Go Back   Pace and Cap - Sartin Methodology & The Match Up > RDSS > RDSS2 / FAQ's
Mark Forums Read
Google Site Search Get RDSS Sartin Library RDSS FAQs Conduct Register Site FAQ Members List Search Today's Posts

RDSS2 / FAQ's Information, discussion, screenshots, videos about the upcoming version, FAQ's

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-16-2012, 07:01 PM   #1
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Huntsville, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 7,238
Adjustments Question

I received the following question about changing adjustment settings, and about a specific race with apparently unbelievable adjustments:
On 9/27 laurel park race 3 the 1 2 8 11 and 15 are all out of the same tandem,. The program gave the race some insane adj figure 9 - 15 points
higher than any one of the horses has ever run. I knew some thing was amiss so i went to the Configure screen and told the program to use the full variant,which
was -41 and and max DTV and nothing changed - still a 90 adj speed rating and a 175 and change total energy. What makes the adj speed rating the program or TrackMaster's variant?

Also race 7 the same day if you look at the 7 horse every time the track variant is exceptionally fast the horse get extremely high adj speed fig.

I want to know if you still use those lines or stay away. I chose to to stay away.
You’re asking a couple of questions:

1. How to change adjustments and rerun the Past Performances and resulting Analysis screens. Regardless of adjustments selected in the Configure Tab, when a race is ‘assembled’ (i.e. the calculations of all the factors and the various adjustments used), the figures for each horse and for the chosen pacelines are stored in the RDSS Cache for quick retrieval whenever you choose to return to that race – you don’t have to pause while all the calculations are redone. RDSS just checks the Cache, if it finds PPs and Analysis for a race, it loads and displays those previously created numbers.

If you want to change adjustments (e.g. 50% DTV to 100% DTV, or change the range of DTV values used, etc), first make your change in the Configure Tab and Save them, then clear that race from the Cache using the Cache Mgmt button on the RDSS Desktop (via Windows File Explorer which opens, drill down to the track, date and race you want to clear, then delete the folder representing that race, or date, or entire track, as you choose).

Then restart RDSS and open the race in question you were interested in. It will re-assemble using the new current adjustment settings. I know, it should be more convenient to make spot changes and see what it looks like, and I’d like to make it so, but there are a number of administrative issues involved. Some day for sure!

2. About LRL 9/27/12 Race 3: why does the Tandem race for the 1,2,8,11,15 horses (LRL Sept 8, Race 5 5.5f Turf) project so FAST compared to what those horses have ever done before, given it’s the same track, distance and surface? First of all, all races are adjusted by: 1) Daily Track Variant (DTV), 2) TrackMaster Inter-track Variant (ITV), 3) distance equalization, 4) surface equalization.

In this case (LRL Sept 8, Race 5), the distance and surface equalization adjustments were both 0 (same distance, same surface as today).

The DTV of -41 for that day’s Turf races, for better or for worse, whether or not it was a reasonable number compared to the ‘par’ for that track, distance and surface – was VERY FAST, so our adjustment system will SLOW DOWN the final and incremental times by the time value of those DTV points. It is up to YOU whether you apply 50% or 100% or 0% of those points, and whether you limit the fastest or slowest values (i.e. the Min/Max Range of DTV used, on the Configure Tab). More importantly, it’s up to you to apply then consistently, which is why there are recommended settings and why mostly, they never change – except when you want to investigate anomalies like this. If you used ANY DTV adjustment, the resulting adjusted times got SLOWER (not faster) as a result of the DTV component itself.

The Inter-Track Variant (ITV) adjustment is what SPED UP the final times by the greatest amount of all the adjustments. One thing which may be difficult to remember (or even accept) is in our adjustment system, we are NOT adjusting pacelines to TODAY’s Track, Distance and Surface – we are adjusting every horse’s paceline to a hypothetical norm, regardless of how different the track, the surface or the distance variation. The ITV between LRL 5.5f Turf and the hypothetical NORM value for 5.5f Turf (i.e. ‘Sartin Downs’, if you will) is SLOW by more than a second, thus in our adjustment system we SPEED UP the adjusted time by the time value of those ITV

Summarizing, when projecting that LRL Sept 8 5.5f Turf tandem race to today’s LRL 5.5f Turf race, the times were SLOWED down by the DTV (slowed more if you used all of the -41 DTV points, slowed less if you used a Minimum/Maximum limit, say -15/+15 (which I do), slowed more if you use %100 of the DTV, slowed less if you use 50%); the times were SPED UP by the ITV adjustment (presuming your Config setting for ITV says to USE ITVs); and were not affected at all by surface or distance equalizations. The ITV adjustment projected those horses’ tandem with faster Adjusted SR (and all other resulting numbers) than they had previously run.

That’s the gory details about adjustments, FWIW.

3. What to do about it - the most important question! A strategy in horse race analysis can never be validated on one single race; and to validate an analysis approach over a group of races (e.g. a 20 race cycle, or 100 or 500 races) requires consistently applied analysis of numbers which are consistently comparable to each other. Failing to have a consistent set of numbers for comparing horses means – since anything can happen in a horse race (trouble, horse is today in a different part of its form cycle, disadvantageous pace setup, etc) – if your numbers are inconsistent, you don’t know if your Win today or your Loss today is attributable to the normal distribution of Wins versus Losses you would expect over a larger set of races, OR whether it is attributable to you changing your analysis method from one race to the next (i.e. inconsistent analysis due in part to inconsistent numbers, including inconsistent adjustment of underlying times which the numbers or factors are based upon).

That said – at the highest level of concept - we want our adjustments to be consistently applied, so, for example, we can compare one set of 6f races we worked to another set of 6f races. Now, I also absolutely accept that sometimes the adjustments – which are indeed automated, not hand crafted, but supposedly of a high calibre, from Equibase/TrackMaster - are not always accurate or perhaps sensible. The ITV adjustment of the Tandem in this race in question may not look sensible – given that you accept the above stated philosophy of consistency ((or perhaps you believe caveats apply to that philosophy) – and if so, you might rework the race with FULL DTV (slowing the race down further), or NO ITV, etc, etc. Or, use a different line for those 5 horses exiting their last race tandem. In this race, there were many handicapping reasons to respect the race winner #16, beside it’s 4/5 odds.

If you ask what I do, while I try to be aware when possibly adjustment anomalies pop-up, I am mostly leery of the ‘zig-zag’ trap in my analysis. In this race, if I thought I could bet against the 4/5 favourite (or perhaps in an exacta, or deeper) I may have bet on one of those possibly (before the fact) over-rated Tandem horses and possibly lost a wager. But by not second guessing the adjustment sets which server me well over the LONGER TERM, I expect to win MORE races to come in which the adjustments present a favourable outcome. I don’t want to agonize over whether I won or lost a race because I ‘zigged’ when I was supposed to zag (i.e. distrusted adjustments given, applied inconsistent analysis practices). If I use constant adjustments and analysis habits, I still expect to lose about 50% of my bets (betting multiple horses or pools per race), and among the reasons I may lose a race are: bad adjustments as well as just plain ‘variable outcome’ in a larger series of betting events.

I guess that’s my argument for consistent analysis habits, including adjustments. However I believe each person has to discover the truth of that (or their own version of it) by investigation, by actually changing adjustments, using diverse analysis habits from race set to race set (cycle to cycle). If you can persist long enough with the same tools, you will determine if you should indeed make changes to suspicious adjustments, or accept them as they are and ride the Win/Loss distribution of race event outcomes, or have a standard approach when things seem ‘smelly’ i.e. pass the race. A part of my truth, or approach to using the tools, has become: trust the program, analyse and bet consistently, demand a minimum of $6.00 in the Win pool, back up longer odds horses in the Place pool, don’t swing for the fences (and suffer the mental consequences while waiting for hits); take smaller amounts of money out of pools as regularly as possible, but don’t be afraid to bet longer odds horses ranked 3rd on my favourite readouts.


FWIW, here are BL/BL screenshots of the race, one with the ‘default’ adjustments, and another with %100 DTV and no restricted DTV Min/Max range. Both are automated Pacelines (BLT/C). If anyone wants PPs in order to discuss this issue further, just ask. Hope this helps, even a bit!

Config: Defaults, except -15 / +15 DTV Min/Max
Name:  LRL0927-3 default.png
Views: 647
Size:  86.3 KB

Config: 100% DTV, full range of DTVs (-50 / +50)
Name:  LRL0927-3 100% DTV.png
Views: 634
Size:  84.7 KB

Note: the #16 horse won at 4/5 odds. In the last image above, the 3 and 9 horse were not serious Win contenders for various reasons, leaving the #16 top ranked. The use of FULL DTV adjustments got the $3.60 winner.

Note: the use of default adjustments (first image above) got the 48-1 3rd place horse which paid $11.60, a neck from 2nd place. Other Tandem winners finished 4th and 5th out of 13 runners - so I believe there was at least some merit in how that Tandem was originally adjusted. FWIW.

Name:  LRL0927-3-cht.png
Views: 645
Size:  75.7 KB
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™ Follow on Twitter @SartinMethod
Ted Craven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2014, 11:00 PM   #2
Frank Barry
Maiden
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3
Question GeniusIQ179

Hi Ted, I would like to chat with another handicapper
who has been swapping lines. I just do not know how
to get my computer program to do the swap correctly.
Do you know of anyone that practices such tactics?
Long time between times. But I always seem to re-appear.
Thanks
Frank Barry

Last edited by Frank Barry; 06-28-2014 at 11:05 PM. Reason: frankbarry@digitalputty.com
Frank Barry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2014, 02:04 PM   #3
Ted Craven
Grade 1
 
Ted Craven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Huntsville, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 7,238
Frank,

Perhaps you could elaborate further on what you mean by 'swapping lines'. Also, what computer program you are referring to.

Ted
__________________

R
DSS -
Racing Decision Support System™ Follow on Twitter @SartinMethod
Ted Craven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2014, 04:22 PM   #4
Frank Barry
Maiden
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 3
Wink GeniusIQ179

Hi Ted.

Thanks for your quick response.
I am doing some Hat stuff, moving pacelines around to get
a better flavor. I called it swapping lines. Seems to work
by eyeball pretty well. I was confounded for a while there
yesterday, and thought I would see if Your Site "Pace and Cap"
might bail me out. But early this morning, shortly after
midnight, I figured it out, and have spent this later morning
writing the formula's to make it happen. I am 1/2 way there,
and see the light at the end of the tunnel.

The race that's been bugging me, is from TAM 12-30-2011,
the 2nd race, 9 horse field, Finished 5 - 9 - 8 - 3 Scratch the 2.

Normally the 9 should win. But not in this case. A fix is needed.
I tried adding a an adjustment, blinker's on the 5, but trashed that.
I hate to do any adjustments. The swapping lines will do the job.
I can see, by eye, that they work, and I get 5 9 8 3 without any
problem when I do the swaps.

My program is one I designed over some 20+ years. It has
not one thing taken from other progams. Nada. Self only.
But the Hat was sooo good, and I appreciate his work.

My win percent is high, and I get my fair share of exactas,
tri's, and supers. (These are done straight.) I guess you could
say I'm in profit with my program. That's all a man can wish for.

Thank you again Ted, I think I have it figured out now, but your
input is to be highly valued. I want to become more involved with
Pace and Cap now that I've reached 75. Getting older teaches us
all to respect other's ideas. I will keep coming back if that's ok.

Sincerely,
Frank Barry
Morro Bay, California
Frank Barry is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Answering Mike's Question - My Learning Experience With Richie P. barb craven RDSS 14 11-26-2011 07:54 PM
Question on pace albatross Previous 'Handicapping Discussion' Forum 0 07-24-2010 12:42 PM
A Question Posed 1986 Bob Cochran General Discussion 12 08-30-2009 08:29 PM
Question Concerning "About" Distances... lueylump RDSS 2 05-13-2009 05:45 PM
QUESTION for the group Tim Y General Discussion 6 03-30-2009 12:04 AM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:48 AM.