TimeformUS

[RXB]

Originally Posted by cj

I understand what you are saying, going to think about this a bit. Just off the top of my head, something I would test out is that the value of a beaten length at the finish would be applied to all the pace calls as well. Make sense?

Worth a shot. Maybe also try using the unit value that you currently apply at the classic pace call (4f spr, 6f mid-dist) to the earlier calls as well as the pace call; that was my first idea when I was mulling solutions.

It will have to be adjusted for surface, I'm fairly sure of that.

When I have more time I'll PM you some details on a couple of semi-related issues/suggestions. Might not be until Tuesday.

[cj]

Originally Posted by RXB

Worth a shot. Maybe also try using the unit value that you currently apply at the classic pace call (4f spr, 6f mid-dist) to the earlier calls as well as the pace call; that was my first idea when I was mulling solutions.

It will have to be adjusted for surface, I'm fairly sure of that.

When I have more time I'll PM you some details on a couple of semi-related issues/suggestions. Might not be until Tuesday.

Sounds good, and your idea is certainly worth looking into as well.

[big frank]

Thanks CJ and Marc......One more slight tweak i would like to see.......When a horse raced last out with 1st lasix or blinks it is HIGHLIGHTED in red.......that is great......i was wondering if you could also highlight in red when a horse is 1st lasix and blinks right below the odds.....i sometime miss it when a horse is getting a change,,,,,if it were highlighted you couldn't miss it--thanks

[MarcAtTimeformUS]

Thanks RXB, provocative feedback.
Big Frank, if you're looking today, look at Honor Bound in r2 at AQU. You're saying you want his Lasix (First) | Blinkers On in red?

We're somewhat averse to adding more color but we can see why you'd want that to pop more.

[cj]

Originally Posted by MarcAtTimeformUS

Thanks RXB, provocative feedback.
Big Frank, if you're looking today, look at Honor Bound in r2 at AQU. You're saying you want his Lasix (First) | Blinkers On in red?

We're somewhat averse to adding more color but we can see why you'd want that to pop more.

I actually have that on a list of things I'd like as well, colors in the header for each horse should match colors in the running line in my opinion.

[big frank]

Yes Marc . i think that would be a help....... and thanks to
both of you guys

[RXB]

Originally Posted by WJ47

Is there a way to see how the horse has done at the distance or this track? I see the overall starts- wins- 2nds - 3rds, but no stats for how a horse has done at this particular track or distance. Or maybe my eyes are just missing this information because I'm new to TimeformUS. Thank you.

Just click on the horse's overall record and you'll get a window with fuller stats including track and distance.

[GMB@BP]

Originally Posted by RXB

The nature of that first example (big lengths behind, almost equal at those two calls, resulting in two very different looking nominal figures) makes it more apparent, but it's not aberrant; there's a wider issue involved. I can readily find other examples across all of the tracks, distances, surfaces-- most of which aren't as immediately obvious yet are just as real.

Another horse from Penn last night: Boss Man Sue who was entered in R5. Go to his Oct 28 race and look at the 2f and 4f calls. For the leader the figs are 86 and 90. Boss Man Sue only drops from 74 to 72 despite going from 2L behind to 6L behind in that span. It's because the margins at 2f are being weighted twice as much as the margins at 4f.

Same horse, July 25. The leader's figs at 2f and 4f are 91-100. Boss Man Sue's early figs are 67-75 despite dropping 4.5L farther off the lead between 2f and 4f. The figures are offering an illusion that his performance is relatively better in the second fraction when in reality it is not.

enlightening, thanks. I often look at a progression the above would prove that a faulty handicapping angle.

[RXB]

Originally Posted by GMB@BP

enlightening, thanks. I often look at a progression the above would prove that a faulty handicapping angle.

Once the appropriate value-per-length adjustments are determined, the resulting figures at each call within any individual running line will be more appropriate for comparison with each other.

[RXB]

Another suggestion: it would be nice for the charts to include any daily bias indication, in the same way that the running lines incorporate it-- i.e., the race rating box gets the appropriate colour code. Right now the charts don't show if there was a bias.

[MarcAtTimeformUS]

Good one

[RXB]

Also regarding the race rating box, black numbers on a deep red background can be difficult to read, especially in modest font size. You could consider writing code to switch the numerals to white if the bias requires the deep red colour designation. It would be much easier on the eyes.

[RXB]

I should add that even the deeper blue is not ideal as background for black font, although it's not as bad as the deeper red. White font contrasts better for both of those backgrounds; then you would also have consistency with "white font = large track bias."

[cj]

One of Friday's free races of the day is the Derby Futures pool. It only includes PPs for the 23 named horses, not the rest of the field.

[Bennie]

Question for CJ - I have "elimination" patterns from way back (2008) when we were on pacefigures concerning the LSP and PF's being more than 10pts or more higher in the last race than the 2nd and 3rd back and was just curious as to the scale of the Timeform numbers vs the original Pacefig numbers. If the Pf is currently 80 would it have been 80 by your old scale? And same for the Late Pace. If it is now 80 by Timeform would it have been an 80 by your original scale?
Also, I don't remember who posted this but they also stated that in the years they had files for the Derby winners ran a negative pace race in their prior. Is this information available anywhere in Timeform?