Yeah but Mitch's example was "A horse that beats only 6 horses would get 50% and earn nothing", it was not a horse that had the 6th FASTEST time, it was a horse who had the 59th WORST time. Your example was for a horse with the 6th fastest time, and for that example, I agree with your math.
another point is that Mitch's example was based on a horse that finished 6th, not a horse that beat only 6 of 65. I get it now, was confused earlier.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Craven
RDSS uses the formula: 100 - 6/65*100 = 100 - 9.23 = 91% rounded.
A horse with 6th fastest workout time out of 65 horses that day and distance worked faster than 91% of the rest.
Then again, a horse who finished 1 out of 11 also gets about a 91%. Of these 2 different horses - or the same horse on 2 different days - if they both worked over 5 furlongs but 6/65 got a speed rating (measure of final workout time) of 80 (slower time) and 1/11 got a SR of 90 (faster time) -- which indicates the better effort? The 6/65 effort worked faster than 59 other horses, while the 1/11 worked faster than only 10 others. Does it matter?
I ask because this is a discussion Mitch and I have been having and I am wondering if the relative presentation of such figures can be tweaked. This readout has been in RDSS for years and Mitch is presenting new ways of using it to measure improvement, particularly in Maiden and longer layoff scenarios.
Ted
|