The Hats Equalization Times

[Segwin]

In the hat check forum there is a thread that talks about equalization time. Richie said to use 6.2 seconds (in fifths) per 1/2 furlong. Does this still hold true and does this hold true for increasing or decreasing in distance?

[MikeB]

Originally Posted by Segwin

In the hat check forum there is a thread that talks about equalization time. Richie said to use 6.2 seconds (in fifths) per 1/2 furlong. Does this still hold true and does this hold true for increasing or decreasing in distance?

Late to the party here, but here is a shot.

I haven't seen the thread, but this looks familiar. In Handicapping Magic, Mike Pizzolla, formerly of Pirco, uses the 6.2 seconds factor to convert between sprint differences. He uses it to compare final fractions at different sprint distances. He uses 6.8 seconds per 1/2 furlong for routes. I have used those numbers and they seem to work out okay. For odd route distances, I add 2.4 to a mile to get 1M 40 yds, and subtract 2.6 from a 1 1/16 to get 1M 70 yrds.

[Ted Craven]

For those who are using RDSS, here is the internal distance equalization table for Dirt surfaces (and the one used in Validator). As the distance increases, the final time gaps per half furlong rise from 6.4 to 6.6 and bounce around for reasons best known by Doc Sartin. Internal gaps also increase accordingly. Those who want to tinker with decelerations by distance, or try different distance cutback strategies will have the opportunity in the next version. (And those who prefer to stick with what works, can do that too.)

Note: RDSS and later Sartin programs don't project or extract distances to these exact times: they use the GAPS between the segments as differentials to actual running time segments (plus DTV and ITV adjustments), then project all lines to today's distance at a hypothetical, equalized norm (i.e. 'Sartin Downs', i.e. NOT today's track).



FWIW, here is an earlier 2014 thread which discusses the final time half furlong increments currently used in RDSS, and some challenges to existing equalizations: http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9805 (see my post #11)

Ted

[Segwin]

Thanks for the reply guys.

Came across a copy of Jim's matchup book and been trying just looking at PP to hc. Taint easy McGee.

[MikeB]

If it matters, I just double checked, and I grabbed on to that 6.2 second number too quickly. Pizzolla uses 6.6 seconds for sprints and 6.8 seconds for routes.

[Bill Lyster]

For some reason that I do not totally understand, most horses who can run successfully in sprints and routes at Woodbine do not run to projected route times using six and two-fifths per half furlong adjustment. Using the 6.2 fifths adjustment to the route distance appears to make sprinters way faster than the routers in the race upcoming.

So for example, say your horse won at six furlongs in 111.0 and is going today at 8.5 furlongs. The projection of final time would be 111.0+0.2+5*6.2 or 111.0+.02+32.0 totaling 143.2 (in fifths). The race results will more likely show a final route time of somewhere around 146.2, indicating an adjustment of about 7 seconds per half furlong (111.0+.2+5*7= 146.2)

My personal thought is that as the class of the horse lowers you need more adjustment per half furlong just because most of the stock cannot run to meet the 6.2 fifth adjustment standard. But even with higher class horses who win six furlong races at 1.09.00 you rarely see them stretch out and win at 8.5 furlongs at 141.2. More often their final route times are in the hi 142 or 143-lo 144 range, appearing to validate the use of more than 6.2 seconds per half furlong.

Woodbine is the only track that I play where the need for a larger differential appears to be needed. All the Socal tracks and NY seem to fit nicely using 6.2 fifths.

Has anyone observed other tracks with adjustment differentials larger or smaller?

When I did my research I only considered horses that had won both in sprints and routes.

Bill

[mowens33]

Ted, if I hand a par chart from a particular track would I be able to adjust the times manually in RDSS?

For instance if I was to use the attached with RDSS how would I go about it?

In your opinion would it even make sense to use it?

Thanks, Mike

[mowens33]

Routs

[Jeebs]

Ted,

1) Is this table current and 2) are the EPR/LPR ratings
based on this table rather than the PMTR book by Hambleton? 3) Is there a turf and poly equalization table?

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

For those who are using RDSS, here is the internal distance equalization table for Dirt surfaces (and the one used in Validator). As the distance increases, the final time gaps per half furlong rise from 6.4 to 6.6 and bounce around for reasons best known by Doc Sartin. Internal gaps also increase accordingly. Those who want to tinker with decelerations by distance, or try different distance cutback strategies will have the opportunity in the next version. (And those who prefer to stick with what works, can do that too.)

Note: RDSS and later Sartin programs don't project or extract distances to these exact times: they use the GAPS between the segments as differentials to actual running time segments (plus DTV and ITV adjustments), then project all lines to today's distance at a hypothetical, equalized norm (i.e. 'Sartin Downs', i.e. NOT today's track).

Attachment 38500

FWIW, here is an earlier 2014 thread which discusses the final time half furlong increments currently used in RDSS, and some challenges to existing equalizations: http://paceandcap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9805 (see my post #11)

Ted

[dlivery]

Quote Richie P

THAT is how it supposed to be when one starts*relying NOT on numbers,*rules*etc but instead FOCUSES on Intuition, pattern recognition and the "Mind's Eye".

Hope this helps because it helps me a lot
As one would say a blind squirel comes across nuggets that work them.
And far a handicapping I'm a pure Last line player staring from the minute the gate pops