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 06-16-2006, 12:00 PM   #11
Houndog
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,258
Fair Enough

What you said is fine. Maybe all of us are going to have to be more diligent with the Match-Up and making are own adjustments when needed. Perhaps I am overstating the case since I do not work enough with Speculator to tell what tracks are causing problems. I do know that Spec150 did fine on Kentucky Derby day with the turf races I worked that day.

Maybe that has something to do with not having a wide range of variants for that track and surface. Nothing worthwhile is really easy or automatic when trying to handicap. We still have come a long way since Phase III days.
Houndog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2006, 08:54 PM   #12
WAB
Maiden
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2
Ted,

I just read the post about the many problems the the new TM variants are causing in the Val/Spec programs. All the discussion seems to be headed towards how the reprogram the new programs to make them compatible with the new data. Have you or any one else thought to modify the new TM data
so it conforms to the OLD format? Since you know the new scheme as opposed tho the old one, it seems to me that it would be much easier to reprogram the data format than to reprogram and change the internal formulas.

Andy
WAB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-16-2006, 11:29 PM   #13
tompkins
Grade 1
 
tompkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 708
There are still a few tracks that are NOT working with Speculator, but they are easy to stay away from. The program still works well, especially if one compares different versions of it: when they jive, you know there is dominance in that horse.
__________________
velocititian
tompkins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2006, 11:48 AM   #14
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by WAB
it seems to me that it would be much easier to reprogram the data format than to reprogram and change the internal formulas.
Andy,

A reasonable observation. Per my initial post above, I think the main issue (if there even is one), is with the new set of track pars TM introduced on Feb 1. They update these pars every year, for better or for worse. If you wanted to restate every DTV from every race in a Past Performance so it used a different (i.e. the previous year) set of track pars and thus was the same as last year, you'd first have to possess that previous set of pars, possess the current set of pars, calculate the difference, which tracks, which distances, then apply the difference and bingo - you'd be in the past again. No one's going to do that.

I think perhaps it makes more sense to find out what data (speed ratings, variants, distance or shipping adjustments) just doesn't make sense on a consistent basis, then tinker with it until you get a consistent method for making it make sense (i.e. getting the winner as a contender).

If ABC Downs ALWAYS projects way fast to BEL, then if you must use those lines for a horse, always make an adjustment to ABC which makes it make sense when it ships to BEL. Or if sprints still project too fast to routes at some tracks, modify them so they make sense (on screen or in your head).

Maybe one or a few of the par changes this year by TrackMaster don't make sense. If you can identify these, either avoid those pacelines or races, or adjust them. We don't have to accept only what they give us.

Ted
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™
Ted Craven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2006, 11:52 AM   #15
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by tompkins
There are still a few tracks that are NOT working with Speculator, but they are easy to stay away from. The program still works well, especially if one compares different versions of it: when they jive, you know there is dominance in that horse.
Which tracks, do you find?

How would the data have to change to work with Speculator? Or, conversely stated, how would Speculator have to handle the data differently from those tracks?

Can you suggest a couple of example races?

Ted
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™
Ted Craven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2006, 11:01 AM   #16
Peteman
Grade 2
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 97
Brilliant

(TED Wrote)
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!)

Ted,This is brilliant,to allow the user to adjust to changes, as one likes
not be locked into a program output like val2 with no way to change,amount of varient,track to track, distance to distance ect.This is the future of
handicapping software.Being able to apply small tweeks or large ones to
fit your style Everyone then will not have the same output.Some will have
better results some worse or you can use program default settings(Not to talk
For Ted Here)Sometimes making your own infomation pays for itself,like your
own adjustment for a shipper.

Pace figures handle adjustments pretty well,in spec 150 Ted set up the
option of going back to Half of varient so it works the same way as before
I'm New to spec so I can't comment on how its doing since the trackmaster
change,I have been working with Validator and found the top 3 in total energy
and the top 3 in Ent have a flat bet Win profit at all distances at about 9
different tracks that I tested about 155 Races,With a avg win mutual about
11.00 dollars so it still seems good despite the changes.Now I have not used
A Sartin program before this year,so I it Might have been better but it looks
good to me.Even with the bad trackmaster pars and varient issues.

Ted I would not worry about the older programs,they still seem ok I'm not
not ready to break out my commodore 64 with my Brohamer program
that I wrote in basic,that took 2.5 hours to do a card,with my homemade
Pars and Varients.Val is the best program that I have used,and it seems
spec has more potential,I need a couple of months with it still.Just keep
a model of your results with all programs.Some tracks and distances dont
play that dont show logical results.Post position bias,horse doping,Programs
Adjustments out of date.


Good Luck All
Pete
Peteman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2006, 11:39 PM   #17
tompkins
Grade 1
 
tompkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 708
examples

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Craven
Which tracks, do you find?

How would the data have to change to work with Speculator? Or, conversely stated, how would Speculator have to handle the data differently from those tracks?

Can you suggest a couple of example races?
TOO FAST: Canterbury, Emerald, Philly sprints, Meadowlands

make them slower, or just don't use them: I am not a programmer.
__________________
velocititian
tompkins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2006, 08:09 AM   #18
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,853
Quote:
Originally Posted by tompkins
TOO FAST: Canterbury, Emerald, Philly sprints, Meadowlands

make them slower, or just don't use them: I am not a programmer.
Do you mean, in the example of PHA sprints, when a PHA horse ships into a sprint at another track (e.g. LRL, DEL, PEN, NYRA, FL...), a PHA sprint paceline will tend to make the horse look too fast?

If so, would you expect to find that if you slowed down the PHA sprint by some amount, it would then not be too fast? (e.g. 1 second, .5 second, 1.5 seconds, or does it vary by destination track?)

Or did you mean something different? Do any other PHA specialists have a comment about this?

And, do you mean the same applies to all distances at Canterbury, Emerald, Meadowlands - when using pacelines from these tracks when the horse ships elsewhere, lines from these tracks make the horse look too fast at many (most) other tracks?

Thanks for the clarifications.

Ted
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™
Ted Craven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2006, 11:49 AM   #19
tompkins
Grade 1
 
tompkins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 708
too fast

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Craven
Do you mean, in the example of PHA sprints, when a PHA horse ships into a sprint at another track (e.g. LRL, DEL, PEN, NYRA, FL...), a PHA sprint paceline will tend to make the horse look too fast?

And, do you mean the same applies to all distances at Canterbury, Emerald, Meadowlands - when using pacelines from these tracks when the horse ships elsewhere, lines from these tracks make the horse look too fast at many (most) other tracks?

One cannot use lines FROM those tracks with confidence at others because they transfer TOO FAST. PARTICULARLY Meadowlands and Emerald which are, by far, the most notables out of range.

Now Tampa Bay lines transfer too slow: have seen this when they shipped to Keeneland, Woodbine and others.

Woodbine tranfers too fast to Gulfstream and Kenneland, and Fort Erie transfers too fast to Woodbine.
__________________
velocititian
tompkins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2006, 12:12 PM   #20
RichieP
Grade 1
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 7,014
here are 4 horses pacelines at 6f where the final time including beaten lenghts are within 1/5 of a second. They are coming from 4 different tracks and wound up in the same race.

TOP half shows RAW data.

LOWER half shows TM data adjusted. Speed ratings "adjusted":

1) 74
4) 78
6)- line 1 - 83
6)- line a - 89

Rich
Attached Images
 
RichieP 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 02:09 PM.