VDC Ties/Separation Discussion

[Bill V.]

Hi Ted
I didn't see this thread I posted my first answer in the Survivor post

Here is a example were the 0.0 horse method helped

This is the Smarty Jones G3 from Parx on Sunday I Bet the 5 and 3
The 5 Won!

The 5 is the 0.0 the 3 is close 2nd then ther is a gap to the 9 and 10 then the 1

This clears for me the BLBL

and make the 5 and 3 top 2 on blbl the clear bet choice


GS
Bill

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by kenr3138

Ted:
Did not forget. Don't know how!!!!
I use Screen Hunter to copy and paste.
Did not work.
May be a lesson in how to do this would be helpful.
Could be I'll get the hang of it.
Ken

Ken,

Please see post #11 above. rmath was asking the same question - I hope my screenshot of the message editor helped. Save your ScreenHunter screen captures to a PNG format file. Then use that Attachment (paperclip icon) button to load your saved PNG files into your message.

Ted

[Bill V.]

Rmath Posted this race from Del on 9/6 in a earlier post

This race is a perfect example of a Binder Improver
Horse 4 and 6 are both BI

Looking at
these factors
1. All lines are comparable
Sprint to Sprint or Route to Route
All Dirt all short sprints here

2. The Adj Speed ratings
All with 3 points of the best

3. The line scores are all close
odds line, Primary and BL

4 The 6 and 4 are top 2 VDC but 4th and 5th BLBL

5. The Supplemental Line score shows all
5 horses in the top 3

6. The ESP E/L match up
Here we see 2 very early horses a E/P and P The 6 is a counter energy

The total energy not shown here is very close the high is 170.2
The 6 is 5th but only 1 point lower at 169

This is a Perfect Binder Improver and a winner for #6

GS
Bill

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by rmath

del. Race 7 ran 7 5.80, 6,4,8 exacta 1.00 15.00, tri 1.00 76.10
the 6 was 0.0 and top pick, 4 & 8 were tied for 2nd and the 7 was 3rd with a lower % than the 8. I eliminated the 5 horse because it was ranked 5 on vdc.
I did not bet either of these races because the odds were not acceptable on my main contenders in either race.

The #6 is the clear top BL, TE, VDC rank and %. Of the next 2 VDC ranked horses (#4 and #8) the #4 is superior in VDC%. For confirmation, the #6, #4 and #7 are also Top 3 TS+F3. For myself, this might have been an opportunity to bet against the #7 in which case I would have lost, but given its clear Early superiority and ability to win sprints, I can empathize with your decision to pass.

Ted

[kenr3138]

Originally Posted by kenr3138

Ted:
Here is a visual of the third frame VDC from RDSS1 & the third frame from RDSS2. (I presume) The horse icons positions in the frame indicate the differences in percent of the #1 ranked VDC contenders as well as the relative positions of the other contenders. The #6 Solar is the #1 VDC horse and the #1 Thoromation horse.
When selecting pacelines I use the Primary screen....use VDC ratings to evaluate how the horse ran his POR(TE).

Ken

Ted:
Here are the screen attachments I did not attach earlier.
Ken

[Ted Craven]

Ken, (Way to go with figuring out the attachments, a big large - 80% of that would work nicely, but well done for a first try!)

What you show highlights a nuance in Val4 mode, which is what you are using. In RDSS1 (your upper image), the right-most (3rd) panel shows VDC rank and the relative position of the horses shows the same thing as the VDC% on the same RDSS2 screen. The difference between RDSS1 and RDSS2 Segments screen layout is that that in RDSS2 that 3rd panel now shows TS+F3 (which was not on RDSS1 Val4 mode), and the addition of the 2 new VDC columns replicates the info from RDSS1 3rd panel.

So, more info in the RDSS2 Segments screen, and the the 2 varieties of that screen from RDSS1 (i.e. the Val4 layout and the Default layout) are now unified. (You still get slightly different numbers on that screen depending on which adjustment mode you are using: Val4 or Default).

Ted

[For The Lead]

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

FTL,

So, when second call velocity = 56.61 fps for horse A and 56.59 for horse B, horse A has rank 1 and horse B rank 2 - a gap of .03 - are you suggesting that horse B ranked 2 is none-the-less equally inferior to horse A in that factor as in a different scenario when the second call velocity gap between the top 2 horses is much larger (say, 56.61 to 56.0) ?

In the first case, the velocity difference is likely completely attributable to chart caller error (was that horse behind 2.5 lengths or 2.25 lengths). Or, is there a certain minimal gap above which you start to consider the ordinal ranks to be absolutely definitive, regardless of the numeric value gap between ranks?

In general, I hear you suggesting that gaps between ranks are (relatively) unimportant. That would be a different way of approaching final contender analysis than I employ.

Ted

Ted, I'll send you a PM.