Pacific Classic Official time vs trakus

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Actually, he went off a lot higher than I thought he would.

I thought he would be about 7/5 or so, I do think public education on speed figures has increased the past decade or so, that the power the Beyer figures has is not as absolute as it used to be, still powerful though.

[cmorioles]

Most of this is already covered here, but more detail:

http://timeformusblog.com/2013/08/27...thless-timing/

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Most of this is already covered here, but more detail:

http://timeformusblog.com/2013/08/27...thless-timing/

i wonder if a bird flew by the timer and set it off...

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i wonder if a bird flew by the timer and set it off...

Actually, before anyone laughs, that is very possible.

[freddymo]

Well done CJ

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Actually, before anyone laughs, that is very possible.

yeah, it sounds kind of funny, but certainly possible.
i have motion sensor lights at home, flying squirrels set them off on occasion.

[cmorioles]

For the record, this isn't the first time Trakus and the Teletimer have disagreed about the Pacific Classic:

2012 Equibase:
23.61 46.98 1:11.08 1:35.25 1:59.54

2012 Trakus:
23.34 46.69 1:10.69 1:34.88 1:59.03

Difference
0.27 0.29 0.39 0.37 0.51

For what it is worth, I had the 2012 and 2013 final times, via video analssis, as nearly identical.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

My GPS once took me into the Atlantic Ocean, no joke. I will take the official time.

Do you know how Trakus works?

I would be willing to bet that Trakus has the correct time.

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Do you know how Trakus works?

I would be willing to bet that Trakus has the correct time.

Yes I was joking. I love Trakus and tracks that have it while watching a race.

[ateamstupid]

Beyer fig corrected to 113.

[freddymo]

t minus 120 and counting

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

Beyer fig corrected to 113.

Hanging chads being looked at now as well.

[randallscott35]

So Moss says Trakus was too fast as well...

http://www.drf.com/news/beyer-figure...lassic-revised

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Keeps creeping up, 105, then 106, now 109...should be 120 by this evening.

Getting there.

I think we all know Moss just didn't time this on a whim. But that is great, I want the word out there that timing of races is bad. Hopefully we'll see some improvement. I don't, however, agree with the 159.74 time either. I think Moss is just being conservative.

[cmorioles]

Delmar is reviewing the race for timing accuracy.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Delmar is reviewing the race for timing accuracy.

Yes, they are consulting Randy Moss to get the real story.

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

Yes, they are consulting Randy Moss to get the real story.

Amazing they won't just use the Trakus time, but then again it isn't. They would have to revise 2012 too. Dullahan ran faster than Game On Dude, even when the time is revised. That is pretty easy to prove too.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

Amazing they won't just use the Trakus time, but then again it isn't. They would have to revise 2012 too. Dullahan ran faster than Game On Dude, even when the time is revised. That is pretty easy to prove too.

so, why use trakus if you aren't going to USE it?

[cmorioles]

Originally Posted by Danzig

so, why use trakus if you aren't going to USE it?

I have no idea. It is one thing to have outdated technology, quite another to have old and new and choose the old. Only in horse racing...

I read they aren't going to revise the time, also not shocking. It would have opened them up to having last year's time questioned as well, since Dullahan definitely ran faster.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by cmorioles

I have no idea. It is one thing to have outdated technology, quite another to have old and new and choose the old. Only in horse racing...

I read they aren't going to revise the time, also not shocking. It would have opened them up to having last year's time questioned as well, since Dullahan definitely ran faster.

yeah, well, give it 40 years, and maybe a groundswell of support will cause them to revisit the time.