"About" Time for a Change at Gulfstream Park

[Denny]

I'm glad I've gotten away from betting Thoroughbreds. I do still like to follow it for the big races and on occasion.

I bet Standardbreds where EVERY race is on DIRT and virtually(*) EVERY race is at I-MILE. Speed figures are reliable. Variants have numerous races to be based on.

(*) Some races are run at 1-1/4 at Yonkers on Sundays for simulcast to France. The meadowlands occasionally runs a race at an extended distance as well. But, these are seldom occurrences. Pompano park even had a 5/8's dash recently.

But, the vast, vast majority of races are at the SAME DISTANCE and over a similar racing surface.

I'll never go back to betting thoroughbreds seriously as things are just getting ridiculous with the proliferation of turf racing and temporary rail and gate placements. NO SPEED figures on turf can be trusted IMO.

Furthermore, the dirt figures have less races to be based on, and are therefor less reliable.

Just my opinion, but, I'm glad I re-discovered Harness racing in the last five years and now direct my attention there almost entirely for betting.

[Jeff P]

To my way of thinking, responsibility for bad chart data rests squarely on the shoulders of track management, horsemen, and state regulators.

Imo, the current situation at Gulfstream, and the situation at many other tracks as well, has become what it is because track management, horsemen, and state regulators don't seem to think accurate timing of races and dissemination of accurate chart data to Equibase is a priority.

If track management, horsemen, and state regulators really thought accurate timing of races and dissemination of accurate chart data to Equibase was a priority:

The industry would become proactive.

They would be reaching out to players (and figure makers like CJ.) Behind the scenes we would be having conversations about:

a. Identifying key areas where the current way of timing races and "sanity checking" of chart data before transmitting it to Equibase is lacking.

b. Improving those key areas.

c. Developing a vastly improved set of internal controls for validating runup, fractional times, and final race time.

d. Implementing these internal controls at the track level. This would include teaching track personnel how to validate runup, fractional times, and final race time from video using software.

Here's a link to a video on the DRF site where CJ explains some of the basics in plain English:
http://video.drf.com/detail/videos/o...autoStart=true

Hint: Fast forward to about the 23:25 mark and watch from there. (It's kind of eye opening.)

As an aside, I find it really odd that validating chart data from video using software is something a lot of serious horseplayers have been doing for years -- but somehow remains an area that many with jobs in the industry are clueless about.

That said, this isn't about making people who work in the industry look bad.

This is about empowering track personnel to vastly improve "sanity checking" of chart data.

Imo, the objective should be to catch and correct timing and data entry errors at the track level -- and PREVENT bad chart data from being transmitted to Equibase in the first place.

Sadly, to the best of my knowledge -- NONE of this is taking place, or even being discussed, behind the scenes.

Imo, the current situation at Gulfstream, and the situation at many other tracks as well, is what it is because industry decision makers continue to bury their heads in the sand and hope the problem will somehow magically go away.

Imo, ignoring the problem isn't a solution.

Imo, it's time for the industry to get proactive.


-jp

.

[cj]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

One weird thing about Hollywood Park was that over the last 23 years of its existence, they never carded a mile race on the dirt.

I mean, I personally like the symbolic importance of the distance (and another sport I love, track and field, has definitely been hurt in the US by the switch from 1 mile to 1500 meters because casual fans can't relate to the latter distance as well), but its not as though people were going to Hollywood Park on Friday nights and saying "gee I really miss mile races on the dirt".

Wasn't Hollywood 1 1/8 miles? They had the one turn miles but then I think they shortened the chute or something so they went away. No way they could run a two turn mile.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

To my way of thinking, responsibility for bad chart data rests squarely on the shoulders of track management, horsemen, and state regulators.

Imo, the current situation at Gulfstream, and the situation at many other tracks as well, has become what it is because track management, horsemen, and state regulators don't seem to think accurate timing of races and dissemination of accurate chart data to Equibase is a priority.

If track management, horsemen, and state regulators really thought accurate timing of races and dissemination of accurate chart data to Equibase was a priority:

The industry would become proactive.

They would be reaching out to players (and figure makers like CJ.) Behind the scenes we would be having conversations about:

a. Identifying key areas where the current way of timing races and "sanity checking" of chart data before transmitting it to Equibase is lacking.

b. Improving those key areas.

c. Developing a vastly improved set of internal controls for validating runup, fractional times, and final race time.

d. Implementing these internal controls at the track level. This would include teaching track personnel how to validate runup, fractional times, and final race time from video using software.

Here's a link to a video on the DRF site where CJ explains some of the basics in plain English:
http://video.drf.com/detail/videos/o...autoStart=true

Hint: Fast forward to about the 23:25 mark and watch from there. (It's kind of eye opening.)

As an aside, I find it really odd that validating chart data from video using software is something a lot of serious horseplayers have been doing for years -- but somehow remains an area that many with jobs in the industry are clueless about.

That said, this isn't about making people who work in the industry look bad.

This is about empowering track personnel to vastly improve "sanity checking" of chart data.

Imo, the objective should be to catch and correct timing and data entry errors at the track level -- and PREVENT bad chart data from being transmitted to Equibase in the first place.

Sadly, to the best of my knowledge -- NONE of this is taking place, or even being discussed, behind the scenes.

Imo, the current situation at Gulfstream, and the situation at many other tracks as well, is what it is because industry decision makers continue to bury their heads in the sand and hope the problem will somehow magically go away.

Imo, ignoring the problem isn't a solution.

Imo, it's time for the industry to get proactive.


-jp

.

Well said. Equibase's general response to pointing out errors is something like "thanks, please let us know any time you see one and we'll get it fixed"...but nothing is done to find out why they happen and how to catch them. I volunteered to provide a better way for finding bad times FOR FREE and was actually turned down.

[jay68802]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

To my way of thinking, responsibility for bad chart data rests squarely on the shoulders of track management, horsemen, and state regulators.

Imo, the current situation at Gulfstream, and the situation at many other tracks as well, has become what it is because track management, horsemen, and state regulators don't seem to think accurate timing of races and dissemination of accurate chart data to Equibase is a priority.


.

I am in agreement with what you are saying here. This situation has been a issue for way to long now. Beyer wrote of the same thing in 2014, and we know that it has been going on for longer than that.

Correct me if I am wrong here. I have been looking and can find no regulations any where that require tracks to report any information on the timing or any other information related to PP data. As near as I can tell, Equibase is entirely responsible for the collection and distribution of this information.

If this is true, I can see why tracks would not want to spend money on something like this if it is not required, even if would promote better customer relations.

[cj]

Originally Posted by jay68802

I am in agreement with what you are saying here. This situation has been a issue for way to long now. Beyer wrote of the same thing in 2014, and we know that it has been going on for longer than that.

Correct me if I am wrong here. I have been looking and can find no regulations any where that require tracks to report any information on the timing or any other information related to PP data. As near as I can tell, Equibase is entirely responsible for the collection and distribution of this information.

If this is true, I can see why tracks would not want to spend money on something like this if it is not required, even if would promote better customer relations.

Usually this stuff is in the rules laid out by the state racing commissions. I found a funny one in Florida:

(26) “Post time” means the time set for the arrival at the starting point of the horses or greyhounds in a race or the beginning of a game in jai alai.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by cj

Wasn't Hollywood 1 1/8 miles? They had the one turn miles but then I think they shortened the chute or something so they went away. No way they could run a two turn mile.

They moved the finish line back to its original position, which made the chute a 7 1/2 furlong chute.

[jay68802]

Originally Posted by cj

Usually this stuff is in the rules laid out by the state racing commissions. I found a funny one in Florida:

I would venture a guess and say that there is a "budget shortfall" in their ability to enforce this one. I was watching Gulfstream today, for the race that started the pick 6, it just happened that they started to get in line to load exactly when the pool reached $2,000,000.

[jay68802]

Post time for the 4th race tomarrow is $3,000,000.00.

[cj]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

They moved the finish line back to its original position, which made the chute a 7 1/2 furlong chute.

Ah yes, they were the only track that ran 7.5f as a regular distance on dirt around one turn.

[cj]

Originally Posted by jay68802

Post time for the 4th race tomarrow is $3,000,000.00.

That is some funny stuff right there.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by cj

Usually this stuff is in the rules laid out by the state racing commissions. I found a funny one in Florida:

and:

Originally Posted by cj

(26) “Post time” means the time set for the arrival at the starting point of the horses or greyhounds in a race or the beginning of a game in jai alai.

Reminds me of that Master Card commercial:

Having just spent several hours today totally immersed in today's Gulfstream card and discovering Florida has a rule on the books defining what post time means?

PRICELESS!



-jp

.

[Denny]

With Meadowlands cancelled this past weekend, decided to go to the Albany Clubhouse, only to find Aqueduct also cancelled.

Bought the cheapest PP's ($2 printouts) for Gulfstream.

Never needed to look at a SPEED FIGURE.

Handicapped with basic information and hit back-to-back-to-back races at Gulf.
Hawkish at 10-1
Flameaway at 5-2
and a double with
Cove Blue who went off at 5-1.
Then missed (had the runner-up in the next two races) .

Like the good-old days before speed figures were in the Form!!!

An excellent day out.

[VigorsTheGrey]

Originally Posted by cj

Ah yes, they were the only track that ran 7.5f as a regular distance on dirt around one turn.

Something interesting

https://www.twinspires.com/blog/2018...rk-turf-racing

[cj]

Originally Posted by VigorsTheGrey

Something interesting

https://www.twinspires.com/blog/2018...rk-turf-racing

He should use more than this meet to get a worthwhile sample.