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

RDSS Racing Decision Support System – The Modern Sartin Methodology

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-13-2009, 11:33 AM   #1
lueylump
AlwNW1X
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14
Question Concerning "About" Distances...

This is a general question about using pacelines run at "about" as compared to "absolute" distances. In the days of Synthesis (less than two weeksago), I had serious reservations when using about distances in my paceline selection because they can distort the E/L Difference graph and possibly effect other ratings.

Two distances that really caused trouble in my handicapping is the about 7 furlong dirt distance at Keeneland (which tranlates too early) and the about 6 1/2 furlong turf distance at Santa Anita (which does not match up well with the 6 furlong turf distance at Hollywood Park or absolute dirt distances). A lot of other tracks also have about distances including Fair Grounds, Louisiana Downs, Tampa Bay Downs, Gulfstream Park, Turf Paradise, Arlington Park, and Suffolk Downs.

So the question is this: Based upon your experience with RDSS does about distances translate accurately when evaluated against absolute distances? And if so, are there still some tracks and distances that one should exclude when making wagercapping decisions because of its propensity for distortion?
lueylump is offline  
Old 05-13-2009, 12:03 PM   #2
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 8,853
lueylump,

RDSS adjusts pace of race times 3 ways: distance equalization, DTV, ITV. Of these, I feel the distance equalization of these about distances is the weakest link, and until I can add a facility to record your own speed-up/slow-down adjustments to/from these distances, you have to apply your own judgement and augment or deprecate the resulting numbers.

The TrackMaster ITV numbers do a better and better job of adjusting different distance/track/surface combos to a hypothetical norm today (i.e. the mythical Sartin Downs), and each of the distances you cite receives an adjustment based on annually revised pars recorded for them (though sometimes there are so few examples per year that the par times can be a little weak: e.g. KEE @7f).

In all, depending on how far the distance equalization is extending (e.g. @6.5T to 8f Turf versus @6.5T to 6f T), and what different tracks are involved (i.e. the magnitude of the ITV), and the speed variance of the day compared to norm (i.e. the magnitude of the DTV) - these about distances can vary in their adjusted 'inexactitude'.

Several folks here have cited several specific track pair examples which they think project too fast or slow (e.g. from PHA sprints to MNR sprints). Note, using this example, this is actually an observation of relatively how fast or slow PHA sprinters project to Sartin Downs versus how fast or slow MNR sprinters project to Sartin Downs (in the case of a PHA sprinter running today in a MNR sprint with other MNR sprinters entered)

Perhaps they can repeat their observations, AND offer specific race examples.

Ted
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™

Last edited by Ted Craven; 05-13-2009 at 12:06 PM. Reason: completed a sentance
Ted Craven is offline  
Old 05-13-2009, 04:45 PM   #3
Bill Lyster
Grade 1
 
Bill Lyster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Escondido CA just 25 minutes from where the turf meets the surf - "...at Del Mar"
Posts: 2,418
Ted: agree for the most part.

(edit made after reading Luey's post - sorry I didn't read it all the way through)

The Beard Course at Keeneland produces some really slow 7f if you believe or misunderstand the screen info. Unfortunately, if I understand it correctly, RDSS does not ID "about distances" in this case, so one thing to look for is really out of whack energy info - like med % into 70's.

Also, I have never seen a 6.5 turf sprint from SA convert to any usable route time because of the about nature of that course. If memory serves the distance is something like 6.41 furlongs, but don't hold me to that.

In the Keeneland example you could manually add the Hat's suggested 6.4 (tenths) per half furlong to get a manual projection, but the SA sprint defies meaningful projection because they are running down hill in the middle and usually much faster than any other middle fraction of the race. I just hope like heck that there are route lines available to correlate when a good turf sprinter stretches out. Otherwise, I get to sit one out.



bill

Last edited by Bill Lyster; 05-13-2009 at 04:47 PM. Reason: didnt read initial post - eek!
Bill Lyster is offline  
 

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
question concerning the last 3 porkchop RDSS 13 05-13-2009 12:43 AM
QUESTION for the group Tim Y General Discussion 6 03-29-2009 11:04 PM
New User Question scgmhawk RDSS 3 01-03-2009 04:32 PM
Question concerning RDSS screen captures Dallas4lr RDSS 3 10-31-2008 11:19 AM
Question for Bill and Ted et al Turbulator RDSS 10 08-08-2008 07:20 AM


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

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:02 AM.