Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro
There in lies the problem I’m talking about.
(It's not how fast "they are going" because at any point of call you only know how fast the lead horse is going.
You can’t assume that the horses trailing are traveling at the same average velocity of the horse arriving at any point of call.
Please re-read the last 3 paragraphs I posted.
|
You did not read the rest of my paragraph when I noted, "Of course there is still some error possible but only when the horse involved and leader are going at significantly different velocities.". No this method is not perfect but is one improvement over just using the more traditional method and yields very good results.
In fact, you can determine a horses velocity even more accurately by comparing it's lengths gained or lost between calls in relation to the leader. Actually even the quick and dirty method of just multiplying the beaten lengths by .167 yielded good results for me for many previous years.
As l also noted there are even more accurate methods to measure precise times using GPS and satellite technology to get exact position, ground loss and times for every horse at every point of call. In addition, cj uses a precise method to that is accurate to the hundreth of a second, but apparently either you ignore these or will just never be satisfied. There is no such thing as perfection in the real world. Something does not have to be perfect to be effective.
The main point is that speed and pace figures using the above methods are accurate, though not perfect, assessments of a horse's performance and most importantly the single best method of rating performances. Particularly when combined with other handicapping factors. This will reduce the small imperfections that you point out when one uses speed/pace figures alone. By implying that figure handicappers are assuming using their figures alone, because they think they are perfect, you are constructing a straw man that is not typical of a good figure handicapper.
