Old standard- 1 length = 1/5 second.

[ken]

My guess is 8' is standard for 1 length because a cord of wood, then fence railing was 8'. Now a length of Fontana safety rail is 8'.
My guess is 1/5 second is used because there are 4 marks between trhe numbers on a clock or watch, so stopwatches were made in increments of 5.
1 length (8') per 1/5 second = 16.5 seconds per furlong. I checked and the following run faster than that: Thoroughbreds; Greyhounds; Arabians; Mules; Almost all trotters (I did not check camels!).Tom Ainslie said racehorses riun about 7 lengths per second- I say about 6 1/2.
It is also the fact that most speed figures are based on projecting the non-winner's time and the winner's distance, neither of which is a realistic snapshot of what is reported in the results chaets. What should be figured is the non-winner's distance using the winner's time (which the charts are frozen in).
My point is, all non-winners' times are discredited about a 25-30% longer gap between themselves and the winner than they should be.
All this means is 2-5 speed points should be added to non-winners' numbers, in my opinion.

[herowithin]

KEN Whats up, this is herowithin responding on 1/5th of a second is equal to 8 lengths or 7 lenghts and so on. I have been reading a chapter on Howard Sartin in the Best of Handicapping. This is a dinasour book on handicapping from the early 80's, but the handicappers in this book are Tom Ainslie, Andy Beyer, James Quinn and the Great One Howard Sartin. The more i try to tap into his methodology the harder it gets. I am sure you heard of this man and how he was a geniuous about using his tools of handicapping. If you have any more information about the Sartin methodology please can you put a thread on this information

[black dog]

Let me jump in... Are you talking about the Sartin that wrote an article for Gambling Times magazine in March of "82"on incremental speeds. Or Do you mean the Howard Sartin that produced a computer program called Phase Three,or was it the Sartin that gave us The Dynamics of Incremental Velocity
& Energy Exertion along with Pace-Speed-Class Handicapping Methodolgy.
Hell, way back in "89" I even talked to him. Really, if you want any info on Sartin drop me a line and I'll see about getting you copies. I still use velocity,for the internal fractions of a race, but I only use it for the track I play locally ( Finger Lakes). Since I've been doing this for many years, I have very accurate class pars and speed ratings. It allows me to make a modest living.. good luck.

[ken]

Internal fractions is not a speed figure. The full race is.
I have researched and read numerous confirmations that the chart callers use photos to measure back in lengths a non-winner's position at the exact point in time that the winner crosses the finish line. I can only speculate that the chart caller uses the same method but visually during a race. If so, that number is flawed to certain extent. As far as I am concerned, I use fractions and position in a horse's running line to measure running style and fading during the race.
Facts are facts- and the fact is 1 length=1/5 second was and is very convenient and is the only way to easily measure a horse's velocity until the tracks decide to get real and do what Sam Houston does in QTR races at the finish- record all runner's times. But current figures not accurate enough for me because I bet more than just winner vs. winner.
Most major makers and inventers of speed or pace figures concede other factors must be used to to predict a horse's final or fractional "time".
If you believe the figures you use are close enough for your handicapping, that is fine; Many people profit using them. But this forum is on handicapping math and this thread is about math.
When a situation occurs like at GGF today, a sealed track, clear weather, and short fields, I don't need no stinklin' math!LOL!!

[Rudy]

Interested If Longshotlarry calculates this factor in his handicapping..I know he's very astute at trip handicapping............

[vtbob]

There's brief description of the Sartin Methodology which you can download free from http://nehandicappers.org Check the Racing Articles page.

[Exciting Story]

1:36 mile is 96 seconds.

5280 feet in 96 seconds is 55 feet per second.

If you use the standard conversion of fifths to lengths, that's 11 feet per length.

I did some playing around with numbers, and it just doesn't make any difference if you use sixths of a second or fifths. We're talking about a difference of only a few hundredths of a second. It's just not enough to matter.

[ken]

Often it does not matter at all; sometimes the closer the numbers are between entrants the more it matters; if you rely only or primarily on them, they matter more that you realize.
Personnaly I more often calculate 6f times or splits using 30% as my adjustment, then adjust subjectively based on other variables for the remaining distance. If I need the calculation. With Lucky in the SA 9th I did not do the math.

[gestalt]

1:36 mile is 96 seconds.

5280 feet in 96 seconds is 55 feet per second.

If you use the standard conversion of fifths to lengths, that's 11 feet per length.

I did some playing around with numbers, and it just doesn't make any difference if you use sixths of a second or fifths. We're talking about a difference of only a few hundredths of a second. It's just not enough to matter.It does matter, you failed to take into account weight, post, wide, number of turns, class, pace values, rider error, track shape and slope, and chaos. So the number is somewhere below 11 ft. If horse leading is doing 36mph at the head of the stretch, you have a workable solution which can provide you with the contenders, solve the ambiguity of the race which means you have to play 2 or more horses and profits may be obtained when one manages the bankroll.

[ken]

DM 7-22 the race Giacomo ran, the leader after 1/2 mile was on the charts 6 lengths plus 2 "HD" ahead, how many seconds back was Giacomo? The same leader at 1 mile ran 1:35 2/5 seconds, and Giacomo was 3 1/2 lengths back. That is very close to 1:36 or 55' per second.
At the 4f= 1 mile mark, when Giacomo was estimated to be 48+' back, does it matter whether he was 1 1/5 seconds back, or less than 1 second back? He won by a head.

[ken]

DM 7-22 race #6 (John Mabee turf) the 1st 4f was run in 49 flat, the next in 46.3 seconds by the same leader. In race #8 (San Diego HCP), the 1st 4f was run in 46 flat, the next 4f in 49.2 by the same leader.
These 2 races are both stakes, but what if a horse from each race happens to compete against each other in the future? will surface, variant, pace matter?

[Charliedog]

Once again time only counts in jail!

The other day at Philadelphia Park, Pleasant Rish at 5y colt ran
5 1/2F in 1:03.15 (TR 1:02.65) So what! Pleasant Rish fastest 5 1/2F
races were 1:05+ both times, Why this this horse improve by 2 seconds
and 10 lenghts. Track was fast and his GSV (Genetic Strenght Value)
was ths highest for this race. Most horses run their best fast races
at the age of 5 and 6 years old.

Next time out this horse will lose and run slower!
time and lenghts don't count with cheap horses.

[ken]

Charliedog- I see exactly what you are saying, and sure looks like you are correct about the track being very fast- but IMO the early leader, #6, burnt out trying to get past 3 others; since the #1 and #3 scratched, your #4 only had to pass the #2 so saved ground due to the 2 scratches. And in cheap races, that could mean a lot too!!
But Pleasant Risk DID have a bullet work in the mud 7-22 3f 1/5; and it did have a 5 lb weight advantage over any others.
Do you think if Phi stays fast and your horse gets the rail it will matter next time?