Synergism III and IV Compared

[Houndog]

Refer to the 2 screenshots of the initial entry screen. I am using the same tracks; fractional times; BL’s; DRF variant; no adjustment for track class except for the final CRC line in the Synergism III screenshot. I was mistaken in that Synergism III will use the Track Class Adjustment. If you don’t want to adjust for Track Class put a 0 in the CLS ADJ column.

In Synergism IV you can turn this feature on or off in the set-up configuration. I am using the same Par File in both programs. As you can see in the screenshots the TPR numbers are different. Look at the balance of EPR to FFR in Synergism III compared to EPR –LPR in Synergism IV. In Synergism III the EPR is higher in all cases while in Synergism IV LPR is higher with the exception of the Belmont line. It appears that Synergism IV is using the fractional par times also in the TPR adjustment process. The 4 furlong par for Belmont is 46.3 (tenths) while at Churchill it is 45.6. So you get a 44.6 adjusted SC in Synergism IV for Belmont while you get an adjusted 45.5 for EP in Synergism III.

Also look at the adjusted F1 for CD for both programs. The par at the 2furlong mark for Churchill is 22.0. Synergism IV slows it down by 2 tenths. What is nice the par file contains the ADV; 3yearbest; Track Class (if you choose); and in the case of Synergism IV it will also use the fractional par times in the adjustment process. I also entered the same fractional times; variants; in a TPR program written by SCHMIDT/HAMBLETON. The TPR program assumes a ADV variant of 17 in all cases. This works in many cases but some tracks such as CT and MNR this variant is not high enough. The ADV variants in the par file that Synergism III and IV uses also differentiates between sprints and routes.

Synergism III as far as TPR ratings are concerned closely resemble the TPR numbers generated by the program written by SCHMIDT/HAMBLETON. The differences will come in with tracks such as MNR and CT which have higher variants and are reflected in the ADV’s contained in the Synergism III and IV par files.

Which program you prefer is a matter of preference. If you want to stay close to the concepts discussed by Tom Hambleton in the book PMTR Synergism III is your better choice. Hambleton and Schmidt did not want to adjust TPR ratings by fractional par times. On the other hand if you want a program to make these adjustments also Synergism IV as you can see in the screenshot does this.

The question comes down to which is better? I cannot answer that. I think Synergism III will get some winners that Synergism IV misses because of this adjustment process. On the other hand it could be that Synergism IV will work better at certain tracks because of these adjustments. Good Luck!

[alydar_ David]

Nice work, Houndog, as usual.

:>)

[shoeless]

Great Job