Re TrackMaster Data Problems - Page 8 - Pace and Cap

Ted Craven · 05-31-2009, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clore1030

I see the same thing.

I won't be downloading any more data from Trackdisaster until I get an affidavit of reliability.

I wrote TrackMaster, documented the data problem and asked for an explanation. I will report on the answer.

Ted

Ted Craven · 06-01-2009, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikesal57

I contacted Jim at trackmaster and asked him for a refund of the files i downloaded from may 18-20 and he responded that he will fix it...according to my account they still show as downloaded files and I dont know if I will be charged for them..

mike

I have no doubts, whatsoever, that Jim V at TrackMaster will fix your account. If you asked, you will not be charged for downloaded files on the days you mention. If there is ANY trouble, just write me.

Ted

Ted Craven · 06-02-2009, 06:32 PM

I spoke just now with both Dave Siegel, TrackMaster President and Jim Vanderbosch VP about the data error reported by Mike W and confirmed by others in this thread.

The short report is: they acknowledge the data error and today have now re-instituted a previously discontinued Quality Control check to scan for such missing values BEFORE all Past Performance data files are published for download either by RDSS or by browser from their website (e.g. for use by Speculator or Validator). This particular QC check was discontinued at some point in the past because it never found any problems, but it's back in effect now and the data problems should not recur.

The longer report is: they maintain a database which includes about 10 million thoroughbred running lines going back about 10 years. Due to some 'deep-in-the-server' issues which occur very occasionally during updates from Equibase, a few of their Speed Ratings and Inter Track Variants (ITVs) which were formerly correct become missing. Siegel told me that yesterday, in response to my enquiry following Mike W's report, they ran a query of their database over the past 2 years, about 1 million running line records, and found a total of 8 records which had missing SR/ITV values (of which we reported 2 of those - this one, and another which RichieP reported re PPs for a race run last night). All 8 (out of 1 million) of these records with missing SR/ITV values were re-run and corrected. Siegel speculated that at any time, even over the past year, there may have been a similar number of records which go bad and are then fixed by periodic review of data-integrity checking scans: 2 out of a million, 10 out of a million, whatever - a small number.

Now, as a result of these reports by us, as stated above, they are running their reinstated QC scan on ALL their PP files for ALL their products BEFORE they are published, looking for any missing values and will rerun any PP files if any missing values are ever found. Siegel told me that he is extremely confident that this re-instated PP file check should result in no further missing SR or ITV values going public. That said, he urged me to communicate to all customers that if EVER they find what looks like it might be 'bad data' to feel free to contact them directly either by phone (800 321-3343) or email (jim@trackmaster.com) with details, and not only to report it here at Pace and Cap or to me. I have seen over the past year how their level of responsiveness to Sartin software users has grown (commensurate with how much more data they're selling and hope to sell). Believe me, they are paying attention now!

From the sounds of it, they took this last report very seriously and responded immediately and in some depth to our concerns. I personally am satisfied that they are presently doing all they can re quality of PP data, given their data volume, but I do think they need to work further on what causes even such a small number of previously good records to occasionally go bad, and told Siegel so.

And remember that the bad data we're referring to is, effectively, the TrackMaster/Equibase Inter Track Variants used to adjust running times - not running times themselves, or positions or beaten lengths or money stats. You should expect a valid TrackMaster Speed Rating (and an underlying ITV) if a thoroughbred race has:

1. a Final Time
2. the horse finished the race
3. there are beaten lengths reported (for other than the winner)
4. it's not a steeplechase

If any of these is missing, the TrackMaster Speed Rating (and ITV) will be missing and this is NOT an example of 'bad data' which needs to be reported to TrackMaster. Otherwise, report it to TrackMaster and report it to me, please. I need to update RDSS (next scheduled major update) to watch for such missing items and simply mark the PP line as unusable (if ITVs are being used). Spec and Val appear to do this already, I think.

Regarding a 'certificate of authenticity' - I think that can never be 'given' by them to us, but rather must be given by us - to them. Siegel told me he definitely wants to know, and directly, if any apparently bad data is found. Each person must decide for themselves how long to wait to judge the data 'authentic'. If anyone wants a refund from TrackMaster for their data account, or from me for their RDSS subscription, just write them, or me - no worries. For myself, I'm going to move on and use the TrackMaster data and RDSS - and encourage other RDSS, Speculator and Validator users likewise - and continue to do my best to make a profit on my wagers ongoing. The data and the software are more than good enough to accomplish that.

All questions and comments are welcome!

Ted

Tanico · 06-02-2009, 11:42 PM

Ted, I can only speak for myself of course and I am aware of that, but I am more than willing to give Trackmaster my business. I know we all want error free data but to be honest I think they really do very well considering the enormous amount of data they have to deal with. I would venture a bet that Briss files would have similar problems with this amount of data. Offering a refund is appreciated but I won't be asking and I want to thank you and Trackmaster for being on top of this from the onset of the problems. I am pretty sure that I make way more mistakes reading and using the data and cost myself a lot more money then I pay.

Thanks,
Doug

mlking · 06-03-2009, 12:33 AM

Doug I concur. I originally pointed out the error I found so that Trackmaster can be aware of it. They have been more than generous in their interactions with me.

Namaste:
Mike W.

RichieP · 06-03-2009, 05:32 AM

It appears that now Trackmaster is on top of killing the bad data before it gets through.

Much is ballyhooed on other boards about the responsiveness of HDW data when they have mistakes in their data (yes ALL data suppliers have bad data from time to time) and they are quick to fix it. Now it appears that OUR supplier will take the extra step BEFORE the data gets to us.

Thanks Ted for fighting through all this with TM while remaining calm (well relatively speaking anyway!!)

mikesal57 · 06-03-2009, 08:00 AM

thxs ted....another headache from your technical mumbo jumbo...LOL

mike

clore1030 · 06-03-2009, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

I wrote TrackMaster, documented the data problem and asked for an explanation. I will report on the answer.

Ted

Thanks for everything. I downloaded today's card and so far so good.

Ted Craven · 06-03-2009, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clore1030

Thanks for everything. I downloaded today's card and so far so good.

Charles, a pleasure

!

Ted

clore1030 · 06-03-2009, 12:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ted Craven

Charles, a pleasure

!

Ted

Spoke too soon. check race one at Belmont.

Horse 3, Calling My Colors.

Line 5

06-02-2009, 06:32 PM	#73
Ted Craven Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Nanaimo, British Columbia, Canada Posts: 9,251	I spoke just now with both Dave Siegel, TrackMaster President and Jim Vanderbosch VP about the data error reported by Mike W and confirmed by others in this thread. The short report is: they acknowledge the data error and today have now re-instituted a previously discontinued Quality Control check to scan for such missing values BEFORE all Past Performance data files are published for download either by RDSS or by browser from their website (e.g. for use by Speculator or Validator). This particular QC check was discontinued at some point in the past because it never found any problems, but it's back in effect now and the data problems should not recur. The longer report is: they maintain a database which includes about 10 million thoroughbred running lines going back about 10 years. Due to some 'deep-in-the-server' issues which occur very occasionally during updates from Equibase, a few of their Speed Ratings and Inter Track Variants (ITVs) which were formerly correct become missing. Siegel told me that yesterday, in response to my enquiry following Mike W's report, they ran a query of their database over the past 2 years, about 1 million running line records, and found a total of 8 records which had missing SR/ITV values (of which we reported 2 of those - this one, and another which RichieP reported re PPs for a race run last night). All 8 (out of 1 million) of these records with missing SR/ITV values were re-run and corrected. Siegel speculated that at any time, even over the past year, there may have been a similar number of records which go bad and are then fixed by periodic review of data-integrity checking scans: 2 out of a million, 10 out of a million, whatever - a small number. Now, as a result of these reports by us, as stated above, they are running their reinstated QC scan on ALL their PP files for ALL their products BEFORE they are published, looking for any missing values and will rerun any PP files if any missing values are ever found. Siegel told me that he is extremely confident that this re-instated PP file check should result in no further missing SR or ITV values going public. That said, he urged me to communicate to all customers that if EVER they find what looks like it might be 'bad data' to feel free to contact them directly either by phone (800 321-3343) or email (jim@trackmaster.com) with details, and not only to report it here at Pace and Cap or to me. I have seen over the past year how their level of responsiveness to Sartin software users has grown (commensurate with how much more data they're selling and hope to sell). Believe me, they are paying attention now! From the sounds of it, they took this last report very seriously and responded immediately and in some depth to our concerns. I personally am satisfied that they are presently doing all they can re quality of PP data, given their data volume, but I do think they need to work further on what causes even such a small number of previously good records to occasionally go bad, and told Siegel so. And remember that the bad data we're referring to is, effectively, the TrackMaster/Equibase Inter Track Variants used to adjust running times - not running times themselves, or positions or beaten lengths or money stats. You should expect a valid TrackMaster Speed Rating (and an underlying ITV) if a thoroughbred race has: 1. a Final Time 2. the horse finished the race 3. there are beaten lengths reported (for other than the winner) 4. it's not a steeplechase If any of these is missing, the TrackMaster Speed Rating (and ITV) will be missing and this is NOT an example of 'bad data' which needs to be reported to TrackMaster. Otherwise, report it to TrackMaster and report it to me, please. I need to update RDSS (next scheduled major update) to watch for such missing items and simply mark the PP line as unusable (if ITVs are being used). Spec and Val appear to do this already, I think. Regarding a '*certificate of authenticity' - I think that can never be 'given' by them to us, but rather must be given by us - to them. Siegel told me he definitely wants to know, and directly, if any apparently bad data is found. Each person must decide for themselves how long to wait to judge the data 'authentic'. If anyone wants a refund from TrackMaster for their data account, or from me for their RDSS subscription, just write them, or me - no worries. For myself, I'm going to move on and use the TrackMaster data and RDSS - and encourage other RDSS, Speculator and Validator users likewise - and continue to do my best to make a profit on my wagers ongoing. The data and the software are more than good enough to accomplish that. All questions and comments are welcome! Ted __________________ RDSS -* Racing Decision Support System™ Last edited by Ted Craven; 06-02-2009 at 10:13 PM.

06-03-2009, 05:32 AM	#76
RichieP Grade 1 Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 7,019	It appears that now Trackmaster is on top of killing the bad data before it gets through. Much is ballyhooed on other boards about the responsiveness of HDW data when they have mistakes in their data (yes ALL data suppliers have bad data from time to time) and they are quick to fix it. Now it appears that OUR supplier will take the extra step BEFORE the data gets to us. Thanks Ted for fighting through all this with TM while remaining calm (well relatively speaking anyway!!) __________________ "Grampy I'm talking to you!"

06-03-2009, 08:00 AM	#77
mikesal57 Grade 1 Join Date: May 2008 Location: Staten Island, NY Posts: 3,952	thxs ted....another headache from your technical mumbo jumbo...LOL mike __________________ Never bet a favorite doing something for the first time-Harvey Pack

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Re TrackMaster Data Problems	Ted Craven	RDSS	6	05-20-2009 10:47 PM
Limitations of Result Chart data Plan in current version	Ted Craven	RDSS	0	03-07-2009 01:32 PM
TrackMaster -- Limited Free Access	alydar_ David	General Discussion	1	01-16-2009 12:50 PM
About RDSS 2009 data files	Ted Craven	RDSS	0	12-30-2008 06:15 PM

06-02-2009, 11:42 PM	#74
Tanico Grade 3 Join Date: Nov 2008 Posts: 70	Ted, I can only speak for myself of course and I am aware of that, but I am more than willing to give Trackmaster my business. I know we all want error free data but to be honest I think they really do very well considering the enormous amount of data they have to deal with. I would venture a bet that Briss files would have similar problems with this amount of data. Offering a refund is appreciated but I won't be asking and I want to thank you and Trackmaster for being on top of this from the onset of the problems. I am pretty sure that I make way more mistakes reading and using the data and cost myself a lot more money then I pay. Thanks, Doug

06-03-2009, 12:33 AM	#75
mlking AlwNW1X Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 18	Doug I concur. I originally pointed out the error I found so that Trackmaster can be aware of it. They have been more than generous in their interactions with me. Namaste: Mike W.