Ted how does RDSS determine the ESP in the primary and analysis tabs

[Dallas4lr]

Greetings,


Just wanted to know how the software comes up with the following designations: (E, EP, S, SP, S, L). Many times the software give a designation that differs from what I would expect.


Thanks
Carl

[socantra]

Originally Posted by Dallas4lr

Just wanted to know how the software comes up with the following designations: (E, EP, S, SP, S, L). Many times the software give a designation that differs from what I would expect.

You've run into another one of those old methodology/ new methodology issues. The Brohammer style ESP was based on visual perception. You look at where the horse runs in the pack in his good races and assign a running style, according to lengths back at the 1st call, or whatever.

Bradshaw uses the same method of designating running styles in the Matchup, though the specific qualifications are somewhat different. In fact, almost everyone in the field of handicapping now uses some form of visual perception ESP, though everyone's definition is slightly different, depending on how they use it.

In RDSS and in all the later Sartin methodology programs, the ESP designations are determined by energy distribution, or what percentage of the horse's energy is used early vs late (the E/L graph). Howard thought this worked much better, and was certainly less well distributed, being essentially invisible to the general public.

You can still mark your own visual ESP designations by clicking the little E,EP,P, etc. colored boxes at the top right of whatever screen (I've been taking a break from the program lately). If you do, you can compare your visual ESP designations with the program's on the TPR/EL screen. There are sometimes dramatic differences.

Dick...

[Buzz]

Dick,

Thanks for sorting all that out...very insightful!

Buzz

[Ted Craven]

The only thing I could add to Dicks' post is that Energy ESP (the column labeled ESP, rather than RS for visual Running Style) is actually a label for a range of %Median values. I you look on the Energy screen for 5 or 6 horses, comparing %Median to ESP, make 6 ESP categories: E, EP, P, SP S, L, then write the %Median value in the corresponding category, after a while you will begin to see what the range of %Median is for each ESP label.

Since %Median is simply what percentage 2nd call velocity is to Total Energy, you will see that the ESP labels are descriptive of where in the race a horse disburses the important portion of its energy. Of course, it matters hugely where a horse needs to have energy to expend, given today's match up, and just because it is an E (i.e. to the 2nd call) doesn't mean that will be enough and soon enough to get the lead it needs at the first call if it is truly a visual Early. (The Segments screen, Match Up Computed Beaten Lengths helps with that).

Ted

[Dallas4lr]

Originally Posted by socantra

You can still mark your own visual ESP designations by clicking the little E,EP,P, etc. colored boxes at the top right of whatever screen (I've been taking a break from the program lately). If you do, you can compare your visual ESP designations with the program's on the TPR/EL screen. There are sometimes dramatic differences.

Dick...

Yes, you can bet your skippy their are some dramatic differences. So much so, I started getting confused trying to figure out how some of the designations were derived in RDSS. Dick, thanks for pointing this out. I still have a slight problem with jim cramers designations in situations such as:


1/4 - 3rd BL 1.6
1/2 - 2nd BL 1.5
STR - 2nd BL 1.5
FIN - 1st 0.5


Based on Jim cramers specifications this horse would have an "S" running style. Looks more like a "P" to me!



Carl

[simon]

Originally Posted by Dallas4lr

Yes, you can bet your skippy their are some dramatic differences. So much so, I started getting confused trying to figure out how some of the designations were derived in RDSS. Dick, thanks for pointing this out. I still have a slight problem with jim cramers designations in situations such as:


1/4 - 3rd BL 1.6
1/2 - 2nd BL 1.5
STR - 2nd BL 1.5
FIN - 1st 0.5


Based on Jim cramers specifications this horse would have an "S" running style. Looks more like a "P" to me!
Carl

Hello Carl

I entered your BL's into KGEN
I made the race 6 furlongs
with this Pace of Race
22.0 45.0 110.0

The line shows up as S/P with a 68.86 % med
The fact that the bl at the end of the race was were this horse
made its move ? Is showing it used its total energy as a sustained presser
It ran even for the first 3 calls against the POR but overcame the POR
in the 3rd fraction

Ragin

[socantra]

Originally Posted by Dallas4lr

Dick, thanks for pointing this out. I still have a slight problem with jim cramers designations in situations such as:

1/4 - 3rd BL 1.6
1/2 - 2nd BL 1.5
STR - 2nd BL 1.5
FIN - 1st 0.5

Based on Jim cramers specifications this horse would have an "S" running style. Looks more like a "P" to me!

I can live with that without any problem. The horse was 3rd at the 1st call and didn't make his move til after the stretch call. That's just a matter of definition, and as Ragin pointed out, the horse comes up S/P on energy distribution running style for that line too.

What bothers me about Cramer's approach is that IF the horse had 2 other wins that were both wire to wire, it would still be designated sustained because he uses the furthest back win as his overall running style designation.

I would be interested to see if the inclusion of his position rankings helps to take care of that problem or not.

Dick...

[Dallas4lr]

Ragin and Dick,


Thanks for chiming in on this, I still have quite a bit to learn and intergrate so all of your comments are of great help. And I'm really getting interest in this KGEN thing also.

And Dick your right I have had several situations over the past few days where I had to mark a clear early has some other RS based on one race.


Carl

[socantra]

Originally Posted by Dallas4lr

And Dick your right I have had several situations over the past few days where I had to mark a clear early has some other RS based on one race.

That kind of requirement has made Cramer's RS-POS pretty much unusable to me, as I spent a lot of time lately playing with Randy Giles' running style designations and Quirin Speed Points. In Giles scheme, it is very important to designate between one dimensional Earlies (E) and the two dimensional Early Presser (E/P).

The lone dimensional early is the equivalent of Jim Bradshaw's Early horse that quits when he doesn't get the lead, where the two dimensional E/P is the equivalent of Jim's "fighter", that will keep coming at you even when passed.

Like I said earlier, everyone seems to be using the esp concept to fit their own idea of what it should do and most folks seem to define the words differently. Its amazing how often you hear people argue about which running style a horse should be, and it occurs to you that they are using different definitions of what the styles actually are.

I'm still experimenting, but whatever I settle on will have to include that seperation between one and two dimensional horses, especially earlies.

Dick...

[tom]

Originally Posted by socantra

What bothers me about Cramer's approach is that IF the horse had 2 other wins that were both wire to wire, it would still be designated sustained because he uses the furthest back win as his overall running style designation.

I would be interested to see if the inclusion of his position rankings helps to take care of that problem or not.

Dick...

Dick, listening to the tapes of the seminar, it appears the idea was to have a method of throwing out horses. This horse had won at a later designation so it would be left in the process longer than a "Crammer E" or EP horse. not to be used to predict today's pace or match up.