Go Back   Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up > Classic Sartin Programs - Support, Discussion > Speculator
Mark Forums Read
Google Site Search Get RDSS Sartin Library RDSS FAQs Conduct Register Site FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts

Speculator Speculator - FAQs, Technical Support, Examples, etc

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-14-2006, 11:46 AM   #1
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,853
TrackMaster Variants (Evil or Misunderstood?)

These thoughts were prompted by comments from Alydar_David and Ramon201 on this thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by alydar_David
While Val isn't dead I think it's seriously wounded. The program doesn't perform as well as it did prior to the Trackmaster change in February. I've handicapped thousands of races before and after the change and there is a discernable difference.

It's like blasting away with a shotgun now. Before it was like taking careful aim with a sniper's rifle.

One way to offset this is to box like crazy whenever there's value. I've noticed many four-horse-box trifecta hits, and some outrageous five-horse-box superfecta scores. Unfortunately, that approach is not for everyone.

The older manual programs should still work as well as ever. They still use 1/5 of a second. I'm not exactly sure which programs have suffered from the change. Certainly, Ted would know.
I know that Val2, Val3c and all versions of Speculator up to Spec150 are affected by TrackMaster/Equibase since Feb 1, 2006 now stating Daily Track Variants (DTV) in 10ths rather than 5ths (that is, 10ths normalized to 8 furlongs). I can't say about immediately previous programs like Synthesis and PaceLauncher which also used TrackMaster data files.

Doc always used only HALF the DTV when adjusting the raw pacelines from TM. This is consistent with his frequent observations that a major component of the variances in final times compared to their 3 year (or periodic) 'pars' was due to the effect of the Match Up in a given race (and also due to calibre of competition on any given day), and much less due to daily changes in the speed of the track surface. But when TM decreased the unit of measure of DTV from 2/10ths (1/5th) to 1/10 seconds this had the effect of causing the programs using their data to use the FULL daily variant instead of the historical HALF variant, thus mooting the foregoing discussion.

This doesn't mean much when DTVs are lower, say -7 to +7, but when you get wild variants like +30 or -27 (like the winner of BEL0610 race 13 in its last paceline, discussed elsewhere recently), adding or subtracting such large numbers to the raw call times can adjust a winner right out of contention, plus make the speed ratings look very bizarre compared to final time.

I'd like to make clear that the ONLY data from TrackMaster used to modify the raw call times is the Daily Track Variant. NOT the Speed Ratings. The Speed Ratings are TM's equalizing measure of Final Time - a guideline for selecting representative pacelines for today's matchup. They have NO effect on the velocities calculated from Equalized, Normalized, Adjusted times, and NO effect on subsequent factors. If you concentrate on mitigating the effects of variants gone wild, and use F6 in Validator or the Perceptor I Total ranking screen in Speculator Past Performances (plus common sense) to select pacelines, I think you end up close to the territory which Ramon discusses, and this seems right, given the best of what we understand Doc intended. And you don't have to rely as much on TM's Speed Ratings to select pacelines, if you don't want to.

Unfortunately, in Validator and previous (excepting ValM), there is no way to manually modify the DTV supplied by TrackMaster. In Speculator you can use the manual entry screen after you have selected some pacelines. As Ramon does, you could take the above mentioned -27 variant and make it be only -9 by entering +18 (-27 +18 = -9). And you could make that DTV = 0 by entering +27 (which puts the horse on top by a mile), like Richie has been experimenting with. Some will recall around February 1 we were discussing the relative merits of using the new (imposed by TM) FULL variant compared to the historical HALF variant used by the programs. The results of some tests were tentatively conclusive, so I released Spec150 with a default of the FULL variant, but made a setting whereby you could reinstate the historical HALF variant (by renaming the file _TVHALF.TXT to TVHALF.TXT, see the Spec150 Release Notes PDF). This was one of the main reasons for even doing Spec150 (along with some bug fixes).

Three things occurred on Feb 1, 2006 which affect Sartin Programs using TrackMaster data:

1. TM updated the par tables they use to calculate DTV and Speed Ratings. They have done this annually since forever.

2. They changed the scale of the Speed Ratings (forced by owner Equibase) from 30 - 100 to 0 - 130 to be in conformance with 'international' (and it seems, Beyer-like scales)

3. The Daily Track Variant (as well as Speed Rating), which is a function of a day's averaged, normalized final times for a given track/surface compared to the par they maintain for that track/surface - had its unit of measure changed from 5ths to 10ths.


Since we know TM's SRs don't affect our numbers, I believe points #1 and #3 above have the biggest impact on changed readouts, with the principal culprit being #1, the new annual pars, and the accomplice being #3 with its effect on how much variant our numbers are now subject to. But I agree with Ramon, that for now, a redoubled attention to the variants being accepted in the calculations is still a source of good mutuels. It just seems there must now be more work required to keep them realistic, in some cases - and paying close attention to what you're doing is never a bad thing.

In my work on the RDSS Windows software, I am now concentrating on the 'Adjustments' module which, when using TM data, permits you to use whatever percentage of DTV you want (e.g. 100%, 50%, 0%), put a minimum/maximum cap (e.g. like Ramon's -9 / +9); also, enter and store regular shipper adjustments from one track to another, one surface to another; use the historical Val/Spec Universal par table for distance adjustments, or DRF 3 year best times, or commercial pars such as HSH, Cynthia, or PaceFigures, or your own. Also change how DTV is applied, from simply 1/10th second per point to 1/10th second normalized to 8 furlongs, or .0125 seconds per point per furlong, which is how TM calculates them. (Amongst other things, these are my current excuses for taking so long to deliver this thing!)

I don't know whether TrackMaster data is becoming too 'dirty' or 'sloppy' to use or whether their last par upgrade had a lot of defects, or whether BRIS, or DRF or HDW data would be better. All these questions can be answered. I know I can't simplistically go to TrackMaster and say: "your data sucks - I lost the Derby, the Preakness and the Belmont for the first time in 10 years." Some people won... (and I'd need to give them a bit more detail than 'sucks'). It reminds me more than ever that we need to continue to forge into the future.

All thoughts welcomed!

Ted
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™

Last edited by Ted Craven; 06-14-2006 at 01:49 PM.
Ted Craven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2006, 02:01 PM   #2
Houndog
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,258
TrackMaster Variants Comments

Ted as usual a very informative post. I monitor the HTR board run by Ken Mansa and they have very sharp people there also. I get the sense that their data provider HDW run by Jim Cramer and Ron Tiller are very careful with their work. Ron Tiller also seems to be very accessible as he posts quite often on the HTR board. For awhile Ellis Starr was available at Trackmaster, but I don’t even know if he is associated with them now.

What you plan to do with RDSS as far as the adjustment module is not only a good idea, but I think necessary if one wishes to continue to work with Trackmaster data. Perhaps because of the sometimes wild track adjustments we are seeing a renaissance of the older manual entry programs. Ted, as I told you before I really like working with Energy but if you are doing multiple tracks it becomes a challenge. Of all the alternative data providers you mentioned BRIS, DRF, or HDW I would prefer HDW for the reasons mentioned above. I know they are not interested in pay as you go downloads as they sell monthly subscriptions. I can also understand that some people do not play every day so they could not justify the cost of a monthly subscription. Other than the quality of data that I think they would provide subscribers get unlimited downloads for a monthly fee. This is not a commercial for HDW but I tried this service for a month when I was working with the velocity program HTR has. I was happy with the value added data they provide such as charts, jockey-trainer stats, etc.

Also if you are thinking of having a modeling module in RDSS you will need to have all the downloads for the tracks you are playing. Anyhow I think the adjustment module is a good idea if we are to continue using Trackmaster Data. I hope others post on this topic because it is very important in the direction that Ted decides to go in the development of RDSS.
Houndog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2006, 02:15 PM   #3
Houndog
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,258
Trackmaster and Polytrack

I have to wonder how Trackmaster will handle the Polytrack issue which many tracks will be switching to in the very near future. How fast will they respond to these changes remains to be seen. I am not trying to cause trouble here, but I think this is an important issue to consider especially when you are putting real money on Equalized, Normalized, and Adjusted pacelines.
Houndog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2006, 03:30 PM   #4
Houndog
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,258
Trackmaster and Doc Sartin

If I recall correctly Doc was initially against automatic downloads for pp data. Only by working very closely with Ellis Starr at Trackmaster and after many trips back and forth to Trackmaster and O'Henry House was he satisfied with the adjustments that was to be made with Pace-Launcher, Synthesis,etc.

It seems to me when Trackmaster made these changes no-one was notified about them. I would have to think that Doc Sartin would not have accepted the current state of affairs as it was so contrary to what he knew to be true.
Perhaps downloads is not a major moneymaker for Trackmaster so they may be putting their resources elsewhere. Looking at all the other software developers out there I cannot think of anyone using Trackmaster Data.

HTR (Ken Mansa) - HDW data
SYNERGISM VI (Bob Purdy) - HDW data
HSH (David Schwartz) - HDW data
Equisim - Bris Data
All In One - HDW data
Netcapper - HDW data
JCAPPER - Bris and TSN Data
Pace Appraiser (Randy Giles) - Bris Data
Master Magician (Michael Pizzolla) - Post Time Solutions
Power On-Line (Steve Wolfson) - BRIS or TSN
Trackmaster SW (Trackmaster) - Trackmaster

I was wrong Trackmaster uses Trackmaster data. The Pace Advantage BBS had a poll about the worst software. Trackmaster SW came in first by a large margin. I like Trackmaster's price $1.00 for a download, but really have to wonder if we would be better off with this download without any pars or variants. I apologize for going on like this but I really have all the members of this BBS in mind when I am posting this. Ted, is busy developing a software product that may overcome this problem. Since Ted was asking for some input these are only my opinions on data providers.
Houndog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2006, 06:31 PM   #5
RichieP
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,014
1) BIZZARO - guess thats my word for evil

Having said that as long as some alternate method is available in RDSS which allows one to use raw data in the calculations and various reads is fine with me.

Can you imagine being able to use "reality based" data coupled with some unreal technological advances Ted has made in RDSS? Going on the paceline screen - clicking on a paceline and having a screen pop up whcih shows the replay of THAT race u are considering. Are you SERIOUS !
These other software's on the market are in for a RUDE awakening when this baby is born.

all bull**** aside remember I said that ok? Then when you see it in action tell me if I was "shilling" for Ted ok? This will be the BEST tool on the market to help SERIOUS cappers WIN.

Being able to access a Drf sr+var would be real nice too. As far as I know the only files that have that are the Drf and PostTime daily.

Richie
RichieP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2006, 07:02 PM   #6
Fast4522
Former member
 
Fast4522's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Gun Country
Posts: 363
Send a message via AIM to Fast4522
What is real nice is to be able to use that Buck download on several different programs. I am stuck on Bris because I love the Bris Custom Past Performance Generator, and I use the same Bris single File format for several programs, which ever one I feel like at the time. The track equalization was a snap to do in excel, but have to admit it did take me a long time to figure out the poly surface with the equalization. Pars become part of many programs because folks want to sell them, to me they are something to keep a eye on when considering a contender rather than driving my program to make the equalization. A simple table of more than 60 tracks either fast5 (-5) or slow7 (7) or any + or - figure that works for a given track.
Fast4522 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2006, 11:00 PM   #7
dugoutgold
Grade 1
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 206
Teds post and trkmast srs

First, very interesting post by Ted! My simple mind goes back to the day s when Doc and Ellis Starr both worked side by side on the srs etc. Ever since PIRCO closed shop and Ellis Starr went on to his touting service the srs and variants have in my humble opinion gone to hell in a handbasket. Guy Wadsworth and myself had many a conversation about this over the years while I was testing various versions of SPEC for him. As a matter of fact I was so fed up with the Trkmast Srs that he sent me a version of SPEC that had no variant!
I recall the last conversation I had with him he told me he thought he might finally be making some headway with them.
Im just glad that Ted is working on this problem.
I guess Im old school on this, many moons ago i had a pace program ( close to phase 2) and we used the old American turf monthly track pars and then to get the variant for each distance we simply took 20 srs out of the drf and averaged them and dumped them into the program. It worked well. No out of line srs and all
A thought for Ted here (as if he doesnt have enough of a headachc on his hands with all this Why not consult the master of the matchup himself on this? Jim bradshaw in hsi forst book wrote that (and its certainly true with trakmaster today) that most handicappers are adjustment happy. He had a simple and straightforward way of making adjustments when they are needed. This would be a great option in the new program!
dugoutgold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2006, 08:35 AM   #8
RichieP
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,014
Apathy

With only THREE people responding to a thread that is EXTREMELY serious as far as where this thing is heading I am depressed.

With all the emails,private messages,posts here I would think 2 pages of comments/advice/suggestions would already exist.

Ellis Starr, Trackmaster, whomever is NOT gonna do "jack" about this.They deal with customer base in the thousands. We are VERY VERY small afterthought especially NOW that Howard has retired which takes ALL of his powerful infuences and influential folks with him.

It is on US now.

Ted is the programmer who can make stuff happen.

Rich
RichieP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2006, 09:23 AM   #9
Houndog
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,258
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichieP
With only THREE people responding to a thread that is EXTREMELY serious as far as where this thing is heading I am depressed.

With all the emails,private messages,posts here I would think 2 pages of comments/advice/suggestions would already exist.

Ellis Starr, Trackmaster, whomever is NOT gonna do "jack" about this.They deal with customer base in the thousands. We are VERY VERY small afterthought especially NOW that Howard has retired which takes ALL of his powerful infuences and influential folks with him.

It is on US now.

Ted is the programmer who can make stuff happen.

Rich


Richie, I agree with you totally on this. This is way to important to be overlooked. I know other people have to have thoughts on this. Ted deserves all the input he can on this so he can figure the best way to proceed on this project.

Last edited by Houndog; 06-16-2006 at 09:27 AM.
Houndog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2006, 10:03 AM   #10
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,853
I am inclined to agree with the notion that Daily Track Variants can be misleading - except when they’re not. One of the points I was trying to make was that, for the time being, Spec150 does provide the means to formally use half the DTV, and all Spec versions provide the means on an ad hoc basis, to use no variant at all or limit the variant swings via the manual entry screen. Richie has been experimenting with that publicly. Others have done this for some time, with success.

Including this range of variant option and other means to modify raw data - when appropriate - is something I hope will be helpful in RDSS.

What I do know is what Ron Tiller at HDW pointed out - that one data provider’s variant being at odds with another data provider’s variant in a one race or in a hundred race sample, does not mean the method of computing those variants is defective. Relatively, one may be more, or one may be less effective than another, but that can only determined after review of a much larger sample. For every 1 race where a suspicious variant eliminates a winner, what if there are 10 other races where such adjustment brings a winner into contention?

I’m not saying TM’s variants pose no issues. I just don’t know, in a way that is useful in the aggregate - over a large number of events. I’d love to be able to critique the detailed formula they use to calculate those numbers, but I don’t see that happening. And something about specialization of labour...

Perhaps the Match Up provides the means to by-pass this whole variant effect, and I aim to become more proficient in that analysis. In the meanwhile, I’m just carrying on from the point where Guy left this software, which was using TM data and SRs and DTVs. He in turn was, in effect, carrying on from where Doc left things. There’s lots of options available.

(And I’d hate to tell those Spec users who have these elaborate manual adjustments that they should return all their winnings...)

Ted
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™
Ted Craven is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trackmaster Daily Variant? socantra Previous 'Handicapping Discussion' Forum 0 09-20-2005 09:29 PM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:13 AM.