Death by 1000 paper cuts

[FantasticDan]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Equibase --

06-29-2019 Finger Lakes R7 and R8:
Right now as I type this, the Equibase cancellations page incorrectly shows that races 7 and 8 at Finger Lakes on Saturday 06-29-2019 were cancelled due to weather.

I also noticed this yesterday, and I'm curious how such a thing even happens. Especially since they do have the winning horses listed in summary results..

Did the chart writer go home early?

[Robert Fischer]

Originally Posted by elhelmete

Equibase shows these stats for poor old Suffolk Downs' last card:

Attendance: 349,010
on-track handle $12,311

party at the park...

[cj]

Originally Posted by FantasticDan

I also noticed this yesterday, and I'm curious how such a thing even happens. Especially since they do have the winning horses listed in summary results..

Did the chart writer go home early?

The data is available, I think they just need to update the charts. I made figures for the races using data provided to me by DRF via Equibase, so they have it.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by FantasticDan

I also noticed this yesterday, and I'm curious how such a thing even happens. Especially since they do have the winning horses listed in summary results..

Did the chart writer go home early?

Based on what I saw in the scratches and changes xml over the weekend I'm about 99% certain someone was trying to key weather cancellations into the system for races 7 and 8 at Delaware Park and accidentally made an entry to cancel the last two races at Finger Lakes --

[Jeff P]

I don't want to shock anybody but --

Is it posible somebody at Monmouth saw this thread and decided to improve their video presentation insofar as showing the horses?

The screenshots below were taken as the horses were nearing the gate for R4 on 07-04-2019.

The first screenshot was taken at about 2 minutes to post while the horses were still warming up. Note that Monmouth appears to have added a semi-transparent background to their graphics.

Having a semi-transparent background makes it possible for players to see the horses through the graphics - as opposed what they were doing back in post #14 on page 1 of this thread) when they were making it impossible to see the horses.

The second screenshot was taken a few minutes later while the horses were approaching the gate. Note that here they are actually showing the horses approaching the gate - as opposed to blocking them out completely (again see post #14 back on page 1 of this thread. )

I don't recall seeing Monmouth with a semi-transparent background earlier in the meet.

I also don't recall them making any effort whatsoever earlier in the meet to show the horses approaching the gate.

But yesterday and today have been much better.


-jp

.

[Jeff P]

In the screenshot below, Lone Star Park is trying to deliver good information to players.

Imo, the weight of a horse can sometimes tell you a lot about its condition.

But check out the weight displayed for the post time favorite #2.

Is #2 a horse or is #2 an elephant?

Seriously though --

This kind of thing drives me nuts.

Thoroughbred racing is data intensive.

We rely on human beings to perform data entry. But there is always going to be human error.

Dating back to at least the mid 1980's, pretty much every piece of software used by Fortune 500 companies has been built with safeguards (sanity checking) designed to reduce human error during data entry.

Based on the screenshot below, I'd have to guess that the systems racing uses for data entry are a bit lacking when it comes to keeping obvious bad data from getting into the database.

Short tangent:

--It is my understanding that horse weights (at the few tracks that are collecting this piece of data) are being disseminated by Equibase to DRF, Brisnet, TrackMaster, and HDW, etc.) in the same sql tables as the regular charts data.

--Q. How many times have players on this site posted about races where impossible fractions or impossible final times given the internal fractions have made it into the charts data?

--And if not for said players complaining, would not said mistakes remain glorified as part of the charts data forever?

--A. I think everyone reading this post knows the answer to that.

--The screenshot below tells me horse weights are subject to a certain degree of human error just like the rest of the charts data.

--Fyi, to their credit, someone at Equibase or someone at Lone Star Park did get the corrected horse weight into the charts data (1075 lbs.) But I was left guessing on race day - and yes I'm picking up horse weights from video and using them in my modeling during live play whenever they are available - and yes I'm making an effort to play those tracks that are collecting and disseminating horse weight as a data point (which is why I am making this post in the first place.)

So how can the industry do better going forward?

What's the max possible weight for a thoroughbred race horse?... 1400 lbs?... 1500 lbs?

What's the min possible weight for a thoroughbred race horse?... 750 lbs?... 675 lbs?

How hard would it be to ask a developer to add 3 or 4 lines of code to the data layer - and perform some sanity checking on horse weights when the data person hits the submit button?

What if, instead of allowing bad data into the system, any horse weight over (say) 1400 lbs resulted in the data entry person getting a message like the following:

"--Weight keyed for #2 is: 10,075 lbs"

"--Hint: That's too high. Make corrections and try again"

It's just a guess on my part, but I'm thinking there might be a lot of places in the systems thoroughbred racing uses for data entry that could benefit from a little sanity checking.



-jp

.

[clicknow]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

We rely on human beings to perform data entry. But there is always going to be human error..

I should have screen shot it at the time... until it was corrected, the Kentucky Derby "official site" had Anothertwistafate's name spelled wrong. Unreal. I copied and pasted it to another forum at the time, they had him listed as "Anothertwistoffate".

[highnote]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Item #173. Volume for individual track video signals --
.

It's hard to say whose fault it is that the volume is different for different tracks. When you start to trace the signal path it gets complex.

The announcer might have his own volume control for his microphone that is plugged into a mixer in front of him. More likely is that his mic is connected to an on-site studio -- either an in-house studio or a mobile truck. The person mixing the sound in the truck is responsible for making sure the signal is leaving the truck properly. There is a 99% chance the soundman is doing his job right. If he wasn't he would be replaced. They also will check to make sure that the signal sounds good by listening to it on the return feed. They probably send it out in stereo at -10 to -20 dB. Since it is probably a digital signal they keep it well below 0 dB to prevent clipping of the signal.

Next the signal will leave the track by fiber optic cable or a satellite uplink. It's hard to say where it goes after that. At some point it probably arrives at Rogers' master control center and then is sent out by satellite or fiber or internet to all the ADWs. Again, it's hard to say what the actual path is.

Then the ADW re-transmits the signal over the internet. I don't know how much quality control ADWs do when it comes to the video and audio signal.

There are so many places where the signal's volume could be adjusted after it leaves the track that it is virtually impossible to say whose fault it is. You'd have to talk to everyone in the chain to find the problem.

It might even be something going on in the satellite. Maybe a channel is going bad and there is no way to fix it since the satellite is circling the Earth. You can't just send a repairman out to fix it.

This would be an interesting subject to research.

One suggestion would be to use multiple computers for betting. Log into your account on each computer and bring up a separate track on each computer. Then you can adjust the volume for each track.

[ubercapper]

Jeff,


Graphics like that are run by the track and have nothing to do with Equibase.



Separately, there are certainly validations for when someone at the track enters weight into the database.



Still, if you ever note a horse weight of 10,000 in your file, please let us and HDW know and it will be corrected.



Ellis

[Tom]

Forgot what track yesterday.....

[chiguy]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

If you go by importance, this one is probably item #173 on the list of the 1000 little things racing needs to address - but never does.

Item #173. Volume for individual track video signals --

Over the past 45 minutes or so I've been playing BEL-BTP-GPX-PIM via ADW:

• The volume for Belmont track video is pre-set (not by me but I'm guessing either by the track or by somebody at Roberts) to "barely hear it."
• The volume for Belterra and Pimlico video are pre-set (again not by me) to "about normal."
• The volume for Gulfstream video is pre-set (again not by me) to "BLAST O' MATIC."

Meaning that:

• If I watch a race at Belmont I have to turn the volume way up in order to hear Larry Collmus.
• If I then switch over to Gulfstream I have to turn the volume way down... otherwise: "BLAST O' MATIC."

Is there any reason not to have somebody (maybe at Roberts) set all track video signals (on a regular basis) to the same damn volume?

Seriously, this has been going on for years, and I for one find it annoying as hell.

Signed,

A guy who (for some strange reason) is still betting a decent amount of handle (5 days out of 6) into your pools.



-jp

.

As someone who runs an night shift at an OTB in California, I can tell you that this sound issue has driven me nuts over the years. Same thing for us. At first I thought it was just the facility I worked at but after working at 4 different ones it is the same. For the night signal, Los Al, Cal Expo, Running Aces are all very difficult to hear. Australia is the blast o matic. Same with Meadowlands, very loud. Pocono Downs is loud. I have always wondered why this is and it must just be Roberts that is having the issue. As someone else mentioned this is such an easy fix. I have called Roberts in the past about this but got the feeling I was talking with someone who had no way of correcting the issue.

[reckless]

Originally Posted by Tom

Forgot what track yesterday.....

Looks like the horse I bet at Parx -- last at the quarter-pole, last after a half, was last into the turn ... and then he got tired!

I'm sure cj needed a sun dial to time him.

[NY BRED]

Jeff;

I'd be careful with this complaint;You might end being expelled
from listening to GP via the same person who expelled Jerry
Hollendorfer from training in NY.

Then again , if you have a wife or kids , they can deal with this
audio problem

[Tom]

CEOs of racetracks need to be out there, EVERY day, using the product they sell. IF they do not, they are not doing their jobs. If they did, they would what garbage they are selling.

[highnote]

Originally Posted by chiguy

As someone who runs an night shift at an OTB in California, I can tell you that this sound issue has driven me nuts over the years. Same thing for us. At first I thought it was just the facility I worked at but after working at 4 different ones it is the same. For the night signal, Los Al, Cal Expo, Running Aces are all very difficult to hear. Australia is the blast o matic. Same with Meadowlands, very loud. Pocono Downs is loud. I have always wondered why this is and it must just be Roberts that is having the issue. As someone else mentioned this is such an easy fix. I have called Roberts in the past about this but got the feeling I was talking with someone who had no way of correcting the issue.

I spoke with some professional tv audio friends. They said Rogers probably just takes in the feeds and then redistrubtes them. The problem is that there is no industry standard for internet audio the way there is for broadcast audio. The levels depend on the type of studio that sends out the feed. An in-house semi/pro studio might send out a signal that is not broadcast standard.

Until there is an internet standard it will continue to be the Wild West.