Re TrackMaster Data Problems

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Tim Y

okay still scratching my head then

Your original thesis of the Track Super changing is the most logical... Wanted to make it his own I guess.

[mlking]

I just phoned Trackmaster (about 4.15 pm EST) and was told they expect to have the problem resolved by tonight. I requested that they send me an e-mail as soon as it is fixed and they said they would.

Mike W.

[reckless]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

In that IND 5/18 card (yesterday) I noticed many 0 TrackMaster SRs (re-downloaded/converted just now). That's your clue that the adjusted data was bogus for those PP lines. If there was a valid TrackMaster SR value (non 0), I expect those lines were correctly adjusted (or as correctly as they would ever be, as the case may be).

FWIW, I am making an adjustment to the RDSS next version code such that if the TrackMaster SR is 0 for any reason, the adjusted data is just shown as blank (like Speculator does).



Ted

hi again Ted:

First off, thanks for checking out the Indiana Downs race I mentioned and your replies to my queries today.

BUT, while you said that Kentucky race for the '3' horse was simply just a slow race, did you notice the Adj. Speed Ratings of the three fall races??

This steed raced on 10/24, 11/9, and 11/28, and for each respective race earned the following Adj. Speed Ratings: -02, -35, -43.

The '8' horse in that same third race had past lines from Laurel, and raced on turf on 10/18 and 11/6, stopping the clock both times while earning Adj. Speed Ratings of -22 and -24 respectively.

Also, the raw times times for those Laurel races seemed more 'normal' than those Kentucky races of the '3' horse.

And one more thing, Ted, please.

Should I, as a RDSS subscriber, have known that a '0' Trackmaster speed rating was trouble, aside from the silly times and adj. speed figures?? You seemed to have made mention of that in your post today which I quoted above.

Again, thanks.

[Ted Craven]

Hi Ralph,

I think the IND 05/19 card you downloaded had different info in it that the one I downloaded (perhaps at a different stage of the problem being resolved). Here is what I see for the 2 horses you cite - different Adjusted SRs than you got.



I also checked those raw lines you mentioned for both horses against the Result Charts and the Pace of Race call times were all per the Result Charts.

I don't expect RDSS users to necessarily be aware of the impact of a 0 TrackMaster SR on adjusted figures. I only mentioned it in my last reply to you in an attempt to give a helpful pointer as to how to tell whether any given paceline you might be looking at was 'good' or 'bad'.

Hope that clarifies. And I hope I can report by the end of the night whether TrackMaster seems to have fixed the problem and whether cards May 20 and forward are correct.

Ted

[reckless]

Thanks again Ted.

I didn't re-download the the Indiana Downs races for tonight because I rather not handicap on the fly, me being a dummy after all.

I had originally d-loaded the file earlier this morning and was in the process of e-mailing you about these problem items we subsequently discussed.

Anyway a betless day at the races are also winning races.

[Ted Craven]

Hello Folks,

Just an update for you on the problem TrackMaster/Equibase were having yesterday and today with their data files. At 7:30pm EST they informed me that the problem had been fixed and they were now commencing re-generating all cards dated May 20 and forward. As of this writing, I haven’t seen any cards for tomorrow (or later) which HAVE been fixed, so I recommend giving TrackMaster overnight to get everything corrected, then begin downloading again in the morning (perhaps starting with one card to see if it is indeed fixed). In the morning, I'll report in here after we see what has (hopefully) happened overnight, (or most likely other more early risers will check in first).

A reminder: the test of whether a card has been corrected, is whether there are no longer any TrackMaster Speed Rating figures which show as 0 .

An important reminder: if you re-download and re-convert any card which you previously downloaded and converted, which was ‘bad’ (i.e. over the past few days), you must uncheck the ‘Don’t Duplicate Tasks’ box in the RDSS Data Centre (if you use RDSS), so that the Tasks to re-download and re-convert the updated, corrected cards will actually run and not be skipped because they were done before.

If you are downloading directly from Trackmaster for Spec or Val data files, remember to delete the temporary files created previously for the cards which you are now re-downloading (otherwise you'll continue to get the old data).

Ted

[BJennet]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

Hello Folks,

Just an update for you on the problem TrackMaster/Equibase were having yesterday and today with their data files. At 7:30pm EST they informed me that the problem had been fixed and they were now commencing re-generating all cards dated May 20 and forward. As of this writing, I haven’t seen any cards for tomorrow (or later) which HAVE been fixed, so I recommend giving TrackMaster overnight to get everything corrected, then begin downloading again in the morning (perhaps starting with one card to see if it is indeed fixed). In the morning, I'll report in here after we see what has (hopefully) happened overnight, (or most likely other more early risers will check in first).

A reminder: the test of whether a card has been corrected, is whether there are no longer any TrackMaster Speed Rating figures which show as 0 .

An important reminder: if you re-download and re-convert any card which you previously downloaded and converted, which was ‘bad’ (i.e. over the past few days), you must uncheck the ‘Don’t Duplicate Tasks’ box in the RDSS Data Centre (if you use RDSS), so that the Tasks to re-download and re-convert the updated, corrected cards will actually run and not be skipped because they were done before.

If you are downloading directly from Trackmaster for Spec or Val data files, remember to delete the temporary files created previously for the cards which you are now re-downloading (otherwise you'll continue to get the old data).

Ted

Ted,

Thanks for working so hard to keep us updated. However, just want to note that I downloaded a BEL card for tomorrow as a test, and there is still bad data in some of these races, but it seems to be no more than about 5 bad lines per race. BTW, these are recent (post-1/09) races. I hope TM doesn't think that the problem is solved.

Cheers,

B Jennet

[Ted Craven]

Yes, I see the bogus Adjusted Speed Ratings and misadjusted lines, in CT, BEL and WO (and likely everywhere).

I'm studying what's what, to report to TrackMaster. Also, for Bundle data users, you can't retrieve Results for any of the PP lines.

Thanks!

Ted

[Ted Craven]

I am studying the effect of TrackMaster's data 'upgrade' on our programs. I am still suspicious of whether the data we're getting is being adjusted in the same way it used to be - certainly it is not, in the case where you see lines with very low or negative Adjusted Speed Ratings.

I suggest proceeding with caution, or avoiding working the cards with adjusted data until I can discuss with TrackMaster (now they say their upgrade work is finished) what exactly they changed/upgraded about their data and how that might affect our particular adjustment formulas.

Ted

[clore1030]

Originally Posted by BJennet

Ted,

Thanks for working so hard to keep us updated. However, just want to note that I downloaded a BEL card for tomorrow as a test, and there is still bad data in some of these races, but it seems to be no more than about 5 bad lines per race. BTW, these are recent (post-1/09) races. I hope TM doesn't think that the problem is solved.

Cheers,

B Jennet

Does there appear to be any commonality among the affected lines?

I'm thinking more of surface or distance, such as it being prevalent among turf or inner dirt races.

Funny, now with this happening, I am reminded of a time about three months ago that a west coast invader showed up in NY. It had a speed rating of "0" for a given race, but I attributed that to its apparently having shattered a track record, it was a amazingly fast race somewhere around 1:07 or so. I meant to bring it up to Ted, but it was late, I was tired and forgot about it the next day.