• The issue has been fixed and hopefully you can post screen shots again
  • Hi Guest Just in case you were not aware I wanted to highlight that you can now get a free 7 day trial of Horseracebase here.
    We have a lot of members who are existing users of Horseracebase so help is always available if needed, as well as dedicated section of the fourm here.
    Best Wishes
    AR

About rating Greyhounds

Great stuff FHRTIPS FHRTIPS with greyhound app

I would like to ask if anyone in past or preferably present to
have downloaded/managed greyhound results in an excel sheet
for 1 or many tracks ?
I did in past , but only for 1 track as manually entered all data
 
Last edited:
Halifaxjohn said:
Great stuff FHRTIPS FHRTIPS with greyhound app

I would like to ask if anyone in past or preferably present to
have downloaded/managed greyhound results in an excel sheet
for 1 or many tracks ?
I did in past , but only for 1 track as manually entered all data
Click to expand...
Manually entering data would take a lot of work, I still to this day test all of my analysis thru Excel. If you had someone and or learned to scrape your data, and then parse and clean it, then include Betfair data, just doing one track would be very enjoyable for yourself
 
woof43 said:
Manually entering data would take a lot of work, I still to this day test all of my analysis thru Excel. If you had someone and or learned to scrape your data, and then parse and clean it, then include Betfair data, just doing one track would be very enjoyable for yourself
Click to expand...
Yes all Uk Tracks and modelled the data and Race comments
 
I have been thinking about the HP dogs at both the Newcastle and the Sunderland tracks, and how they can be adjusted, I gave up on the Sunderland HP's, as what I thought were Raw times were Times that had an adjustment which made the data too unreliable, but using Mikes Raw Times I had a re-think of the problem, so when you think about greyhound racing there is always an element of noise in the data caused by interference, box position and whatever, so normally the track architecture plays a part two turns etc, but with UK racing dogs run about more during a race which makes it a lot noisier then our racing, so with that in mind, there is normally a bit of a range in the Stdev generally a .150 up around .20, so if we take an average race Stdev of .180 , now I got Mikes data for Newcastle, broke it down into HP and Normal racing, but I also put aside the Scr runners from the HP data, then looked at the unique groups that raced at both HP and Normal and filtered the number of starts at each HP>3 and Normal>5 which left a very large number of formlines. I created Handicap Dist bins 0-3m, 3-6m, 6-9m,9-12m, 12-15m 15-18+, then I applied Linest tests etc , so no surprise those dogs that start within 0-3m range also fits the normal stdev performance of a normal dog, so that group no matter how many starts 50% might run faster then the Normal avg time and the reverse happens so a dog of scr0-3 metres performance will be in the normal bounds, once we get to 3-6m handicaps the needle slightly moves to a slightly faster time but still within the normal bounds of a nromal Stdev, once you get to 6-9m handicap, HP dogs will run faster on the average >3 & >5 , 9-12m handicaps Clearly faster and so on thru the next groups getting faster times the general reciprocal for Time and Speed worked out around .0446 so once your outside of each dogs normal Stdev for every metre travelled they go .0446 faster. Anyway thought i'd share may help others with dealing with Handicaps , it's always important to remember the noise of the Stdev , when your trying to create micro adjustments that fall within that parameter
 
woof43 said:
I have been thinking about the HP dogs at both the Newcastle and the Sunderland tracks, and how they can be adjusted, I gave up on the Sunderland HP's, as what I thought were Raw times were Times that had an adjustment which made the data too unreliable, but using Mikes Raw Times I had a re-think of the problem, so when you think about greyhound racing there is always an element of noise in the data caused by interference, box position and whatever, so normally the track architecture plays a part two turns etc, but with UK racing dogs run about more during a race which makes it a lot noisier then our racing, so with that in mind, there is normally a bit of a range in the Stdev generally a .150 up around .20, so if we take an average race Stdev of .180 , now I got Mikes data for Newcastle, broke it down into HP and Normal racing, but I also put aside the Scr runners from the HP data, then looked at the unique groups that raced at both HP and Normal and filtered the number of starts at each HP>3 and Normal>5 which left a very large number of formlines. I created Handicap Dist bins 0-3m, 3-6m, 6-9m,9-12m, 12-15m 15-18+, then I applied Linest tests etc , so no surprise those dogs that start within 0-3m range also fits the normal stdev performance of a normal dog, so that group no matter how many starts 50% might run faster then the Normal avg time and the reverse happens so a dog of scr0-3 metres performance will be in the normal bounds, once we get to 3-6m handicaps the needle slightly moves to a slightly faster time but still within the normal bounds of a nromal Stdev, once you get to 6-9m handicap, HP dogs will run faster on the average >3 & >5 , 9-12m handicaps Clearly faster and so on thru the next groups getting faster times the general reciprocal for Time and Speed worked out around .0446 so once your outside of each dogs normal Stdev for every metre travelled they go .0446 faster. Anyway thought i'd share may help others with dealing with Handicaps , it's always important to remember the noise of the Stdev , when your trying to create micro adjustments that fall within that parameter
Click to expand...
I’m not a greyhound expert, in the data I have they have the actual times each greyhound finishes the race, then they adjust it for going, they use a simplistic going metric like 20 or -20 for example so say dog runs 30.00 seconds and going is 20 they then adjustbthe time and call it either an adjusted or calculated time to 30.20, if the going was -20 they adjust to 29.80, for the rare handicap races , they then take the raw time and add 0.08 seconds for each 1 metre received , so if a dog was receiving 10 metres in handicap and runs 30.00 s and the going is -20 the calculated or adjusted time would be 30.00 -0.2 seconds + (0.08 sec * 10 metres ) = 30.6.
This calculated times is used by the track grader to assess what grade the dog belongs in, so you could argue the going and the adjustments are official metrics used.
Some of these going adjustments are massive I have seen one for Suffolk Downs that was -300 so they took 3 seconds off the time.
I know you have expertise in Australian greyhounds so I only post this simple stuff in case it was much different than they operate in Australia, apologies if this is knowledge you already have.
W woof43, if you are interested, I already have 5 years data (realise maybe a maximum of 2 years is all that is needed) for every track in UK. Can send you anything you want, I think I have already failed to make real sense of it myself, lack of greyhound understanding probably ky to blame although haven’t been in the mood this week with pain and drugs from botched dental surgery. I have this whole database that updates a month results at a time very quickly and a integrated race card scraper that take about 10 mins to get all the runners, only issue is I slowed it down a bit adding my ratings calculations and the app I built to it. But it has a feature where I can pull data from any course in a couple of minutes. I have lost a bit of interest because do know I’m limited by my greyhound understanding. Let me know if you want anything.
 
Last edited:
woof43 said:
I have been thinking about the HP dogs at both the Newcastle and the Sunderland tracks, and how they can be adjusted, I gave up on the Sunderland HP's, as what I thought were Raw times were Times that had an adjustment which made the data too unreliable, but using Mikes Raw Times I had a re-think of the problem, so when you think about greyhound racing there is always an element of noise in the data caused by interference, box position and whatever, so normally the track architecture plays a part two turns etc, but with UK racing dogs run about more during a race which makes it a lot noisier then our racing, so with that in mind, there is normally a bit of a range in the Stdev generally a .150 up around .20, so if we take an average race Stdev of .180 , now I got Mikes data for Newcastle, broke it down into HP and Normal racing, but I also put aside the Scr runners from the HP data, then looked at the unique groups that raced at both HP and Normal and filtered the number of starts at each HP>3 and Normal>5 which left a very large number of formlines. I created Handicap Dist bins 0-3m, 3-6m, 6-9m,9-12m, 12-15m 15-18+, then I applied Linest tests etc , so no surprise those dogs that start within 0-3m range also fits the normal stdev performance of a normal dog, so that group no matter how many starts 50% might run faster then the Normal avg time and the reverse happens so a dog of scr0-3 metres performance will be in the normal bounds, once we get to 3-6m handicaps the needle slightly moves to a slightly faster time but still within the normal bounds of a nromal Stdev, once you get to 6-9m handicap, HP dogs will run faster on the average >3 & >5 , 9-12m handicaps Clearly faster and so on thru the next groups getting faster times the general reciprocal for Time and Speed worked out around .0446 so once your outside of each dogs normal Stdev for every metre travelled they go .0446 faster. Anyway thought i'd share may help others with dealing with Handicaps , it's always important to remember the noise of the Stdev , when your trying to create micro adjustments that fall within that parameter
Click to expand...
Excellent W woof43 your work is streets ahead. I'm sorry I had messed around with those handicap times. They do originally come as the actual times though. I thought the unadjusted times were on the sheet but I have removed them! I ccan send again if you would like.
 
woof43 said:
That would be great to re-send then I can get a good comparison
Click to expand...
Hi Grant

New one attached up to yesterday. All times not including handicap marks now. Put the handicap marks in a seperate column and also HT, hand times that were in the sectionals column. Still have the texy for the non finishers and those beaten a distance in the final time sthough.
 

Attachments

  • SLA26.xlsx
    2.5 MB · Views: 3
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top