1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. There seems to be a problem with some alerts not being emailed to members. I have told the hosts and they are investigating.
    Dismiss Notice
Welcome to the UK Betting Forum. Please consider registering, it is free!

Early days

Discussion in 'Ratings & Utilities' started by davejb, Jul 1, 2017.

  1. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    @davejb

    I am impressed with your going allowance of +0.70s/f for Market Rasen, after adjusting for the rail movements I ended up with a going allowance of +0.75s/f.
    Market Rasen stated that the going was good (watered), in my book the maximum going allowance for good going should be around +0.40s/f.
    We now have a choice to make here, the clerk of the course rail adjustment calculations were out, or the actual true going ref the clock was firm.

    MR3.png

    Mike.
     
    Ronald Shaw and Donny like this.
  2. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    I'd like to claim some spectacular insight, but the allowance was based pretty much on your video of how to do it! My computer program balances average winner OR across the meeting against the average of top 3 ratings, and then looks at how far apart the two figures are - it calculates a correction factor for the allowance, and then keeps recalculating the values with the new correction added. It takes about three loops, in general, to achieve a balance.

    I do think the going was a bit firmer than they reported though, the times were out, or the rails weren't where they were reported to be - of the three choices I'd go with the first or third reason.
    Dave

    ps - I was wondering how come your ratings are close to mine barring the next last race, and it's down to the rail movement. I had the comptime at 5.9 fast (HRB time v standard of 339s), the RP racetime of 5m 51.95s looks a bit fairytale-ish, Timeform have it at 5m 32.2 (6.8s fast). So far so good, but the railmove of 216 yds then makes my 5.9s fast a whopping 20.3s fast... and my ratings ends up almost 60 higher than yours....
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2017
    Donny likes this.
  3. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Well, today went well at Ayr, but abysmally at Worcester and Ripon - out of 22 races there were 5 winners, 3 of which were at Ayr (5/6, 15/2, 15/2) Worcester and Ripon had one each, 11/8 and 1/2.... that about breaks even across the three meetings but I'm glad I didn't get mysteriously transported to Ripon and think "Might as well go racing now I'm here...". A bit unlikely as I'm in Northern Scotland, but hey ho. 9 of the top rated runners were placed, I really will have to start checking how EW returns would compare....

    Okay - another change, and I have three different card formats, the third one is what I was aiming for initially as a means of identifying POSSIBLE bets - so I'd be using the third format (called, imaginatively, 'card3') to try to find horses that were well rated, had won (preferably) or placed over distance, at this class or better, same going, a jockey on board who has won (preferably) or placed on the horse before, and whose trainer is currently doing well. Card3 is an Excel spreadsheet, it has Brighton, Pontefract, and Wolverhampton in it, and it has a colour coded section after the usual racecard style information for each runner.

    The colour coding is as follows -
    At the top of each column is a clue to the content - Trnr, Dist, Class, Jockey - each horse has a simple score for each beneath. 0 indicates no win or place form, 1 for a place, 2 for a win. So, to give a simple example, under' Dist' Bees Knees is rated 0, Freddy Fugglechops is rated 1 - Freddy F has placed over this distance since 1/4/16, Bees Knees hasn't. Same for the other headings except the Trnr rating shows form over the past 7 days for that trainer, who gets a 1 for 10% or better strike rate, a 2 for 20% up, or a 0 for less than 10.
    If you open the spreadsheet in Excel you should see a colour scheme applied where 0's are plain white background, 1's are light green, 2's are darker green - the idea is to provide an at a glance guide to which runners have previous form matching today's race.

    For distance flags I allow half a furlong above and below the race distance on the race card.

    Card2's and 1's remain untouched. I'll put a card 1 or 2 up for the three in the spreadsheet for those who want to see the actual form lines - the way I intend to use these is to identify (probably) several horses per race by looking for runners with lots of green flags showing, check the ratings, then look at the form in card2 or card1 for a fuller picture. A race with lots of green flags for lots of runners I will probably tend to leave alone, I'm looking for runners who appear to have only a limited amount of opposition!

    Any comments feel free to let rip - as there are three variants on the race card I'm only posting a sample here, but if anyone actually wants a specific meeting in a specific format I'm happy to oblige, provided I'm at my PC during the morning at some point!

    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    Donny and TheBluesBrother like this.
  4. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    First off all the RP time of 5m 51.95s for the class 2 race is correct, I put a stopwatch on the race, how Timeform ended up with 5m 32.2s Closing Sectional: (6.20f): 84.50s (105.7%) beats me.

    Races 1, 2, 5 & 6 increased by 216yds and race 3, 4 & 7 by 156yds.

    The race was increased by +216yds (14.4s), how did Timeform manage to produce a sectional time, is it just a case of suckers are us...

    If your rating for The Tourard Man was 60pts higher than mine, then the horses who finished behind him, now have ratings that are also inflated.

    So you have to make a choice here, go with HRB, Timeform or me....

    Mike.
     
    davejb and Ronald Shaw like this.
  5. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Well,
    I guess I'll go with you there Mike, I'll recalculate and upload the results shortly.
    This isn't difficult or time consuming to correct, but I can't help wondering how TF, RP and whoever HRB is using (seems to be very close to TF usually) managed to get such disparate times - I'm not that amazed to see RP and TF a little bit different, it's not uncommon for a small difference, but this is a bit of a whopper.
    Dave
    There you go, revised ratings. I had the same railmoves as yourself.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jul 11, 2017
  6. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    @davejb

    The problem you have now is, the going allowance has changed from +0.70s/f down to +0.44s/f, because of one race? this then increases the figures on all the other races.

    Here is an example of my speed figure calculations from Monday's meetings.

    Or you can download every meeting from Jan 2013
    Speed figures2 - Google Drive
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jul 11, 2017
    davejb, ArkRoyal and Ronald Shaw like this.
  7. ArkRoyal

    ArkRoyal Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    Messages:
    12,739
    Likes Received:
    13,216
    davejb likes this.
  8. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Well,
    the problem is really that the original calculations were based on an erroneous time that was approx. 20s faster than it ought to have been, leading to the re-rating dropping the winner by 37 lbs or so... yes, it does lead to all the other runners at that meeting being re-rated, which is what I did when you advised me the reported time was in error. Thanks for the ratings, I'll be interested to see how you've rated some of the races I've had a go at. Obviously I need to gain a great deal of experience yet before I'd be comfortable with applying my perceptions of going to the results I download - the calculations are automatic, reliant on the times that are fed in, and as a consequence are at the mercy of incorrect reports whether it be race times or rail movements. Thanks for the help, I do appreciate you taking time to steer me through the minefield.

    Thanks for that info Ark - the chap running HRB is clearly putting a lot of work into his site, he's equally hostage to the perennial rule of rubbish in - rubbish out of course, I'm just grateful that he's doing the hard work of editing the cards and results into a format that makes it relatively easy to process the data... its' my own fault (as illustrated above) that I couldn't see the anomaly in the race Mike and I have been discussing.

    Lots to learn, it's coming slowly....

    Dave
     
    Donny and TheBluesBrother like this.
  9. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Tomorrow's cards,
    card3_12_july is the Excel file with a sheet per meeting covering all meetings with colour coded flags etc.
    Single meeting 'card2' format csv's for those without Excel, and also containing the reduced form printouts (1-2-3 results only)...not all meetings, these are to show what I'm doing/trying to do rather than an attempt to undermine Timeform.
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    mlmrob likes this.
  10. mlmrob

    mlmrob Dam

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2012
    Messages:
    9,970
    Likes Received:
    25,832
    Excellent sheets @davejb thanks for letting us have a look at them. Impressive stuff.:handgestures-thumbup:
     
  11. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Thanks, I'm glad you like them.
    As the thread title has it, it's early days - I'm still experimenting with a mix of 'what I can get' and 'what I can do' to try to come up with something useful - my unshakeable and probably incorrect opinion is that if I plug away at this relentlessly I'll get better at it and actually be able to pick a decent percentage of winners....which is very definitely not the case yet :)
     
    mlmrob likes this.
  12. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Here we go,
    quite a lot of cards for tomorrow, as before I've done an Excel sheet with all meetings on, plus a few 'card2' format individual meetings for those who want them. As ever, tell me if you actually want any particular format/meeting and I'll try to accommodate.
    Tiny change, I did an end column in the Excel version with a total across the jockey/trainer/class/going/distance flags - the ratings are 2 for being a winner at today's going/class/distance, today's jockey has won on the horse, the trainer has 20%+ win rate in the past week. 1 point for being placed instead of winning, otherwise as above, trainer flag for 10%+ win rate recently.
    0 pts if the horse hasn't won or placed over the going, distance, class, jockey hasn't won or placed on it, and the trainer is below 10% win rate recently.
    The total at the end is just to allow an even quicker scan, for example it made Jumira Bridge pretty obvious at a cursory glance as I formatted the file - I think (cursory check so far) it's the only runner tomorrow with a '2' in all 5 categories... given the high rating as well I'd be tempted to say that I'd consider putting 5 bob on it.... As this is all work in progress please don't rely on it for betting purposes, it isn't finished yet!

    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

  13. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Well, obviously picking Jumira Bridge was the equivalent of firing a tranquiliser at him in the parade ring, all I can say is if the first nine home hadn't turned up he'd have made a decent each way bet.
    Well, nothing ventured - at least my wife had a winner, I recently bought her an Elite Racjng club membership for a surprise present and Tribute Act just managed to get her head in front at Doncaster - Marsha and Judicial should be running this weekend too, so at least one of us gets to cheer their horses home occasionally!

    Here's three cards for tomorrow, plus the same three in my Excel format. I'm still collecting information at this stage, trying to find out what does or does not work, it's slow going but then it'd be rather unlikely to produce a sure fire version with just a few weeks of programming, so we'll see how things develop.
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    mlmrob, Keegans head and Donny like this.
  14. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Working on a revision to the ratings methodology, for w while the ratings will be the original formula however - then I'll be looking to see if my efforts produce any improvement. I'm hopeful, but then if racing could be made simple by 2 months of home programming it would probably have already been done! (I am, naturally, ever hopeful that THREE months of home programming will turn out to be the magic ticket....)

    Three of tomorrows meetings in the files, Ascot, Newmarket and York.
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

  15. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Oh I forgot,
    actually I've been quite busy today and didn't get much chance to keep up with racing, I wanted to keep things clear for tomorrow - if anyone was watching the ratings you can probably see why I'm trying to calm them down a bit, at the moment they can produce some good winners but there are long dry runs in there too often! Todays three (ie the three I posted last night for the same three meetings I've done today) gave a complete duck at York - a 9/1 third place and that was it for 7 races. Newmarket was by far the most satisfying, 3 winners from 8 at 5/2, 11/8 and 6/4 - not exactly profitable but it's the sort of strike rate I'm after. Ascot produced 2 winners from 7 and by far the best return, thanks to getting the 20/1 opener and the 5/2 winner of the last race - but that's a bit of a fluke I reckon.
    Dave
     
  16. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    As there's nothing much of interest tomorrow I'm going to plug away at my revision of ratings rather than going nuts over colour coding Perth.... not great today anyhow, Harry Angela and Ballet Concerto were the highlights of an otherwise lacklustre performance from the original ratings.... Normal service will, as they say, be resumed - I'd dearly like to get the revision finished pdq.
    Dave
     
  17. Donny

    Donny Yearling

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2016
    Messages:
    123
    Likes Received:
    106
    Hi @davejb ,
    Keep at it and Good Luck.
    Donny.
     
  18. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    @davejb

    The one thing that you will never be able code, is how to dial in the going allowance.

    Using yesterday's meeting at Hamilton as an example, I will explain in another post how I arrived at the going allowance of +0.09s/f (good), what did you end up with?

    Hamilton.png

    The official going description was given out as good to soft, on my scale would put the going allowance around -0.25s/f (good to soft).

    Mike.
     
    mlmrob likes this.
  19. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    My original method has the going allowance at -0.04. What my updated version will put t at I don't know yet as I'm still hard at work on it, if I manage to make it work I'll certainly tell you how I got on with it. I'll look for your other post with interest.
    I have to disagree regarding the possibility of correctly computing an effective ga, it might well be very difficult and doing what you do yourself might be too involved to even attempt to duplicate, and there's a distinct possibility that I'll not be up to the task personally, but as I said before I'm not expecting to crack the puzzle after just a few weeks of effort and I have an O-level in bloody minded stickatitness :)
    Dave
     
  20. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    @davejb

    When myself and Dave Edwards agree on a going allowance for a meeting, he will assess a going allowance at say 0.00s/f (good) and I will be 10lb higher at +0.10s/f (good), this is due to a combination of different lbs per lengths, and he uses WFA.

    I have checked the BHA website for any rail movements, and made the necessary adjustments if required.

    Hamilton2.png

    I then do the ratings to OR lbs adjustment, in this case instead of using the 3 fastest times which would have given me a figure of -5, today I am only using the top 2 figures giving me a final figure of -1.

    I now add a constant of 10lbs to the -1 rating which gives me an going adjustment figure of 9lbs, I now enter 0.09s/f as the initial going allowance.
    Note: on some racecourses you might end up with 2 going allowances.

    Hamilton3.png

    So after the going allowance adjustment of +0.09s/f (good), I am looking for a rating/OR figure difference of between -8 to -10, if the figure is only -4 adjust the going allowance by +5 to +6lbs to correct.
    As a rule of thumb, any speed figure that is within 10lbs of their OR, the form is rock solid, looking at the final figures, Cline was best on the day with +1.

    Cline.png

    This how I dial in a going allowance...

    Looking at Cline's best RPR of 68, at this moment in time, on my RPR to OR conversion table, this gives him a possible max OR of 61.

    Mike.

     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jul 16, 2017
    ArkRoyal and davejb like this.
  21. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Yes,
    I can see how even with practise that would take you some time to work through each day!
    My latest method, which is very early in development currently, has been looking at calculating a more accurate ga for the race - perhaps a bit simplistic of me but I figure if I get the allowance right I'll be pretty much there. I've been basing it on the idea that a 100 rated runner will manage standard time on good going carrying 9-0, and trying to use the OR, weight, distance of a runner to calculate a correction factor to reflect my 100/9-0 runner. So far I'm working this out for the first and second in each race, to allow for races where the second performs to a higher rating than the winner, and looking at the best race result each meeting to decide what to hang my hat on - figuring that most races will not reflect horses running to their OR but the best figures for the meeting are probably pretty close.

    I'm still working on it, I hope to have something to show you in the not too distant future....
    It's very kind of you to go to this trouble to explain things, I do appreciate your efforts.
    Dave
     
    TheBluesBrother and ArkRoyal like this.
  22. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    The going allowance would be the most important factor when compiling speed figures, you could have the the best set of standard times available,
    without the knowledge on how the going on the day, was slowing or speeding horses up, you would be up the creek without a paddle.

    Some days you will see speed figures that just don't make sense, this morning I asked Dave Edwards this by email.

    Morning Dave,

    With regards to the official race distances in Ireland, here is something to ponder over, was the 1m4f distance at the Curragh correct?

    How on earth did the rider of the Amateur race Miles to Memphis carrying 16lb more than Enable, get within 2.73s of a impressive classic winner.

    The speed figure of 49 I have for Enable is so bad, I am having a hard time trying to work out what went wrong here.

    I had the going allowance as firm…

    *************************

    Morning Mike

    Strange goings on maybe they went slow early in the Classic

    Definitely firm ground though.

    Dave.
     
  23. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    I'm still beavering away, and was just about to take a break when I noticed that your figures for comptime at Hamilton are fairly different to mine - somewhat unusually HRB, RP and Timeform all give the same times for Hamilton yesterday, and I'm using the same standard times as yourself (unless you've altered them in the past week) - from your race distances (most noticeably the last race, which was 8.5f and you have it as 9.3) it looks like you've factored railmoves in or something? According to the BHA site race distances were 'as advertised' with no rail movement to account for. I get comptimes of 3,3, 3.04, 3,41, 6.12, 5.81, 4.0, and 5.26 for Hamilton. Races 1,5,6,7 are all a fair bit different, and as races 1 and 2 were over the same distance I don't see how we could agree on race 2 yet not race 1.... any ideas?

    Dave
     
  24. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Three for tomorrow,
    Ayr, Windsor, and the AW at Wolverhampton
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    Donny likes this.
  25. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    The comparison per furlongs times I use are taken off the Racing Post website, remember I update the standard times list most days.

    Hamilton.png

    I see Dave Edwards has used 2 going allowances for Hamilton?

    Standard times: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3rVp0WNvwn8anUySlNvSjN1bXM
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jul 17, 2017
    davejb likes this.
  26. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Ah,
    okay - I'm still using slightly different times to the RP for 8.3f and 11.1f.
    Yes, and that is a tweak (change of going) that I'll have problems with - there's a sneaky but more labour intensive option for dealing with that and I'm going to give it a go.The problem I have currently is that I have more ideas than I have time to actually code up!
    Dave
     
  27. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Here's 3 cards for tomorrow,
    anyone following the exchange between myself and Mike (@TheBluesBrother) will hopefully understand that I post these for interest, I believe some of the filtering my program produces would be of use to anyone looking to analyse form, and that this is still very much a work in progress. I offer these cards each day as an aid to those who are interested, I hope one day they might be regarded as bloody useful! (If they do become so I hope everyone will appreciate the large part Mike has played here in getting me to think the right way).

    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    mlmrob and dicko14 like this.
  28. dicko14

    dicko14 Mare

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2012
    Messages:
    4,415
    Likes Received:
    2,475
    @davejb
    Thanks for putting these up for our perusal.
    How you guys do this is amazing and way over my head.
    Saw an interesting segment whilst watching ATR today where they showed 2 divisions of the same race where in the first race they went hell for leather from the off and in the other they ran to even splits which was the faster race. Think this maybe your next project?
    Dave
     
  29. kevinc

    kevinc Mare

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2013
    Messages:
    2,066
    Likes Received:
    559
    Interesting thread ive always liked speed ratings but never had the commitment. With the Hamilton standard times , does the rp having a separate standard time for when they race in the loop
     
  30. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    There are only one set of standard times for Hamilton.

    Hamilton.png
    HamiltonST.png

    The racecourse has just been remeasured.

    Mike.
     
  31. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    @davejb

    One thing that I have failed to mentioned is the max and minimum weights I use for both the Flat and jumps.

    Flat - max 10-0. min 8-0
    For example, if a horse on the flat is carrying 11-6 in an amateur race, I only adjust to 10-0.

    NH - max 12-0 Min 10-0

    Ayr.png

    Example from yesterday's meeting from Ayr, as you can see Royal Shaheen rating was only adjusted to 10-0.

    The importance of looking at the rails movements certainly applied to Ayr yesterday.

    AYR/MON 17 JUL

    GOING/TRACK

    Good (GoingStick: 7.8 on Monday at 06:30)
    Rails: Inner rail out 6yds/Top Bend out 8 yds

    Race:3 Distance as advertised
    Races: 1,2,4,5 & 6 +24yds (subtract 1.6s)
    Race: 7 +42yds (subtract 2.8s)

    PLEASE NOTE: the current set of RP standard times for Ffos Las cannot be used on yesterday
    course configuration, there is a major discrepancy, I sent an email to Dave Edwards.

    Mike.
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2017
    davejb likes this.
  32. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Rail movement,
    yes, it makes a sizeable difference quite frequently, and it's not that long ago I recalculated everything to include them as you probably recall. Your idea abut max weight bears thinking about - I'll add it to the list! I haven't done yesterday's figures yet - it doesn't take very long and I prefer to keep working at the update, as I'm not betting until I get this all sorted out it's a higher priority at the moment to see if I can improve things.
    Thanks as ever for the information.
    Dave
     
    TheBluesBrother likes this.
  33. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Okay,
    @TheBluesBrother
    I said earlier that I'd post something for you to look at if I managed to get anything to work on my second method of calculating the allowance, and here are a couple of days I've been using for testing purposes with allowances calculated by my updated program.
    I was using these two as I have your speedfigures up to around then - I don't want to just copy your stuff, I'd just like to be somewhere on the same sheet with my efforts!
    From a fairly quick glance I've got some allowances that match yours spot on, I am usually within 0.1 or less of your figure.... I'm not sure I'm going to get any closer as I suspect the remaining differences are the result of your own expertise being used to tweak the figures until they match your expectations.
    I'm going to trial this version's speed figures for a while now to see if they perform better than my original set - so the next hour or so will be spent recompiling a second database of figures for the past 18 months.
    Thanks again for all the help, I'm going to trial things for a while now before making any significant changes to anything - I need some thinking time to decide if I can improve things further.

    @dicko14 sorry, I didn't spot your post initially. I'm currently on summer holiday - which will lead seamlessly into my retirement, so this is a project to keep me and my noggin busy doing something I have been interested in for about 45 years. If I ever get to the point of wanting to do something else I'll probably have a crack at another interest from my misspent youth and try handicapping greyhounds. (I used to be better at that).

    I'm not sure that split times for racing over here is all that practical - it's hard enough getting reliable timing data for the races as you probably realised from some of the chat on this thread. I know Timeform produce the figures, in fact decades ago I bought the first few of their annual timefigure booklets.. mainly because I couldn't afford the racehorses annual!
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    dicko14 and TheBluesBrother like this.
  34. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    Make the figures your own, my method of using the 10lb constant, to calculate the going allowance is fairly recent, I had that figure in my head for a long time, but it works.

    After a while you come across figures that are just not right, like Rowlestonerendezvu at Ffos las yesterday, the 1m4f distance is now 1m3f209y, I took 2.0s of the standard time to correct it
    or the 48 rated winner would have had an exaggerated high speed figure.

    Ffos Las.png

    Whenever I change a standard time, the lbs per length figure is also updated.

    Mike.
     
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2017
    mlmrob and dicko14 like this.
  35. TheBluesBrother

    TheBluesBrother Gelding

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2013
    Messages:
    1,387
    Likes Received:
    3,009
    @davejb

    Here are my figures for the mixed meeting at Killarney yesterday, note the 2 different going allowances for both the flat and jumps,
    in the majority of cases, you have to take the official Irish race distances with a large pinch of salt.

    Killarney.png

    Killarney standard times updated.

    Mike.
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Jul 18, 2017
    mlmrob and dicko14 like this.
  36. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Well, I don't really have any option not to - as you said a little while back I would find it extremely difficult to program in the different tweaks you do, so the ratings will evolve as I alter things, I did want to be somewhere in the same ballpark as yourself just to ensure than I wasn't producing imaginary Unicorn racing ratings ;)

    Handling multiple allowances for a single meeting would be difficult I think to program in, but it's not off the radar - it just isn't likely to be a mod I can put in any time soon.
    Cheers again, gotta go outside.....eek!
    Dave
     
    TheBluesBrother likes this.
  37. dicko14

    dicko14 Mare

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2012
    Messages:
    4,415
    Likes Received:
    2,475
    @davejb
    Congrats on getting out of the rat race. I see your retiring at the same age I did which was 2 years ago now, how time flies!
    Enjoy the holiday and your retirement.
    Dave
     
  38. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    Daily cards for tomorrow then, these cards are all using the new version of the ratings, having recompiled them all for the past 18 months or so.
    I've left the mixed turf/AW card at Lingfield out of it - it's no harder to do than any other but I would rather watch the others on turf.

    @TheBluesBrother Tomorrow's results from Lingfield, being mixed, will be a bit of a test.... my program SHOULD treat it as two separate meetings (obviously the database records whether the race is on turf or AW, and there's coding inside that ensures the correct set of standard times is applied) but I wouldn't be surprised to see something needing a quick fix when I actually come to process it. This might be a possible route for handling cases of the going changing during a meeting, process each part of a set of results as a separate meeting.

    @dicko14 Well, the last few years at work were pretty hard going, so I'm not sorry to be out of it at last - the trick is to accept there is more to life than work, and I have a number of ideas for how to make retirement go the way I'd like, so we'll see what comes up.
    Dave
     

    Attached Files:

    TheBluesBrother, dicko14 and mlmrob like this.
  39. mlmrob

    mlmrob Dam

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2012
    Messages:
    9,970
    Likes Received:
    25,832
    What was Love Oasis real figure for last Saturday as I think 141 must be an error.
     
  40. davejb

    davejb Foal

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2017
    Messages:
    73
    Likes Received:
    93
    You're quite right, I'll have to step through Chester for that day and see if there's some reason it's going allowance was calculated to be rather larger than expected - a bit of a 'back of the fag packet' manual rating looks to put Love Oasis at 58 or 59 for that run. Sorry, this stuff is still developing (as the thread illustrates on a daily basis) but after I find the reason for the miscalculation (which usually just takes time and a degree of bloody mindedness) I'll hopefully be able to check for it automatically in future.
    Dave
     
    mlmrob likes this.

Share This Page