Track Comparisons
 

The attached screenshots are POR comparisons at 6 furlongs for major tracks. I averaged Total Energy and MED%. Any track that was 1.75 Energy Units below Average in Total Energy I highlighted in Green. Any track that was 1.75 Energy Units above average I highlighted in Red.

Any track that was below .50% average for Med % I highlighted in Green and above .50% was highlighted in Red.

Since many races do not go wire to wire most of the tracks will show relatively high Med%. The one track that really jumps out at me is Keeneland and I can only assume it would be more so as distances increase.

The attempt is to get a handle on tracks that may be faster or slower than normal. The 1.75 Energy Units coincides with the warning flag that comes up in THOROMATION to use the #2 Adjustment. Some of these differences may be due to Polytrack; Weather Conditions; and track configuration.

Houndog,Thanks for sharing.Jeff

Nice work Mike.

I entered your data into a blank par table in the TMH program and worked 3 6f races from yesterday selecting only 6f lines.

Tampa race 2 - had #7 on top followed by #5. #7 wins at $8.00 #5 places for exacta $40.20

Mountaineer race 8 - #10 and #9 tied on top. #10 wins at $7.40 and #9 runs out of money

Mountaineer race 10 - #10 and #7 tied on top. #7 ran 2nd at 3/1 and #10 ran out.

I have the following 6f races worked for today:
Gp race 8
Kee race 1
Kee race 8
Sa race 4
Tampa race 5

I'll followup and thanks again for sharing Mike. Numbers look real good in the package
:)

Averages? The entire idea of the match up is SPECIFICITY of that race. there are rarely two the same. A lone speed horse negates all of these, a total energy excess of three units and a stone cold closer negates these and on and on and on.

Think of RANGES not averages.

Another extraneous irrelevant layer to complicate the simplicity of the specifics right before your eyes.

Mike:

A question of clarity. Does your data include all races at a particular track? Does it exclude maidens or is it just for older horses.

Thanks,

Bill

One of the initial weaknesses of Energy was the adjustments. They never quite worked even when one dealt with a regular supply of shippers in the same circuit, i.e. Delaware, Maryland, Penn, NY

The downloads are much more accurate today, with a few notable exceptions of Philly, PID, Mnt etc.

Mike

Can you explain why you averaged TE and MED% and do your results back up your methodology???

Averages
 

Tim I anticipated your response and as I said in my post I was trying to get a handle on what tracks may need a #2 adjust in a particular program. (THOROMATION) hence the post in the Energy area. This is why I posted this in this particular area.

I made no clear cut assumptions except for Keeneland which is well known. Yes I did average the certain columns and this in no way supplants the individual match-up.

This info would be of little use to Speculator and Validator users.

I have never found an adequate way of adjusting using Energy unless you stayed at a course like Hastings and Woodbine that have few shippers

Averages
 

Charlie I averaged TE to get a handle on which tracks may be running slower or faster compared to an average and to be used with a particular program (THOROMATION). THOROMATION does not use pars but the adjustments are made according to the horses you enter. I think in THOROMATION if you have a 1.75 difference in TE the program will ask if you want to use the #2 adjust.

Charlie the MED% average really wasn't too meaningful with the exception of Keeneland. This research will not help Speculator; Validator and RDSS users as you are working from a set of pars.