|
|
09-16-2018, 11:22 PM
|
#601
|
@TimeformUSfigs
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,828
|
|
|
|
09-19-2018, 04:54 PM
|
#602
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,943
|
Maybe it was just the day at LosAl 9/16/2018
1st race 22.15 45.89 57.29 1:04.62
(23.74) (11.40) (7.33)
Bold numbers. I don't think so. They didn't accelerate like that at the top of the stretch, and they sure didn't stop like that in late stretch.
58.29 would be more likely.
Last edited by ultracapper; 09-19-2018 at 04:55 PM.
|
|
|
09-19-2018, 06:24 PM
|
#603
|
@TimeformUSfigs
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,828
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by ultracapper
Maybe it was just the day at LosAl 9/16/2018
1st race 22.15 45.89 57.29 1:04.62
(23.74) (11.40) (7.33)
Bold numbers. I don't think so. They didn't accelerate like that at the top of the stretch, and they sure didn't stop like that in late stretch.
58.29 would be more likely.
|
Watched the replay, timer clearly malfunctioned. This must be a hand time that isn't very accurate. I've let Equibase know. They are working to make sure hand times are noted in the charts but some are still getting through the cracks as it is fairly new still.
|
|
|
09-21-2018, 02:10 PM
|
#604
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,738
|
CJ, I'd be curious about your opinion on something.
My expertise is in broadcast TV and considering my actual job title, I know enough about the technology to be...dangerous. But mostly I hire very, very smart people to handle that for me.
A few years ago one such person was working with a partner using a teeny amount of VC $ to essentially solve a data problem simply by using a camera picture. In other words, rather than set up a complex remote data collection and report system they just use video from a camera, and not necessarily a special camera or under highly controlled circumstances. I was kind of floored, but they chuckled and said something to the effect of, "pound for pound the data we can get from this video is just so superior."
I know you hand time races a lot off of video replay. Based on that hands-on experience, do you think this could eventually be the better way to go, or that it could be done in wholesale and offered as a data product for sale?
|
|
|
09-21-2018, 04:27 PM
|
#605
|
@TimeformUSfigs
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,828
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by elhelmete
CJ, I'd be curious about your opinion on something.
My expertise is in broadcast TV and considering my actual job title, I know enough about the technology to be...dangerous. But mostly I hire very, very smart people to handle that for me.
A few years ago one such person was working with a partner using a teeny amount of VC $ to essentially solve a data problem simply by using a camera picture. In other words, rather than set up a complex remote data collection and report system they just use video from a camera, and not necessarily a special camera or under highly controlled circumstances. I was kind of floored, but they chuckled and said something to the effect of, "pound for pound the data we can get from this video is just so superior."
I know you hand time races a lot off of video replay. Based on that hands-on experience, do you think this could eventually be the better way to go, or that it could be done in wholesale and offered as a data product for sale?
|
I don't actually hand time for the record, I use video editing software with timing capability. Accuracy is dependent on the frame rate and quality of the picture.
Currently the video isn't precise enough to be as accurate as the beam system (when it functions properly). It is as or more accurate than current GPS and Trakus-like systems. It takes a bit of work to learn all the different angles at the various tracks and the different distances. You have to establish a baseline first from accurately timed races.
Once we have a frame for every hundredth of a second with video it could be as accurate as the beam system IMO. GPS is getting better all the time and maybe could get there some day, but it isn't yet. Trakus...meh. Seems almost DOA to me at this point.
|
|
|
09-23-2018, 01:19 AM
|
#606
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
|
Not a time issue, but Equibase charts kept the BEL turf as Yielding today, when it clearly was not, it was Good and so labeled during the races
|
|
|
09-23-2018, 02:23 AM
|
#607
|
@TimeformUSfigs
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,828
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltonKelsey
Not a time issue, but Equibase charts kept the BEL turf as Yielding today, when it clearly was not, it was Good and so labeled during the races
|
Pretty sure track labels are supplied by the tracks. I've seen Equibase change it at times but I imagine that isn't something they like to do.
I'm actually working on a scale that add some context to the traditional track ratings and should be particularly helpful on turf. It will rate tracks from 1 to 10, with 1 being like the turf at Pimlico on Black Eyed Susan Day and 10 being similar to Ellis Park after it bakes in the sun.
Belmont today would have been a 7 or 8 for the inner, which definitely falls in the firm category, and the outer would have been a 6, good to firm. Parx ran one turf race today on a track labeled good that will get a 4, slower than Belmont's yielding for sure.
By the way, do tracks with multiple courses ever use different ratings? Can't say I've ever seen that but I've noticed they definitely aren't always the same.
Now for a timing error, R5 at Woodbine Saturday had the 1/2 mile 0.60 too fast.
Last edited by cj; 09-23-2018 at 02:35 AM.
|
|
|
09-23-2018, 02:06 PM
|
#608
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
|
NY recently has called the main and inner with different conditions.
NYRA was posting the T as Good yesterday, so if they sent Equibase the wrong info.....
|
|
|
09-23-2018, 02:26 PM
|
#609
|
@TimeformUSfigs
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 46,828
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by AltonKelsey
NY recently has called the main and inner with different conditions.
NYRA was posting the T as Good yesterday, so if they sent Equibase the wrong info.....
|
Interesting. I'll ask about that. I've seen Equibase override the track before but never in what I would consider the wrong direction. Do you mean NYRA had the outer as Good and the inner as Yielding?
|
|
|
09-23-2018, 03:57 PM
|
#610
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
|
I think they were all listed good yest .
PS in the 5th today , our friends at Trackus have placer Souper Tapit running +141 feet to the winner.
Jerry Brown gonna have a field day.
|
|
|
09-24-2018, 12:10 AM
|
#611
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
|
Trackus belmont must have broken today, that 5th race and some others never got posted.
|
|
|
09-24-2018, 10:15 AM
|
#612
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,239
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj
Pretty sure track labels are supplied by the tracks. I've seen Equibase change it at times but I imagine that isn't something they like to do.
By the way, do tracks with multiple courses ever use different ratings? Can't say I've ever seen that but I've noticed they definitely aren't always the same.
Now for a timing error, R5 at Woodbine Saturday had the 1/2 mile 0.60 too fast.
|
Craig is correct. The track supplies the label on the board/video. Equibase Chart Callers can label the condition differently in the chart, though that rarely occurs.
Here's an example: At a track recently the dirt track was "fast" to start the card but in the middle of a card it started to rain lightly. When it started to rain, the upcoming race was on turf, which was displayed as "firm" on the track video. There was no disagreement with "firm" being the condition of the course when the race was run. "Firm" was the condition in the chart as well.
Also, before the turf race was run, the track changed the dirt condition to "good" on video. Additionally, either before or just after the turf race (I can't recall) the track was sealed. After the turf race was run the video the track changed the condition to "sloppy." This was correct, and so "Sloppy" (sealed) is what was displayed in the rest of the charts for the day. The track never got to "muddy," which would have been the next condition.
However, had the track video still displayed "good" as the condition following the turf race, the chart for the next dirt race would most likely (75% confidence) have displayed "sloppy" (sealed) and not "good" as on the video.
"Good" would not have appeared in the chart because "good" is a drying out condition. A track can go from some form of wet to "good" but not the other way around. This has been the case as far as I can remember. If anyone wants to know the definitions for dirt and turf conditions, they are on this page:
https://www.equibase.com/newfan/codes.cfm
As for different turf courses having different track condition labels on the same card, I have seen that in New York but not other places.
Regarding the timing error, it is being looked into.
|
|
|
09-24-2018, 11:51 AM
|
#613
|
The Voice of Reason!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 112,871
|
Seems to me that with the abundance of evidence that GPS and beams are not reliable, video timing is the state of the art at this time.
For at least timing, but probably for positions and beaten lengths as well.
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
|
|
|
09-24-2018, 12:00 PM
|
#614
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 15,123
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom
Seems to me that with the abundance of evidence that GPS and beams are not reliable, video timing is the state of the art at this time.
For at least timing, but probably for positions and beaten lengths as well.
|
They have used these systems for cross country track races since the 80's. Able to time all the competitors during the race.
Never mind, it makes sense and works....
|
|
|
09-29-2018, 07:17 PM
|
#615
|
Veteran
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1,831
|
Unreliable turf designations at NYRA
Based on the times, no way I'd call the Main turf soft today.
Both yielding
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|