It has been a long time since I done this and synergism 3 may be only 3 calls. I used to have to extrapolate a stretch call. For example, a 6 furlong race with fractions of 47 and 1:11, I would extrapolate a stretch fraction of 59.0. Other distances took a little more math. Hope this helps.

Stretch Call
 

Slew, thanks for the explanation. I can see that this would be a time consuming process. As far as the stretch call it may not be too critical as far as the accuracy, because I am not sure if the stretch call is used all that much (or at all) in the THOROMATION 4 call program.

As far as par times I agree with Jeff (shoeless) that Horsestreet has good reliable pars. I am just waiting for the new Horsestreet pars to come out which has been delayed. Dave Schwartz is a busy man as he is also doing alot of work with HSH.

Could you just enter 0 in the stretch call?

I don't think so. It's been awhile.

Partsnut,

As discussed several times elsewhere, Val2006 is not a commercial software - it is only an experiment I did to prove to myself that I understood how to repair the formulae 'broken' by the 2006 data changes by Equibase/TrackMaster and to show to Doc to get his opinions and to prove that his 'baby' was not orphaned. I have no rights to Validator and thus cannot circulate it. I am busy making RDSS produce the same output as Validator (Val2006), for those who might wish that compatibility.

Also, you have helped me with older Sartin software file structures and I thank you for that help. As soon as I can, I will provide for export to (at least) the 4 call format for Thoromation and EXDC from the RDSS Original or Adjusted screens, i.e. distance equalized (or not), including ITV and DTV (or not), employing Validator variable beaten lengths (or not).

Indeed, as you point out, other software already does this today and best wishes to those profiting by whatever tools and personal proficiency!

Ted

I'd sure like to see that experiment (i.e. comparing Thoromation against Val/Spec/RDSS). It's been many years since I picked up Thoromation. In the long run, with RDSS you should be able to tinker with adjustments to your heart's content (or until you hang yourself). Doc undoubtedly thought highly of the adjustment scheme in Validator and I presume in the pars/variants behind TrackMaster data, so when you adjust the POR by these means, I'd like to think that they're as good as any other adjusted numbers for the purpose of exporting to T'mation, or as 'socantra' puts it, perhaps good-enough to win with.

Slewbacca, I nominate you as chief tester for that experiment:).

Ted

I thought the RDSS stuff was just supposed to be in that section of the website that was designated for it.I feel like Im in a movie theatre that's running commercials.Sorry Binder if Im out of line with this but that's the way I feel about it.Jeff

Ted was just responding to questions asked and points raised by 40% of the posters on this thread. Didn't look like a commercial to me.

Dick

Dick,I asked Bill to start this section for older sartin programs I dont think RDSS is one.Even in an earlier post here Bill asked all RDSS questions should be done on that part of the website.Jeff

Okay with me. Since I'm not using an older Sartin program, I'll try not to intrude.

Dick