HORSEPLOP.COM
General Category => Harness Racing => Topic started by: A Merliner on November 16, 2024, 10:48:40 PM
-
Because I wasn’t clever enough to find recent track speed variants anywhere online, I computed them myself by creating a database of horses with consecutive races (fast tracks, no breaks, no layoffs, no interference) at two different tracks and tabulated their time differences.
FWIW these are the results after 5,362 such races :
1:54.0 Lex1
1:54.0 DuQ1
1:54.1 M1
1:54.2 Spr1
1:54.3 Haw1
1:55.1 OakGr5/8
1:55.2 Wbsb7/8
1:55.3 HoP7/8
1:55.3 Phl5/8
1:55.3 Mea5/8
1:55.3 PRc5/8
1:55.3 VD3/4
1:55.4 ScD5/8
1:55.4 CbRn5/8
1:56.0 MVR5/8
1:56.0 PcD5/8
1:56.0 Dtn5/8
1:56.1 Aces5/8
1:56.1 TgDn5/8
1:56.2 Dela
1:56.3 RcR5/8
1:56.3 DD5/8
1:57.2 YR
1:57.4 Nfld
1:57.4 Stga
1:58.1 Btva
1:58.1 Fhld
1:58.1 MR
1:58.2 BR
1:58.3 Har
1:58.3 OD
1:59.0 Bang
1:59.3 Cumb
-
I have many problems with using track variants. Tracks with cheaper horses tend to have slower track variants but might me very fast tracks. Some tracks race in the late fall and winter months like Dover Downs, which is probably one of the fastest 5/8 miles tracks around. Rosecroft is also extremely fast, but the caliber of their horses is rather weak. Tracks with a higher caliber of horses will give that track a higher track variant but may not be as fast as another track with cheaper horses, or ones who race in colder weather.
-
Everything single thing you wrote is false.
The variants are computed using the time differentials of the SAME horse racing at two different tracks in CONSECUTIVE races, which eliminates track class bias.
Further, the variants account for the temperature differential of the two consecutive races (18.6 degrees/sec) which eliminates weather bias.
Rosecroft and Dover and not “extremely fast”. They are, instead, the slowest two 5/8s in the country.
-
Everything single thing you wrote is false.
I'll agree with you especially on the rating he gave Dover and Rosecroft. Totally absurd to think that class of horse has anything to do with a tracks speed rating either.
One thing that is strange is how Chester suddenly in the last 2 years has gotten so fast. It was always slower than Pocono and the Meadows but not the last 2 years. I suspect some Pylon movements were made.
-
I made a false statement, shame on me, or was it just my opinion?
A-Merliner:
Thanks for being such an expert on track variants, what else are you an expert at? Back in the 1960's alot of racetrack programs used to have track variants for most of the tracks, but it seemed like they never updated them thru the years. First of all, who cares what a track variant is.
"The Thorn"
Do you honestly believe that tracks with faster horses don't end up with higher track variants? You obviously don't watch the races at Dover and Rosecroft on a regular basis, both tracks are extremely fast and if top horses raced there in the summer, they'd easily go under 1:47 which is their track records. So now Chester suddenly got faster because they moved the pylons, that's a good one, where did you dig that one up from. Do you believe in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy too?
-
Rosecroft has a bunch of good ones there tonight and they will not go under 1:47, nor would they if it were warm out. No horse "easily" goes under 1:47 on any 5/8th mile track. Just a dumb statement.
-
When has any horse "easily" gone sub 1:47 on a 5/8 mile track? You stated many would easily do it didn't you. Only other i remember is RUTHLESS HANOVER.
-
It's obvious that the rosecroft turns are banked significantly and those times don't travel anywhere else. Most likely the fastest 5/8ths out there
-
It's obvious that the rosecroft turns are banked significantly and those times don't travel anywhere else. Most likely the fastest 5/8ths out there
The objective, numerical computation of the comparative times of over 5,000 North Americans races says your speculation is spectacularly incorrect.
-
The objective, numerical computation of the comparative times of over 5,000 North Americans races says your speculation is spectacularly incorrect.
any experienced gambler would not agree with you. Those rosecroft times never translate to any other track in the mid Atlantic/northeast.
-
Rubbish.
The objective, reproducible, repeatable numerical data directly reflects reality - unlike the guesses or feelings or suppositions of “experienced gamblers”.
-
Rubbish.
The objective, reproducible, repeatable numerical data directly reflects reality - unlike the guesses or feelings or suppositions of “experienced gamblers”.
Do you gamble or race at rosecroft and other nearby east coast tracks? Just curious.
-
Do you gamble or race at rosecroft and other nearby east coast tracks? Just curious.
Indeed.
As a Marylander (pronounced in the Free State as “A Merliner”), I’ve been wagering at Rosecroft, FreeState and Ocean Downs since the late ‘70s - and will obviously be at RcR shortly for the Potomac.
-
I mean Northfield has a 3 second same track variance compared to last year
-
Because I wasn’t clever enough to find recent track speed variants anywhere online, I computed them myself by creating a database of horses with consecutive races (fast tracks, no breaks, no layoffs, no interference) at two different tracks and tabulated their time differences.
FWIW these are the results after 5,362 such races :
1:54.0 Lex1
1:54.0 DuQ1
1:54.1 M1
1:54.2 Spr1
1:54.3 Haw1
1:55.1 OakGr5/8
1:55.2 Wbsb7/8
1:55.3 HoP7/8
1:55.3 Phl5/8
1:55.3 Mea5/8
1:55.3 PRc5/8
1:55.3 VD3/4
1:55.4 ScD5/8
1:55.4 CbRn5/8
1:56.0 MVR5/8
1:56.0 PcD5/8
1:56.0 Dtn5/8
1:56.1 Aces5/8
1:56.1 TgDn5/8
1:56.2 Dela
1:56.3 RcR5/8
1:56.3 DD5/8
1:57.2 YR
1:57.4 Nfld
1:57.4 Stga
1:58.1 Btva
1:58.1 Fhld
1:58.1 MR
1:58.2 BR
1:58.3 Har
1:58.3 OD
1:59.0 Bang
1:59.3 Cumb
-
Because I wasn’t clever enough to find recent track speed variants anywhere online, I computed them myself by creating a database of horses with consecutive races (fast tracks, no breaks, no layoffs, no interference) at two different tracks and tabulated their time differences.
FWIW these are the results after 5,362 such races :
1:54.0 Lex1
1:54.0 DuQ1
1:54.1 M1
1:54.2 Spr1
1:54.3 Haw1
1:55.1 OakGr5/8
1:55.2 Wbsb7/8
1:55.3 HoP7/8
1:55.3 Phl5/8
1:55.3 Mea5/8
1:55.3 PRc5/8
1:55.3 VD3/4
1:55.4 ScD5/8
1:55.4 CbRn5/8
1:56.0 MVR5/8
1:56.0 PcD5/8
1:56.0 Dtn5/8
1:56.1 Aces5/8
1:56.1 TgDn5/8
1:56.2 Dela
1:56.3 RcR5/8
1:56.3 DD5/8
1:57.2 YR
1:57.4 Nfld
1:57.4 Stga
1:58.1 Btva
1:58.1 Fhld
1:58.1 MR
1:58.2 BR
1:58.3 Har
1:58.3 OD
1:59.0 Bang
1:59.3 Cumb
Nice work!!
Did you account if the same driver was used for the same horse?
Also--the speed the starting car has at the start--is that the same at all tracks?
The track maintenance guy also is a factor--sometimes he uses a harrow on the track other times just the screen Ive noticed but the track is rated as "fast" but is it?
Post positions--was that also included?
-
Because I wasn’t clever enough to find recent track speed variants anywhere online, I computed them myself by creating a database of horses with consecutive races (fast tracks, no breaks, no layoffs, no interference) at two different tracks and tabulated their time differences.
FWIW these are the results after 5,362 such races :
1:54.0 Lex1
1:54.0 DuQ1
1:54.1 M1
1:54.2 Spr1
1:54.3 Haw1
1:55.1 OakGr5/8
1:55.2 Wbsb7/8
1:55.3 HoP7/8
1:55.3 Phl5/8
1:55.3 Mea5/8
1:55.3 PRc5/8
1:55.3 VD3/4
1:55.4 ScD5/8
1:55.4 CbRn5/8
1:56.0 MVR5/8
1:56.0 PcD5/8
1:56.0 Dtn5/8
1:56.1 Aces5/8
1:56.1 TgDn5/8
1:56.2 Dela
1:56.3 RcR5/8
1:56.3 DD5/8
1:57.2 YR
1:57.4 Nfld
1:57.4 Stga
1:58.1 Btva
1:58.1 Fhld
1:58.1 MR
1:58.2 BR
1:58.3 Har
1:58.3 OD
1:59.0 Bang
1:59.3 Cumb
Nice work A Merliner.
-
That is a lot of work to put in. Thanks for doing it.
-
The Potomac at the rosecroft went faster than the breeders crown , the dayton stake, the hoosier derby, the Canadian pacing derby
-
There was also no action at all in the race because Ruthless Hanover looped the field at the start or else they probably go even faster. Dexter won the race by grabbing the pocket at the start. Not a bad time considering Rosecroft is one of the two slowest 5/8-mile tracks in the country according to track variant expert "A Merliner".
-
Everything single thing you wrote is false.
The variants are computed using the time differentials of the SAME horse racing at two different tracks in CONSECUTIVE races, which eliminates track class bias.
Further, the variants account for the temperature differential of the two consecutive races (18.6 degrees/sec) which eliminates weather bias.
Rosecroft and Dover and not “extremely fast”. They are, instead, the slowest two 5/8s in the country.
No way Delaware is faster than Rosecroft.
-
I never said Dover was faster than Rosecroft. I said Dover was one of the fastest 5/8-mile tracks around and Rosecroft is also extremely fast, even though the track variant expert calls them two of the slowest 5/8-mile tracks in the country.
-
No way Delaware is faster than Rosecroft.
That would be true except for the teeny-weeny little problem that all the data says Delaware is, in fact, faster.
-
In my opinion, both tracks are very fast, and I'll leave it at that. Arguing which is faster doesn't really matter to me.
-
The data shows that Hawthorne is just a few ticks slower than Lexington, I think most people know that is ridiculous
-
There is one thing that makes those charts completely useless. JUICE.
Did the trainer juice the horse in one race and not the other?
-
The data shows that Hawthorne is just a few ticks slower than Lexington, I think most people know that is ridiculous
And how exactly might most people “know” such a thing?
Intuition? Feelings? Tea leaves? Ouija boards?
Or do they, instead, systematically accumulate and numerically evaluate the time differentials between Hawthorne and Lexington and every other track in the country?
I humbly suggest that essentially nobody, much less “most people”, have ever done the latter.
-
I once heard Ross Croghan say, statistics don't lie, but statisticians do. LOL.
-
I once heard Ross Croghan say, statistics don't lie, but statisticians do. LOL.
https://scontent-ams2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/241976938_4258720630849642_2305170255125111143_n.jpg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=127cfc&_nc_ohc=6akIgDLZefAQ7kNvgFzlKDp&_nc_zt=23&_nc_ht=scontent-ams2-1.xx&_nc_gid=AxrQg0tBO3IxMi_6fvCVtNN&oh=00_AYCm5OsVxq2PKIXynBpqT3lzT_Idh716DfA-PniBy9WKWQ&oe=67409C6A
-
That would be true except for the teeny-weeny little problem that all the data says Delaware is, in fact, faster.
That is how we know the analysis is not always valid.
-
And how exactly might most people “know” such a thing?
Intuition? Feelings? Tea leaves? Ouija boards?
Or do they, instead, systematically accumulate and numerically evaluate the time differentials between Hawthorne and Lexington and every other track in the country?
I humbly suggest that essentially nobody, much less “most people”, have ever done the latter.
You always have to do a review to see if the result make sense. In this case there are a number of places the conclusion does not make sense.
-
Science : When data conflicts with belief, throw out the belief
Religion: When data conflicts with belief, throw out the data
-
Science : When data conflicts with belief, throw out the belief
Religion: When data conflicts with belief, throw out the data
When the results of an analysis do not make sense in the real world there is likely a flaw in the methodology.
https://aspectmr.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/Dewey_Defeats_Truman_AN-95-187_resized-768x599.jpg
-
I wouldn't complain if you would like to do the same for Canadian tracks
-
nice work i for one applaud your efforts
-
I wouldn't complain if you would like to do the same for Canadian tracks
Yeah, I’ve been thinking about doing that - maybe I’ll post them sometime next month or so.
-
That would be like amazing Scoob. tmbz1
-
To many variables to be useful.
-
nice work i for one applaud your efforts
tmbz1 tmbz1 tmbz1 tmbz1 tmbz1