Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board > Thoroughbred Horse Racing Discussion > General Racing Discussion


Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old 10-09-2021, 03:47 PM   #16
MJC922
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,064
If I'm understanding the Beyer team's findings correctly the timing started .83 seconds early. If we then reduce the fractional times by .83 we get 22.75 and 45.67 which largely into the wind even if it was fairly light at the time @ 8mph would still be pretty impressive. Not disagreeing but I have my doubts tbh.
__________________
North American Class Rankings
MJC922 is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-09-2021, 03:57 PM   #17
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 45,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJC922 View Post
If I'm understanding the Beyer team's findings correctly the timing started .83 seconds early. If we then reduce the fractional times by .83 we get 22.75 and 45.67 which largely into the wind even if it was fairly light at the time @ 8mph would still be pretty impressive. Not disagreeing but I have my doubts tbh.
I personally don't think for this race the fractions are off the same amount as the final time. They are probably even faster going from memory. I don't have the means to look them up right now.This wasn't a simple beam tripping early problem. There is something going on with the timing system at Belmont, whether mechanical or operator error.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-09-2021, 07:57 PM   #18
Hedevar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicago area.
Posts: 603
Quote:
Originally Posted by cj View Post
I personally don't think for this race the fractions are off the same amount as the final time. They are probably even faster going from memory. I don't have the means to look them up right now.This wasn't a simple beam tripping early problem. There is something going on with the timing system at Belmont, whether mechanical or operator error.
The fractions and final times in turf races are very suspicious.
Hedevar is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-09-2021, 08:29 PM   #19
the little guy
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 6,299
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJC922 View Post
If I'm understanding the Beyer team's findings correctly the timing started .83 seconds early. If we then reduce the fractional times by .83 we get 22.75 and 45.67 which largely into the wind even if it was fairly light at the time @ 8mph would still be pretty impressive. Not disagreeing but I have my doubts tbh.
It was a crosswind so they weren't going into the wind.
the little guy is online now   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-10-2021, 11:43 AM   #20
classhandicapper
Registered User
 
classhandicapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Queens, NY
Posts: 17,823
Do I have to break out my standard diatribe about all the potential pitfalls of speed figures again?

The times of races obviously matter, but there are loads of technical and subjective issues that impact their accuracy on top of extremely complex interrelationships between individual horse ability, race development and surface that can impact the times.

IMO, (backed by years of data and testing) the best use of figures is to help find the strong and weak fields within classes, especially in races where the quality is tough to determine (maidens and other very lightly raced horses). If you spend a lot of time worrying about a few points either way, just line up 3-4 of the best sets of figures out there and your head will explode in race after race when you see all the small and sometime HUGE differences.

Wind, clock, run up, malfunctioning timers etc…all matter, but this Champagne was almost obviously strong. Upping the figure didn’t change my opinion. It verified it.
__________________
“Truth is Treason in an Empire of Lies”
classhandicapper is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-10-2021, 02:02 PM   #21
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 105,524
From Andy's comments on ATR Friday, they can't even get the run up distances right. DUH????

I can give any track a simple 2-step method that works......

__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-10-2021, 05:55 PM   #22
GMB@BP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Dark Side of the Moon
Posts: 5,486
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
From Andy's comments on ATR Friday, they can't even get the run up distances right. DUH????

I can give any track a simple 2-step method that works......

yet other sports like golf and baseball have instant analytics about bat speed, ball speed, etc...a sport built on timing cant even get the fractions correct.
GMB@BP is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-10-2021, 07:38 PM   #23
Tom
The Voice of Reason!
 
Tom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Canandaigua, New york
Posts: 105,524
Maybe that guy was chewing gum on the job.....
__________________
Who does the Racing Form Detective like in this one?
Tom is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Old 10-10-2021, 08:22 PM   #24
cj
@TimeformUSfigs
 
cj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Moore, OK
Posts: 45,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
From Andy's comments on ATR Friday, they can't even get the run up distances right. DUH????
I know this is something that is being worked on. IMO run ups should never have been published if tracks weren't going to take them seriously. Very few places, if any, did for a long time. Most of what is reported is a very rough guess. But things do appear to be moving in the right direction.

As I've said, just tell us the real distance (race plus run up) and we can usually handle the rest. The most difficult part of verifying race times from video are inaccurate run ups being given. Of course the ideal situation would be to tell us the real distance and time from the gate.
cj is offline   Reply With Quote Reply
Reply




Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

» Advertisement
» Current Polls
Wagering Pool with best chance to find an overlay.
Win - 36.36%
20 Votes
Place - 3.64%
2 Votes
Show - 9.09%
5 Votes
Exacta - 30.91%
17 Votes
Trifecta - 7.27%
4 Votes
Superfexta - 1.82%
1 Vote
Pick(x) - 10.91%
6 Votes
Hi 5 Pentafecta - 0%
0 Votes
Total Votes: 55
This poll is closed.
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:14 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2021 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.