Fractional Time Errors

[cardinalsfan]

In fairness, I never said Equibase didn't care, I have complained to people at DRF. I'm guessing DRF is just a user of data from Equibase and a separate entity, so it looks like I may have been barking up the wrong tree.

I stand by my comments about my experiences with people at DRF, however, apologies to the folks at Equibase. I'm impressed it somebody affiliated with them would step up and post on the board about this! Maybe somebody does still care about racing fans. :-)

I've got to go back and find the race in question, but I will definitely DM when I locate.

Thank you.

[ubercapper]

Originally Posted by cardinalsfan

In fairness, I never said Equibase didn't care, I have complained to people at DRF. I'm guessing DRF is just a user of data from Equibase and a separate entity, so it looks like I may have been barking up the wrong tree.

I stand by my comments about my experiences with people at DRF, however, apologies to the folks at Equibase. I'm impressed it somebody affiliated with them would step up and post on the board about this! Maybe somebody does still care about racing fans. :-)

I've got to go back and find the race in question, but I will definitely DM when I locate.

Thank you.

Thanks for the clarification. I am looking forward to hearing from you.

[cj]

Originally Posted by cardinalsfan

In fairness, I never said Equibase didn't care, I have complained to people at DRF. I'm guessing DRF is just a user of data from Equibase and a separate entity, so it looks like I may have been barking up the wrong tree.

I stand by my comments about my experiences with people at DRF, however, apologies to the folks at Equibase. I'm impressed it somebody affiliated with them would step up and post on the board about this! Maybe somebody does still care about racing fans. :-)

I've got to go back and find the race in question, but I will definitely DM when I locate.

Thank you.

Not sure who you have been reaching out to but I am always willing to help and have a pretty good track record of getting things done. So does Lonnie Goldfelder and I'm sure there are others. But yes, if there is a problem with data from Equibase, we would just be a middle man. Ellis can tell you I always pass on problems I see or are told about but going straight to the source would be easier on both of us.

[cj]

Banner day for timing at Santa Anita Saturday 5-30. Race 9 was hand timed but the hand times are really, really poorly done. Race 2 was Trakus timed and is as bad or worse than the hand time of Race 9. Not sure how anyone working for Santa Anita could see the times of Race 2 and not think it was worth at least asking questions.

[cj]

Bad timing continues since my last post.

Twitter

Twitter

[cj]

More bad times at Santa Anita Saturday. Race 3 was obviously too slow and hand times are given, but they are way too fast.

Race 4 is at 5.5 on the turf with no run up, but the opening quarter is listed as sub 21 LOL. It timed from video the whole race is also way off, final time and fractions. The difference here is nobody knows enough that works for Santa Anita or Trakus to even realize there was a problem.

Louisiana Downs had a couple races today that were hand timed as well, on on dirt and one on turf.

The 1st at Charles Town had a 28 opening 1/4 on the screen and is listed as hand timed. Good luck with using those.

[cj]

I realize by now few people really care, but this string below is worth a read if you care even a little bit about data integrity:

Twitter

Twitter

[classhandicapper]

That last string of information is mind boggling.

[Tom]

So nothing is something at SA?

SA don't know nothing!

YouTube

[ubercapper]

Cross posting this (CJ/PA please don't delete it as it's important IMO) as it's also in the thread about the 5.5F T races at SA.

On the issue of these 5.5F T races, CJ and I have exchanged emails on the topic and we are working with others on the issue.

On a somewhat related note, on this topic and others like the marketing comments, I'm not privy to a lot, but I based on my 25 years of experience in the industry, there are usually serious discussions about many of these issues.

However, it's not in anyone's interest to share anything publicly until something has happened. There's absolutely NO upside in this. That doesn't mean it's not happening, but I see a decent amount written suggesting just that and it's not true.

For example, let's say there was a certain distance/surface/rail setting combination at a track in which the rail setting or run-up was wrong and was for a while. Someone points it out, via social media or email, to me or CJ or someone else. It usually gets to the right person. Maybe one to three weeks later the charts have all been corrected and the speed figures re-run with the new information and there are steps in place to avoid the error in the future. There would have been no point in mentioning it prior to that, just like there would have been no point mentioning the meetings that took place prior to the recent marketing announcement which had to have taken place as multiple entities were involved as were big bucks.

That's why I try to remind everyone, especially in this thread, if you see an issue in a chart, send me a PM or email to feedback@equibase.com to my attention. At the least I can promise it will be looked into.

[Tom]

People do build and bet from their own databases. When data is flawed or suspect, they should know about ASAP. THAT is the point in mentioning.
In this day an age, 2-3 weeks is 100% inexcusable. You do your job and make the corrections, but you do not collect the initial data.

That fact that many tracks are filled with incompetents is not excuse. A track that takes in thousands of dollars in handle a day has NO excuse for ANY of the errors that get by. If they can't get it right, the CEO should be personally verifying all data every day until he fires the fool who does it now.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Tom

People do build and bet from their own databases. When data is flawed or suspect, they should know about ASAP.

A corrections page would be a big help for sure. As part of DRF I'm on list that gets some corrections, namely things to do with the finish---time, finish positions, beaten lengths. But I don't see any fractional corrections of which I would think there are just as many, probably more.

[Tom]

You have no idea how many corrections I have made to my DBs thanks to you!
A lot of time, the pace figs then just miraculously "fall into place."

[cj]

Another horrendous day of timing at Gulfstream Park.

Three races at 5f with the temp rail at 108 and run up of 94 feet.

R1 is badly mistimed. All the fractions are about 2.51 seconds too fast. You would think the opening 1/4 of 23.95 would have raised a flag but it didn't.

R5 actually appears ok. I'm using it as the baseline to time the other two. This race was for 2yo, none of which had ever run before.

R8 showed an opening 1/4 of 24.33 but was removed from the screen and no other fractions given. A hand time of 55.81 is listed in the chart but it is too slow. Timed from video it is 55.19, or about 0.62 too slow. How do you hand time a race with the rail a 108 and 94 feet of run up? How do you know where the race starts and where the fractional segments are taken? It is very hard with video, impossible by hand.

Imagine trying to make speed figures for Race 5 using the much too slow times given as official for Races 1 and 8. You'd think the winning 2yo filly was ready for the Breeders' Cup Turf Sprint against older males next time out. Gulfstream should be embarrassed but nothing seems to phase them. They probably don't even know, and neither does Trakus, they people they are paying good money to time the races.

I haven't even gotten to the other races yet LOL.

[cj]

Originally Posted by cj

I haven't even gotten to the other races yet LOL.

The feature, a race that featured some very good 3yos and a winner that could very well run in Triple Crown races, was hand timed. Too late to dig into it too deep tonight, will check how accurate it is tomorrow.