[Ted Craven]

Can anyone point me to articles by Doc Sartin in Follow Ups where he discusses the relative merits of %Median versus %Early readouts.

Both formulae are attempts to measure how much of a horse's inherent energy (at the time of a given race) is exerted to the important 2nd call point (4f in sprints, 6f in routes) - a point marking 2/3 to 3/4 of the distance of most races.

%Early is calculated as (2nd call velocity + 3rd fraction velocity) / 2nd call velocity.

%Median is calculated as (1st fraction velocity + 2nd fraction velocity) / (1st fraction velocity + 2nd fraction velocity + 3rd fraction velocity) or (F1+F2) / Total Energy.

Doc moved away from %Early claiming it was no longer as effective as %Median, which had been documented and made mainstream by Tom Brohamer in Modern Pace Handicapping. Or perhaps it was that he found %Median inherently more useful, or perhaps they are/were both equally useful but he wanted to keep mixing things up, while conveying that he was on the cutting edge...

I'd appreciate any reference to his written thoughts on the matter.

In RDSS (and Speculator, Validator, Synthesis, PaceLauncher) these calcualtions are made after being distance equalized, and adjusted for Daily and Track to Track variants.

The difference between the 2 formulae is that %Early employs the average velocity to the 2nd call point, while %Median uses the sum of the F1 plus F2 velocities - perhaps a more fine-grained approach. I also know that Doc stated later on that %Median itself was overrated as a standalone factor because it didn't measure energy interelationships and decelerations between today's horses (something like that). Also, a hammer is overrated as a standalone tool because you can't use it alone to build a house...

I wonder if both of these factors are interchangeably useful, or are they about equally irrelevant?

Any thoughts and particularly Follow Up references would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

Ted