Quote:
Originally Posted by thaskalos
My goal since I first started playing this game has been to try and "understand" it as thoroughly as I possibly can. I figured that if my understanding of this game became complete enough...then the profits would also have to come along, as a reasonable side-effect. The speed/pace figures might not be the complete answer to the puzzle of this game...but they provide a level of understanding without which the game can't be properly comprehended, IMO. This "who-beat-whom, and by how much" philosophy detracts from the level of understanding that I am trying to achieve in this game. But if it helps other players...then that's what really counts.  |
Here is the problem.
There are an endless number of technical and subjective issues involved in the speed/pace figure making process that make accuracy an idealistic fantasy.
That's easy to demonstrate by putting the 3-4 best figure sources next to each other and comparing them. They are often all over the map and sometimes quite significantly.
On top of that, there are track surface/race development issues too subtle to measure that impact the times. So even if you have accurate figures, it doesn't always fully reflect the quality of the performance.
That's the kind of stuff the qualitative class approach does not have to deal with. If you know the quality of the horses well, watch the race, look at the relative trips, and see who beats who by how much, you don't care if the track variant changed during the course of the day, if the wind was blowing for a few races, if the timer malfunctioned, what the run up was, where the rails were set, if the figure maker had accurate figures going into the race and projected the variant correctly, if the pace or flow impacted the final time etc.. You re just looking at who beat who, by how much, and how.
On the flip side, there are times the qualitative approach doesn't allow for you to really know the quality of the field because it's loaded with 1st time starters, very lightly raced horses that are improving, horses from a track you are not familiar with, a class with very volatile performances, etc... There are loads of situations where it's not clear what the quality is or what actually happened in the race.
The pace/speed figure guy doesn't have to worry about that. If the pace/final time was fast or vice versa it often screams what happened.
I'm the guy caught between.
I understand most of the strengths and weaknesses of both approaches and am always trying to refine my methods and understanding.
When they agree, there's not much of a problem, but it's unlikely you will get a price.
When they disagree, it's not always clear which is right.
Both approaches are trying to measure the same things in different ways with clear advantages and disadvantages.
