I' m Running A Test on TUP Race -3, Need Help
 

here you are Bill
Attachment 32958

barb craven:

Barb, Thank you for your help.
So far my tests were inconclusive.

Partsnut,

I hope that you and your wife are doing well....

I think that I have a remote idea of what you are trying to do...I did a couple of races using the adjusted speed ratings from Rdss from the races that Bill V. worked and enter the pacelines into some of Sartin' s old programs... From limited races and from prior studies that I have experimented with energy numbers from a buddy, it is not always the highest adjusted ratings or speed number race...I believe it has been always been in the best early pace fractions or best last fractions.....I will try to post some examples of what I am trying to say...

Anyways, good luck in what you are trying to test....

Thanks for the well wishes.
I did a comparison of this race with a couple of programs that I use to see which one would spit out the best results. I tested the RDSS numbers against the Sartin speed rating adjusted by variant method.
Naturally, either method was good and is dependent as to the pace lines I pick, but honestly the old Sartin method was better. Here is what came up running both methods with AmerVar (Taulbot Pace Calculator).
The top screen shot came from the RDSS adjusted speed numbers.
The bottom screen shot came from the Sartin Speed rating adjusted by variant from the DRF As you can see, one method had the winner in the top 4 and the other in the top 2. Both were good but the latter was better. I also review a contender screen that a friend had sent me from HSH and the Sartin Speed Rating adjusted to variant outperformed it as well. MPH came in with outstanding results using the SSR.

TUP 12-22-12 (Race-5)
 

TUP 12-22-12 (Race-5)

Here's another contentious race that favors a sustained type.
The speed points and pressure gauge (29X0) indicates this.
Lot's of early type horses in this race.
I personally favor the 3 & 4 horses.
I used MPH for this race using the SSR numbers adjusted to variant.

With respect, it's ridiculous to compare relative value of different tools and methods on the basis of a single race, much less a low class Maiden Claiming race like this one. Even weaker to borrow numbers from one method and adjust them by a different method. Each method may have its own well functioning, built in and coherent adjustment system - and each would likely be rendered less effective - over a large number of events - by mixing and matching numbers from one into the other. Just my opinion - and advice to others, FWIW.

It is meaningless to base any comparison between methods on 1 race.

Also FWIW, here is how the race would likely have been done by almost anybody using RDSS, who has been following any of the discussions here about paceline selection and Contender identification. A different outcome than your mash-up above:

Attachment 33004

Wow This is fun
 

Wow we get to post all kinds of programs

Bill H Here are your lines into KGEN/Thoromation
and the RDSS results

Attachment 33005

1-4
Attachment 33007