track, I think).

Since my software only recognizes 3-character track codes, I stuck with the "PHA" code and assumed (apparently incorrectly) that everyone would realize that. Also, "OSA" is still lumped with "SA."

Widening the "track code" field would create print problems and I did not think it was worth it for one occurrence.

While I will continue to use only 3 characters, the OSA vs SA will change in the future as I breakdown more meeting-by-meeting.


Regards,
Dave Schwartz

[thelyingthief]

thanks for the reply,

tlt-