BRIS Pace and Corresponding Times

[jeebus1083]

I'm trying to figure out corresponding times to Brisnet pace figs for both sprints and routes. Since the figures are in theory, transportable across tracks and distances, I am trying to find a hypothetical norm in which to translate the figures. Anyone versed in Brisnet figs that can help me with this?

Thanks!

[FakeNameChanged]

Reverse engineering is your friend.

Or maybe shoot them an email or call and ask them how they do it. They won't give you their secret formula but may give you a ballpark figure.

[DeltaLover]

Originally Posted by jeebus1083

I'm trying to figure out corresponding times to Brisnet pace figs for both sprints and routes. Since the figures are in theory, transportable across tracks and distances, I am trying to find a hypothetical norm in which to translate the figures. Anyone versed in Brisnet figs that can help me with this?

Thanks!

It ain't worth it. Brisnet pace figs consist a very weak signal and I do not think you should bother. You will be much better off if you bite the bullet and build your own from scratch.

[FakeNameChanged]

Originally Posted by DeltaLover

It ain't worth it. Brisnet pace figs consist a very weak signal and I do not think you should bother. You will be much better off if you bite the bullet and build your own from scratch.

Kind of where I was going as well with the rev. engr. suggestion. When you see how times stack up, the next step is to do as you suggested. The only problem is when someone is enamored or attached to a set of figs, they'll seldom vary from their use.

[Tom]

I have calculated the pace and final times conversion to times from Multicaps files. I'll post later - my main computer crashed again, so I have to search back ups to get the file.

[Tom]

Well, I was able to recover my main computer with a boot disk, so I found the file.

I used the Multicaps program to find the date and used a scatter diagram to get the conversions. Not complete yet, but I have most sprints ready.

Sprints E1 (E1*-0.1)+31.717
E2 Sprints and E1 Routes =(E2*-0.1)+56.15 or (E1*-0.1)+56.15

5.5 = (SR *-0.1112)+114.85, = (LP *-0.1023)+27.323
6.0 = (SR *-0.1206)+121.89, = (LP *-0.1046)+33.723
6.5 = (SR *-0.1289)+129.20, = (LP *-0.1012)+39.889
7.0 = (SR *-0.1414)+136.81, = (LP *-0.1013)+46.307

The same formula is used for E1 routes (4Fur) and E2 sprints (2fur).

I need to finish the LP for routes, but the E2 is = the SR for routes. I'll try to finish tomorrow.

[jeebus1083]

Originally Posted by Tom

Well, I was able to recover my main computer with a boot disk, so I found the file.

I used the Multicaps program to find the date and used a scatter diagram to get the conversions. Not complete yet, but I have most sprints ready.



The same formula is used for E1 routes (4Fur) and E2 sprints (2fur).

I need to finish the LP for routes, but the E2 is = the SR for routes. I'll try to finish tomorrow.

Thanks, Tom. Looking forward to it.

[Speed Figure]

When I 1st started to use bris pp's I wanted to try to adjust the numbers to my liking. I made this chart back in 2003 for Santa Anita male 6 furlong races. I would than make a pace TV to adjust the pace numbers and use the DRF TV and adjust the final times.

                   "Walker Pace & Speed figures"

   Class              6 Furlongs         SA               
 

    G1       21.2 = 105/43.8 =113/108.1 =112           
 
    G2       21.3 = 104/43.9 =112/108.2 =110            

   G3/LS     21.4 = 103/44.0 =111/108.3 =108            

  Clf/C100   21.5 = 102/44.1 =110/108.4 =106            

  NW3/C80    21.6 = 101/44.2 =109/109.0 =104            
  
   C62.5     21.7 = 100/44.3 =108/109.1 =102            

  NW2/C50    21.8 = 99 /44.4 =107/109.2 =100            

  NW1/C40    21.9 = 98/ 44.5 =106/109.3 =98             

    C32      22.0 = 97/ 44.6 =105/109.4 =96             

  C25/MSW    22.1 = 96/ 44.7 =104/110.0 =94             

    C20      22.2 = 95/ 44.8 =103/110.1 =92             
   
    C16      22.3 = 94/ 44.9 =102/110.2 =90             

 C12.5/MC50  22.4 = 93/ 45.0 =101/110.3 =88             

  C10/MC40   22.5 = 92/ 45.1 =100/110.4 =86            

   C8/MC32   22.6 = 91/ 45.2 =99 /111.0 =84             

    MC25     22.7 = 90/ 45.3 =98 /111.1 =80

[jeebus1083]

Thanks for sharing that. What about routes?

Both you and Tom bring some interesting ideas aboard.

[Speed Figure]

That chart is from 2003. I've completely changed it and have done basically every track and distance. A lot of the class levels have really changed since then.

[jeebus1083]

Originally Posted by Speed Figure

That chart is from 2003. I've completely changed it and have done basically every track and distance. A lot of the class levels have really changed since then.

Since the figs themselves are (in theory), "universal", my goal is to assign a universal time to each figure. Howard Sartin basically did this (Sartin Downs) in his programs. I want to make sure that I scale this as close as possible so that the times spit out will reflect as close to real life as possible. In other words, even though the formula would apply the same to all horses plugged in, I don't want to have the horses too fast or slow on any given call.

My scale of distances will only be from 5.5f to 9.5f... 10f plus are useless because I'm pretty sure that the E2 at the long distances are the 1m call. That would explain why the E2 is either very very high or very very low (mile times can fluctuate wildly due to pace)... and races less than 5.5f have no E1 figure. My best guesstimate would be to figure out an raw equivalent BRIS scale figure after beaten lengths are applied but without a variant available, I don't know if the results would be satisfactory.

[jeebus1083]

Speed Figure

How did you come up with the corresponding charts? I'm sure that there had to be some sort of databasing involved. I want to make sure that when figures are entered into my spreadsheet, I don't get an insane turn time or final fraction. I want the times to reflect some sort of reality so not to over/under-rate runners.

Tom,

You mentioned scatter diagramming. How did it come to whatever formula you came to?

I'm kind of stuck at the moment.

Thanks!

[jeebus1083]

I took the stuff that Speed Figure generated and "formulated" some equivalent times by figure by distance in sprints from 5.5f to 7f. Basically, it took some elbow grease and projection based on pace multiplier concepts. Here is my chart:

Fig	1F	S/C	5.5f	6F	6.5f	7f
113	20.40	43.80	62.40	68.30	74.00	79.60
112	20.50	43.90	62.50	68.40	74.10	79.70
111	20.60	44.00	62.60	68.50	74.20	79.80
110	20.70	44.10	62.70	68.60	74.30	79.90
109	20.80	44.20	62.80	68.70	74.40	80.00
108	20.90	44.30	62.90	68.80	74.50	80.10
107	21.00	44.40	63.00	68.90	74.60	80.20
106	21.10	44.50	63.10	69.00	74.70	80.30
105	21.20	44.60	63.20	69.10	74.80	80.40
104	21.30	44.70	63.30	69.20	74.90	80.50
103	21.40	44.80	63.40	69.30	75.00	80.60
102	21.50	44.90	63.50	69.40	75.10	80.70
101	21.60	45.00	63.60	69.50	75.20	80.80
100	21.70	45.10	63.70	69.60	75.30	80.90
99	21.80	45.20	63.80	69.70	75.40	81.00
98	21.90	45.30	63.90	69.80	75.50	81.10
97	22.00	45.40	64.00	69.90	75.60	81.20
96	22.10	45.50	64.10	70.00	75.70	81.30
95	22.20	45.60	64.20	70.10	75.80	81.40
94	22.30	45.70	64.30	70.20	75.90	81.50
93	22.40	45.80	64.40	70.30	76.00	81.60
92	22.50	45.90	64.50	70.40	76.10	81.70
91	22.60	46.00	64.60	70.50	76.20	81.80
90	22.70	46.10	64.70	70.60	76.30	81.90
89	22.80	46.20	64.80	70.70	76.40	82.00
88	22.90	46.30	64.90	70.80	76.50	82.10
87	23.00	46.40	65.00	70.90	76.60	82.20
86	23.10	46.50	65.10	71.00	76.70	82.30
85	23.20	46.60	65.20	71.10	76.80	82.40
84	23.30	46.70	65.30	71.20	76.90	82.50
83	23.40	46.80	65.40	71.30	77.00	82.60
82	23.50	46.90	65.50	71.40	77.10	82.70
81	23.60	47.00	65.60	71.50	77.20	82.80
80	23.70	47.10	65.70	71.60	77.30	82.90
79	23.80	47.20	65.80	71.70	77.40	83.00
78	23.90	47.30	65.90	71.80	77.50	83.10
77	24.00	47.40	66.00	71.90	77.60	83.20
76	24.10	47.50	66.10	72.00	77.70	83.30
75	24.20	47.60	66.20	72.10	77.80	83.40
74	24.30	47.70	66.30	72.20	77.90	83.50
73	24.40	47.80	66.40	72.30	78.00	83.60
72	24.50	47.90	66.50	72.40	78.10	83.70
71	24.60	48.00	66.60	72.50	78.20	83.80
70	24.70	48.10	66.70	72.60	78.30	83.90
69	24.80	48.20	66.80	72.70	78.40	84.00
68	24.90	48.30	66.90	72.80	78.50	84.10
67	25.00	48.40	67.00	72.90	78.60	84.20
66	25.10	48.50	67.10	73.00	78.70	84.30
65	25.20	48.60	67.20	73.10	78.80	84.40
64	25.30	48.70	67.30	73.20	78.90	84.50
63	25.40	48.80	67.40	73.30	79.00	84.60
62	25.50	48.90	67.50	73.40	79.10	84.70
61	25.60	49.00	67.60	73.50	79.20	84.80
60	25.70	49.10	67.70	73.60	79.30	84.90
59	25.80	49.20	67.80	73.70	79.40	85.00
58	25.90	49.30	67.90	73.80	79.50	85.10
57	26.00	49.40	68.00	73.90	79.60	85.20
56	26.10	49.50	68.10	74.00	79.70	85.30
55	26.20	49.60	68.20	74.10	79.80	85.40
54	26.30	49.70	68.30	74.20	79.90	85.50
53	26.40	49.80	68.40	74.30	80.00	85.60
52	26.50	49.90	68.50	74.40	80.10	85.70
51	26.60	50.00	68.60	74.50	80.20	85.80
50	26.70	50.10	68.70	74.60	80.30	85.90

Routes on the other hand, have proven tricky. Trying to get the appropriate spread for deceleration. Also, marathon distances such as 1 1/4m, the E1 is the 1/2 while E2 is the Mile call. This would explain the high E2s that I observe from those particular lines.

If anyone can help or add feedback to this, it is greatly appreciated!

[Tom]

Finally got the routes finished. Not enough data for the long ones or LP at 10F. I have the mile time for 10, but it is suspect - out of 5 data points, I had to throw out 2 to get anything reasonable, so I don't use it. To get the data, I need a race, say 10F, and then I also need pacelines at the exact distance so that the times are not adjusted by the program.

Sprints E1 (E1*-0.1)+31.717
E2 Sprints and E1 Routes =(E2*-0.1)+56.15 or (E1*-0.1)+56.15

5.5 = (SR *-0.1112)+114.85, = (LP *-0.1023)+27.323
6.0 = (SR *-0.1206)+121.89, = (LP *-0.1046)+33.723
6.5 = (SR *-0.1289)+129.20, = (LP *-0.1012)+39.889
7.0 = (SR *-0.1414)+136.81, = (LP *-0.1013)+46.307
8.0 = (SR *-0.1608)+153.23, = (LP *-0.0987)+35.169
8.2 = (SR *-0.1666)+158.19, = (LP *-0.0964)+39.356
8.3 = (SR *-0.1750)+158.91, = (LP *-0.1044)+39.912
8.5 = (SR *-0.1755)+161.24, = (LP *-0.0998)+41.699
9.0 = (SR *-0.1836)+168.45, = (LP *-0.0973)+47.876
10.0 = (SR *-0.1813)+174.53, = Not enough data

[jeebus1083]

Thanks Tom!