Pegasus timing

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Cratos,

Is there any chance, in the above quote, that your use of the words "final velocity" are meant to convey the same meaning as a horse’s "top" or "max" velocity?



-jp

.

No, because typically a horse’s “top” or “max” velocity occurs before the end of the race

[Jeff P]

Ok. (Poor choice of words on my part.)

Were you referring to final velocity (in physics) defined as follows?:

Final Velocity is defined as the Velocity attained by a body after completing or reaching certain distance or a given or certain time interval.

Link, here:
http://physics.tutorvista.com/motion...-velocity.html



-jp

.

[Cratos]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

Ok. (Poor choice of words on my part.)

Were you referring to final velocity (in physics) defined as follows?:


Link, here:
http://physics.tutorvista.com/motion...-velocity.html



-jp

.

Final velocity; however, if I was calculating max velocity I start with the acceleration vector which is the rate of change of the velocity vector; this should give me instantaneous velocity which would be the horses’ max velocity at that point in the race, but I think we should end this discussion because it might cause some “ruffle feathers.”

[cj]

Only feathers ruffled here are when an important thread is littered with bad information that is trying to be passed off as science.

I'll be frank, not a fan of Jeff's post here. I think you are trying to shelter him or play peacemaker or something. Everyone and his brother knows what I meant by final time. I spelled out exactly what I was talking about and Cratos refused to even address it. He just slung more mud and somehow said it was an insult while deflecting away from the data I posted. Unless somebody thinks I just made up a table, it is obvious what he said trying to discredit me is false. Why try to defend that or let him wiggle away from it?

When Cratos first started spewing his usual crap in this thread I deleted a few because I knew exactly where it would lead, total thread derailment. I should have kept it up but I tried to be nice. Part of the derailment is my fault. I'm a stubborn horseplayer. But I won't let BS go by if that is what I truly believe I see, particularly if I know it is trying to say something I posted I know to be true is wrong.

I also know Cratos hates when I get a little spotlight, which frankly I don't even want. He has done this every time I've found an issue that I thought needed attention and others agreed. The truth is I'd rather none of this ever happened. I wish the sport would get it's crap together. I easily worked an extra 40 hours this week with no benefit to me other than maybe tracks will do better in the future. I'd much rather play tennis and binge watch some TV show I like with my wife in my free time.

After tonight, this thread will be about the timing of the Pegasus and nothing else. So anybody that wants to air laundry or talk about the anything else in this thread, have at it soon. I'm tired and a pretty worn out moderator.

[senortout]

Assume that timing is done the old way, by breaking the light beams.
in my example, the first beam will be broken by 1, either a very
fast gate horse...or...2, by a goose! the goose is on the ground
right next to the first light beam! Now the bell rings and the
gates fly open and the horses begin their 'run-up'....and the
GOOSE
startled by the bell, breaks the beam. The official timing for this
race has now begun! It will NOT be accurate, as the leading
horse(quick as a bunny) is barely out of his stall~this will
very much cause the race to be run in slower time. Same or near
same effect as when a speed horse speed-pops gate and burns
up all his energy. Only if race timing starts when the gate itself
opens is the time accurately reflected. That silly goose (you, I'm
afraid, in this case) only makes it more inaccurate. Go figger. This, I might add, without the goose insult (here's where I apologize) is exactly what cj said in different words, in his post. Please refute these facts with your sort of counter-intelligence.

Originally Posted by Cratos

No, you don’t live in a “real world”; this is cyberspace where people like you feel good with superficial power.

Now you are taking the thread off into a personal affront which (doesn’t affect me) with sayings like “big words” and “intimidation.”

The problem here and others through PMs/emails to me have stated; this is “your show”; do I care? No, I don’t sign your paycheck.

Incidentally, I don't feel insulted.

[steveb]

Originally Posted by Cratos

CJ, it is not silly and you and no one else here or elsewhere will defy the laws of science.

What is silly is your invariable attempt to contradict fact with experiment.

I don’t want to list my resume, but I am Certified Black Belt Six Sigma with core competency in DOE (design of experiment)

The intent of my post was written in a simple manner to illustrate and help others on the forum understand why run-up have a minimal or no effect at all on a horse’s final velocity.

However, I am always willing to learn and if you can prove that what I posted is incorrect with fact beyond incidental empirical evidence I `will humbly agree with you.

you have undone all your good work!!

it might have none or minimal effect on FINAL velocity or, or ,or; but if you think the run up does matter in a zillion other different ways, to those that use times effectively, then you are in cloud cuckoo land.

and i think i have mentioned it before, but i am friends with a very much published physicist.
he was for a long time helping me with racing stuff.
but not surprisingly he could teach me nothing about racing with all his formulae, that i had not already established analysing data.

[Jeff P]

Originally Posted by cj

Only feathers ruffled here are when an important thread is littered with bad information that is trying to be passed off as science.

I'll be frank, not a fan of Jeff's post here. I think you are trying to shelter him or play peacemaker or something. Everyone and his brother knows what I meant by final time. I spelled out exactly what I was talking about and Cratos refused to even address it. He just slung more mud and somehow said it was an insult while deflecting away from the data I posted. Unless somebody thinks I just made up a table, it is obvious what he said trying to discredit me is false. Why try to defend that or let him wiggle away from it?

When Cratos first started spewing his usual crap in this thread I deleted a few because I knew exactly where it would lead, total thread derailment. I should have kept it up but I tried to be nice. Part of the derailment is my fault. I'm a stubborn horseplayer. But I won't let BS go by if that is what I truly believe I see, particularly if I know it is trying to say something I posted I know to be true is wrong.

I also know Cratos hates when I get a little spotlight, which frankly I don't even want. He has done this every time I've found an issue that I thought needed attention and others agreed. The truth is I'd rather none of this ever happened. I wish the sport would get it's crap together. I easily worked an extra 40 hours this week with no benefit to me other than maybe tracks will do better in the future. I'd much rather play tennis and binge watch some TV show I like with my wife in my free time.

After tonight, this thread will be about the timing of the Pegasus and nothing else. So anybody that wants to air laundry or talk about the anything else in this thread, have at it soon. I'm tired and a pretty worn out moderator.

I asked the question that I did because I was trying to understand what the hell Cratos was trying to say.

I'm paraphrasing, but what he said was: "Runup distance has no effect on a horse’s final velocity."

It turns out that "final velocity" is a concept from physics.

Once I understood that I was able to understand what he was trying to say.

It's as simple as that.

And OF COURSE runup distance has an effect on a horse’s FINAL TIME.

One more thing CJ,

I'm really glad you caught yet another timing error and decided to write about it.

Too bad this had to happen for such a high profile race.

But I'm hoping something good will eventually come out of this.

Because it happened for such a high profile race:

Maybe Gulfstream/Trakus/Equibase will be embarrassed into putting some tighter safeguards/sanity checks in - and actually start catching timing errors like this on their own going forward.



-jp

.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Jeff P

I asked the question that I did because I was trying to understand what the hell Cratos was trying to say.

I'm paraphrasing, but what he said was: "Runup distance has no effect on a horse’s final velocity."

It turns out that "final velocity" is a concept from physics.

Once I understood that I was able to understand what he was trying to say.

It's as simple as that.

And OF COURSE runup distance has an effect on a horse’s FINAL TIME.

One more thing CJ,

I'm really glad you caught yet another timing error and decided to write about it.

Too bad this had to happen for such a high profile race.

But I'm hoping something good will eventually come out of this.

Because it happened for such a high profile race:

Maybe Gulfstream/Trakus/Equibase will be embarrassed into putting some tighter safeguards/sanity checks in - and actually start catching timing errors like this on their own going forward.



-jp

.

Fair enough. I knew you didn't mean anything bad or negative towards me. He is the one that kept changing final time to velocity. That is what he does. I was just annoyed and should have never brought your name up. This is a horse racing board where people use horse racing terminology. Why he insists on trying to force different terms on people that mean the same thing I have no idea.

I appreciate the nice words about the Pegasus.. That is all I want too. I don't care if my name ever gets mentioned. I want the game to stop living in the 20th century.. That is slightly selfish on my part because it would make my work easier, but that really isn't the driving force by a longshot.

[cj]

Originally Posted by Cratos

The reason that increasing run-up distance have minimal or no effect on the horse final time in racing is primary due to energy expenditure.

Yes, a horse needs a certain distance to accelerate (per the Jockey Club a horse hits its top velocity in 125 feet), but after that a horse is slowing down due to energy expenditure.

You can find empirical evidence to support many contentions, but that is not scientific fact.

There is yet to be any irrefutable proof in this thread that I am wrong. What there has been are “I don’t believe” and it is okay to be a contrarian, but support your opposition beyond...

Note here he says final time. After I showed the data it changed to velocity. That is cratos 101 when he can't figure something out or doesn't want to admit he is mistaken, dazzle them with BS and / or change the topic.

[Tom]

Please, you are applying empirical conclusions;

That is what we bet on.

[classhandicapper]

I use a lot of mental energy "theorizing" about things hoping that if I understand what's actually going it will lead me to better conclusions and new ideas. But in the end, if reality does not match your theory you are going to go broke betting on that theory.

[Tom]

CJ put in more Quality Control on one race than GP has on all of its races the last 20 years.

The world's richest race ever and GP puts Abbot and Costello on the timer.

Sad.
One would think for this one day GP would at least try.

[ultracapper]

Originally Posted by Tom

CJ put in more Quality Control on one race than GP has on all of its races the last 20 years.

The world's richest race ever and GP puts Abbot and Costello on the timer.

Sad.
One would think for this one day GP would at least try.

Particularly when they know damn well they'll get nailed.

[linrom1]

The whole idea of speed handicapping is a joke. Who cares about Beyers or Timeform ratings? The whole discussion about how fast was the mediocre race run at Gulfstream is obsoletely pointless. I don't even look at speed figures?

Andrew Beyers sent horse handicapping back into stone age and directed fools on pursuit equivalent of ancient alchemists for the last 30 years ever since the stupidest book ever written on handicapping--Beyer on Speed.

[JJMartin]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

I use a lot of mental energy "theorizing" about things hoping that if I understand what's actually going it will lead me to better conclusions and new ideas. But in the end, if reality does not match your theory you are going to go broke betting on that theory.

I do the same and it is good practice to do so. You will get some wrong and you will get some right. When you get it right, you will have permanently upgraded your arsenal if what you have discovered is something fundamental, especially if not very transparent or easy to calculate.