Vector Graphs

[DanBoals]

Example race of how I use pace vectors. This race was from today at AQU.

2, 5 and 7 are just not fast enough, their TE and aSR are too low so they are non contenders for me.

3, 4 and 9 are not turf runners, but they are in form.
3 shows 1 turf route in his career and was not itm.
4 shows 2 turf routes, and was not itm in either.
9 has 1 turf route in his last 18 races and finished dead last.

If none of the contenders showed the pace vector profile I am looking for, but one of the secondary contenders did, then I would elevate him to contender.

1, 6, 8 and 10 are my turf runners.

My profile shows that for 8.5f on turf there have been 4 races and in each, the horse made either a big 2nd fraction or 3rd fraction move, or both.

Of the secondary contenders, 4 shows this running style in his 9f on the mud 15 days ago, but being out of the money in his 2 lifetime turf routes, I really can't go with him.

8 has good early speed, but he falls behind this group in F2 and F3 being ranked 3rd and 4th respectively.

1 has the top F2 speed and 2nd best F3, so he looks like a strong candidate.

10, like 8, starts fast, but then fades when compared to 1 and 6.

6 has the 2nd best F2, and then finishes strong with the best F3.

1 and 6 fit the profile best.

8 and 10 seem like they will be out front and then get passed in the stretch.

The first graph is the profile of the winners of the 4 previous races at this distance and surface for this meet.

The second graph is the original data screen for the race.

The third graph is the pace of horse screen with the fps for each fraction and the pace vectors of the races they came out of.

The final graph is the result chart.

Hope this helps,

Dan

[ray lopez]

Dan,
Here's the vector graph on Synthesis.

Ray

[DanBoals]

Thanks Ray,

The 1F, 2F and 3F are the values that are now on the RDSS version 65 pace of horse screen. For me, this is what is important.

I know some people like visual data, but if you understand what the numbers are, then I think they make sense without the graph. Also, I am not sure why Howard or whoever came up with this graph back in the early 80's thought it made sense for these numbers, but I never saw the connection.

In the old follow ups you can copy the blank graph and print it out and put the numbers on the graph and connect them yourself if you wanted to, that is how Jimmy said he got good. I am glad Ted has added them, but I had already created a series of Excel macros to do the work and now I have competition

It is funny how they are a bit different. My guess is Trackmaster's adjustments account for the difference between the hand entered numbers from the Synthesis printouts and the RDSS numbers from TM.

[tleusin]

Ted, for what it is worth, I would like this feature to remain. There is an abundance of data in RDSS and it can be overwhelming. Regular PPs have the same issue. Learning what noise you shouild listen too and which to ignore is part of the learning process.
Reading DanBoals explanation as to his use clarified their meaning for me. I find them to be good indicators of exactly how a race will be run.
There are many features in RDSS that I do not use because I find it muddies the water for me. I know my utilization is not strictly along the lines spelled out and some would say I am not operating correctly. It works for me.
Again, IMHO the vector numbers should remain.

[Lt1]

Why not simply use the segment screen, That's the matchup of the horses you have entered. You get both numerical and visual pictures of moves by contenders.
Tim

[tleusin]

I have not been able to use that screen well, There is not a screen or readout in RDSS that I have not used at one time or another and learned what works for me and what does not. The numbers of the vector graphs in RDSS
allow me to see how the race will play out, especally in figuring the minor awards.
Regardless it is not a deal breaker. Just expressing an opinion and a request.

[Lt1]

Ok if that's what you get the most info that works for you then hopefully they stay. Like Doc always said use what you understand and disregard the rest. You don't need to be a mechanic to drive the car. Good luck.
Tim

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by Lt1

Why not simply use the segment screen, That's the matchup of the horses you have entered. You get both numerical and visual pictures of moves by contenders.
Tim

FWIW, this is the question I asked early on in this Thread (http://paceandcap.com/forums/showpos...15&postcount=4), which Dan answered from his POV in the subsequent reply.

In short - Segments measures each horse's own position and F1, F2, SC and Final beaten lengths, compared to the same from other horses. The pace of the race faced by any of the horses is not an element in this readout.

On the other hand, the Pace Vector numbers show what a horse did against the pace of the race it faced in any given race (and on the Analysis screen, in the race/s selected to represent it today). For example, showing that a horse gained slightly or maintained against a relatively fast pace of race in several segments, is different than using that same line to represent the horse in Segments screen using only its OWN times.

In thinking about this, it seems that some kind of overview of:

a) how the horse moved or declined against the pace (Pace Vector figs) AND

b) its OWN energy-expenditure (defined by computed beaten lengths and relative positions in different segments) along with

c) running positions and gains/losses in lengths and position

- would ALL serve to give an interesting picture of how the horse is likely to run today against a likely pace. Of course, we have ALL that info already on separate screens. I wonder if there's any advantage or extra perspective to be gained by having it all in one place.

Forgive me for musing about this out loud. Fortunately, I gain valuable input for doing some of this thinking in public. I trust users of RDSS to say what they think and what they need and already do 'by hand', which sometimes leads to improvements in the software tools.

Of course you can retrieve BRIS Prime Power by hand, calculate workout improvement vectors by hand, watch the tote board by eye, keep models only by pen and paper. But some of these things are helpful to have within RDSS, thus saving time for more critical analysis. At one point, there was no such readout as VDC%, or Perceptor, or Rx-n, or Quirin Speed Points or Composite Speed Rating, etc. Yet now, I know people make use of many of these newer readouts in their handicapping process (while some others do not).

All I'm trying to do is understand how people use these Pace Vectors - actually, trying to get ideas to help improve RDSS. I'd rather take an open-minded stance and say YES initially to a new (or old) idea and have it turn out to be redundant, than say NO initially and find out that it was actually really helpful if only refined and presented well.

I appreciate everyone's input: thanks Dan, Tom, Tim, Ray! (FWIW, I'm inclined to leave in the new Pace Vectors, though remove the 3 Energy Percentage F1, F2, F3 readouts surrounding %Median which I've never heard of anyone using as-is). Agreed though, these PVs need to be better explained, perhaps better presented.

Ted

[Ted Craven]

Originally Posted by DanBoals

Thanks Ray,

The 1F, 2F and 3F are the values that are now on the RDSS version 65 pace of horse screen. For me, this is what is important.

I know some people like visual data, but if you understand what the numbers are, then I think they make sense without the graph. Also, I am not sure why Howard or whoever came up with this graph back in the early 80's thought it made sense for these numbers, but I never saw the connection.

In the old follow ups you can copy the blank graph and print it out and put the numbers on the graph and connect them yourself if you wanted to, that is how Jimmy said he got good. I am glad Ted has added them, but I had already created a series of Excel macros to do the work and now I have competition

It is funny how they are a bit different. My guess is Trackmaster's adjustments account for the difference between the hand entered numbers from the Synthesis printouts and the RDSS numbers from TM.

1. specific readouts on RDSS compared to the same readouts in older software can differ depending on adjustments used, degree of precision of running time and also the feet and thus time value of beaten lengths used by different software. Thus, inputs used by each software will be self-consistent within each software, while producing slightly different outputs compared to other software even if displaying the same formula.

2. Graphs - in older Sartin software displaying graphical representations of Pace Vectors (or anything using 3 Fraction velocities or times) - there's only so much precision to go around! The Kgen or Synthesis graphs of Pace Vectors for example show a nice graph line falling or rising smoothly from segment to segment, BUT - the F1, F2, F3 data is only an AVERAGE of values during each segment! We don't have values for each furlong, or each 200 feet, thus the inputs used for those older graphs are data extrapolated from the coarser values we have to make the graph look nice. It's not giving you any extra info on a finer-grained based than however long each segment on the graph is!

In RDSS, I could give a fancy graph just to match the older program graphs, but that gives no extra info (while taking up extra space and compute power). Instead, I (and Doc before me in later software) presented simpler graphical representations which were meaningful (e.g. relative positions of horse icons on the Segments or older Incremental Matchup Graph, and Early/Late bar charts). I have a few ideas using colour and simple straight-line graphs to portray interesting Pace Vector info. Let's see.

Thanks for the comparison graph, Ray!

Ted

[Lt1]

Ted I use %med every day. By modeling the range of winners at each dist it becomes a very effective elimination factor. If more folks would pay more attention to % med they might improve their game. It is one of the most important factors in the program.
Tim