Quote:
Originally Posted by Bill V.
When in a discussion about projecting the pace of race
recently, I thought about all the races I have watched over many years at Parx.
I thought that I had noticed something.
I started keeping track of the pace of race from all the races at Parx.
Right now I have 170 race for 3 + male at the 1 mile distance.
Here is what I have seen. It seems to me that the longer the race goes the
less likely the splits will fall into a range of 1 from the average.
For example at the second call, the average pace of race for 3 + males is
113.4
So I went and sorted the second call pace of race to find how
many times in those 170 race the pace of race was between 113 and 114.
This turned out to happen 74 times in the 170 races
The grid below shows the results of all the splits and final time
using the same measure of within 1 of the average.
According to my chart, The first number ( around the first turn at Parx )
shows an average of 24.5 The range of 24-25 shows the highest percent
of the splits, Yet final time shows the least amount of races within 1 of the average. on 40 of 170
My idea is based on what Doc said. That a 5000 claimer runs the early pace
just as well as a champion. The difference is the 3rd fraction.
Your thoughts ?
Attachment 36350
Thanks
Bill
"Life is so simple and beautiful when you live in the present moment. what greater gift can you give then presence ? Pure presence is from the heart" |
I regard to Bill V.’s post, above, in Tom Brohamer’s book he spends considerable time talking about the DRF variant adjustments. Although it does not read as simplistic as I will write here, it boils down to the same thing.
First he writes that first fraction adjustments should be kept to a minimum. He goes on to say that the biggest adjustment to the first fraction should be on a “track to track” basis. Further, he says that even on a track labeled as “heavy”, the first fraction remains very close to the track par whether the speed of the overall track is either fast or slow by many lengths.
Finally, he initially says the second fraction should receive 50% of the DRF variant, but goes on to say that the first fraction should also receive a smaller portion of the second call adjustment. It should receive a smaller portion for the reason mention above. And, of course, the final time would receive a 50% Adjustment.
Looking at Bill V.’s chart, below, you can see that what was written more than 20 years ago remains the same today. The first fraction in Bill V.’s chart is very similar throughout the year regardless of the track condition and daily variant and therefore not requiring much of an adjustment.
When my son and I were writing program code for my database, we took the variant adjustments live about a year after we initially started. The reason for that was so we could gather information on 10’s of thousands of races and see if we agreed with what we had learned from Brohamer. Once we had this additional information we “tweaked” it a bit for our own purposes based on what we learned from our research before finally taking the coding live.