Keep it Simple Silly

[Tim Y]

K.I.S.S. "Given the option of a direct and/or straight analysis and a more complicated one, you can rest assured what most people will use." According to Wikipedia: In software development analysis paralysis typically manifests itself through exceedingly long phases of project planning, requirements gathering, program design and data modeling, with little or no extra value created by those steps. When extended over too long a time frame, such processes tend to emphasize the organizational (i.e., bureaucratic) aspect of the software project, while detracting from its functional (value-creating) portion.

At Cook County Hospital in the mid 90's, the cardiac care ward was being over-run since too many pateints were being admitted for possible heart attack than warranted the amount of time and cost of care. A new Emergency Department director from Dartmouth, Dr. Brendan Reilly used the work of a Harvard mathematician to simplify the work up and after two years found the diagnostic rate had increased by 70%.The mathematician, after studying thousands of cases of patients presenting with chest pain found FOUR things to watch for, AND NOTHING ELSE; 1) abnormal ECG 2) pain like unstable angina 3) fluid on the lungs 4) systolic blood pressure below 100. If they had these four things they were admitted and it has been correct 90% of the time. If they were overweight, out of shape a smoker ,etc. IT DID NOT FACTOR INTO the diagnosis as those factors were NOT helpful but just represented "diagnostic noise."

That same logic is at work with handicapping a horse race. It is, at the heart, a competition amongst HORSES (we have each of their races broken down by segmental velocity) and their ability to go up against a set pace with a set style, over a distinct type of surface via a certain type of energy distribution.Like the Goldman algorithm of Cook County, extraneous information is diagnostic "noise."

Throwing in modification factors of workouts, jockeys, trainers, breeding etc. etc. all secondary factors of unkonwn relevance to the incremental velocity, make a handicapping decision haze move in over a race.How many times in the Follow Up did the authors tell us to "forget that horsey logic," to forget about class distinctions, to look at the horse and forget the rest, yet in article after article we read about those who simply could not let tme go always trying to add a modification factor to the variant, adjust for this or that? Just leave things alone and let the program do what it was designed to do: compare velocities to the proposed pace and running styles of the entrants in today's match up.

One corrupts the entire idea of pace analysis with secondary and tertiary factors that have NO direct bearing on modifying today's pace or a horse's ability to go up against or set one. How does breeding alter the pace lines (PAST TENSE) that we have to evaluate? From what we know today of studies of genetically identical twins, that epigentetics is far stronger an influence on phenotype than ever thought possible a few years ago. I was not aware of how much study has occurred in the breeding of animals since talking with our gate vet when she commented last Summer; "This new field is going to make old time breeding beliefs have to be all re-evaluated."

The trainer never runs the races, so how can his standing in the crowd effect ANY of the pacelines we use to put in the program? The horse runs against a pace in an energy style that compares to the others in today's contest and THAT IS IT.

Do yourself a favor and undergo an extraneo-ectmy to remove all that extraneous noise just like the many articles in the Follow Up have suggested. Keep It Simple Silly.