Run up distance

[For The Lead]

There was a recent post about "run up" distances.

Does anyone know the "run up" distance at 6 furlongs at Pimlico?

[RichieP]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

There was a recent post about "run up" distances.

Does anyone know the "run up" distance at 6 furlongs at Pimlico?

FTL:
Courtesy of Trackmaster/Equibase

6f runups:
Laurel - 60 feet
Pimlico - 5 feet

All this info fwiw is available to "see" in the TM Pdf downloads.
RDSS already has the runups added automatically in the race file.

Hope this helps

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by RichieP

FTL:
Courtesy of Trackmaster/Equibase

6f runups:
Laurel - 60 feet
Pimlico - 5 feet

All this info fwiw is available to "see" in the TM Pdf downloads.
RDSS already has the runups added automatically in the race file.

Hope this helps

Thanks.

So, on the basis of a horse running 55 feet per second, if you are comparing a line from LRL to PIM, you would have to slow the LRL line by almost a full second at the first call, true?

[fasthorses]

So, on the basis of a horse running 55 feet per second, if you are comparing a line from LRL to PIM, you would have to slow the LRL line by almost a full second at the first call, true?

The runup distance is untimed. So, all else being equal, the time to the first call at PIM should be a little slower than that at LRL because presumably (probably "certainly" would be a better word) the horses are running faster after 60 feet than they are at 5 feet. What the average velocity is in that 55 feet I'm not certain of. If it happens to be close to 55 fps then I'd guess you are close in your estimate if no other factors are involved. For example, at SA the turf sprint runs downhill and that slope significantly impacts fractions.

[For The Lead]

Regarding the above posts and all other such instances, not just PIM vs. LRL, how does RDSS handle this and how does the various, older Sartin programs handle it? I think it would be most interesting for those who may be manually inputing lines in the older programs. I would think the lack of an adjustment would show lines from PIM where the horse was "early" and went wire to wire to be a sustained horse when compared to horses with lines from other tracks because of this slower first fraction.

[tom]

Up through Thoromation, I adjusted the running lines track to track, using either Par Times ( a publication) or Glen Connolly's method of getting times from the From ( Brohamer's method in his book).

We did know why Pim and Lrl were a second apart a the fist call, we just adjusted for it.

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by For The Lead

Regarding the above posts and all other such instances, not just PIM vs. LRL, how does RDSS handle this and how does the various, older Sartin programs handle it?

Since the last month or so, the effect of varying runup distances are figured into the ITV and DTV figs supplied by TrackMaster. DTV is only a measure of average final times, by distance, surface and track, by day - so runup effect on fraction 1 time is watered down (though Bill V elsewhere observed a DTV changing by 1 point, after adding in runup). Same is true currently for ITV for Val4, Spec160 and RDSS), as ITV is extracted from a final time-based ITV since the late 1990's, then approximately apportioned over calls 1 and 2. TrackMaster supplies RDSS with a 3 call ITV set of values (to be used starting next RDSS version) so the 1st call point ITV will contain the most adjustment related to runup variances.

For older Sartin hand entered software, as Tom suggests, just bump up or down the Pace or Race times per the runup differentials of the from/to track pairs. In Speculator, you can manually modify POR times. Or in all cases, you can mentally down/upgrade specific or aggregate factors a notch or 2 based on your knowledge of whether a Fraction 1 time/velocity is slower than that of other contenders', due only to a shorter runup distance before the timer clicks on.

Ted