The video:
Anyone watch it?
Me. Me. Me.
Dan was my pick. Too bad I didn’t have a bet down.
It was a great race. The broadcast was awful. 90 minutes between races? They couldn’t find enough fluff.
Oh yeah. Watched it at my local race book. It doesn’t get the NBC fluff; it gets the feed directly from the tracks it subscribes to. So, constantly updating tote board and probable pays on exotics, instead of fluff.
I won the exacta on the race. It paid $258.56 for a $2 exacta wager. My buddies were strongly hinting that I might like to pick up their bar tabs.
Wow. Good for you! I mentioned to my wife that the exacta probably paid a LOT higher than normal given that a 20-1 won the race.
The official results chart of the race:
Yeah I watched it. That was crazy close.
I’ve watched every test since 1973. Secretariat (the greatest). I’ve been hooked on the TC races ever since.
I watch the Derby each year, hoping for a close race. This year it certainly did not disappoint.
I don’t usually watch the race, but we’re out of town this weekend visiting family, and met up with my brother and SIL for dinner at a sports bar so they could watch the race. Quite a different experience with the whole place cheering than sitting at home on the couch watching. That was a crazy close race!
Do they still do photo finishes with a moving-slit shutter? And if so, is that photograph available anywhere? You get some fascinating artifacts from those.
That’s why I record it, then speed through the BS.
Wonderful race, track so different from the day before! I very much enjoyed both days and hope to see some of these horses in the Breeder’s Cup.
New random thought: Everyone knows that race horses like racing, and want to be in the lead… but from a horse’s point of view, the “finish line” would just be a random arbitrary point. Did Mystik Dan (or any other winning horse) know that he’d won? Was he maybe disappointed when some other horse passed him up after the finish line? Or do they just take their cues from the excited humans around them (and if so, do they know that the excitement is about the race they just ran)?
I liked one of the announcers saying. “He won by a flare of the nostril!”.
Any word on why the favorite - Fierceness - faded so badly? Did the jockey intentionally save him once he saw he had no chance to win.
And who was more in the wrong between the place and show. They kept referring to the outside horse as “lugging in”. But the inside jockey looked almost like he was going to fall off at least once. Someone lost a whip going down the stretch, and it looked ast thos the outside jockey almost whipped and punched the inside jockey.
IANAE, I’ma casual fan, but I do think that on some level the horse knows that s/he has won. There’s a big fuss made over them, and they’re trapped with the blanket of roses. So yeah I think they know.
I was thinking the same thing. The link in the OP is to a news story about the photo finish, that doesn’t include the photo.
I hadn’t heard the term “moving-slit” before, but I know the kind of photos you’re describing. The finishline photos at the Tour de France are very odd; the wheel spokes are stretched apart below the hub, and compressed above.
Having now seen the Derby photo, is that a moving-slit? The track surface looks like blurred horizontal lines, but the horses legs look normal.
Here’s Wikipedia about slit photography, which I think explains it well. The important thing to remember is that the x-axis does not represent horizontal position, as in a conventional photograph, but rather time.
In other words, the track isn’t motion-blurred into horizontal lines. Each horizontal line is actually just one unchanging point on the track.
Interesting thing about these pictures: If a horse were, for some reason, running the wrong direction at the finish line, then it’d appear in the finish-photo to be running in the same direction as the other horses. But if a horse were moving backwards, it’d appear in the finish photo as facing the other way. And horses moving at different speeds will be different lengths.
Fixed-slit. The slit is fixed at the finish line and the film moves behind it.
The horses look more or less normal because the bulk of their bodies doesn’t change that much over time, and their legs aren’t moving too much over one body-length (though they still get somewhat distorted). In contrast, rolling-shutter artifacts arise from the same principle, but can have very obvious distortions on rapidly moving objects like propellers, because the rate of movement is so high compared to the speed of the shutter.
The horse’s lengths will be distorted somewhat, but the photo-finish camera must be designed for a nominal horse speed so that it looks approximately right. You probably wouldn’t notice if they got it wrong by 10% or so.