New Racing Form Format
handicapper
Junior Member
The Daily Racing Form's new "magazine" format is ill-conceived, and fails every test of improving the handicapping experience. Here are the issues:
1) Hyper-abbreviated running lines, leaving the experienced handicapper guessing about who ran first, second and third. MSI, McB, Rdnt Tlnt are some real examples:thumbdown:
2) Reduced workout lines, often omitting key workout info. :surrender:
3) Scant room remaining, for the handicapper to input data and write notes.
4) Reduced spacing between data lines, making perception more difficult. :yelling:
Perhaps the most unfriendly user problem with the "magazine" format is past performances were never supposed to be analyzed in a magazine format, with the field spread over FOUR pages. It is supposed to be easy for the user to compare horses in preferably a Single View! Sifting through Four Pages or more (the Kentucky Derby will probably be spread over 6-8 pages is unacceptable, especially when you go back to review the race and have to do it all over again, thumbing as you go.
This last and main problem is inherent in the new format, and the new format will also prevent new info/data, to be added. Handicappers loved the Form they have been used to for decades. Under the old format new, improved innovations could be accommodated. Instead, the new format defies logic, as it makes the info that is important, harder to decipher and more difficult to access and use.
1) Hyper-abbreviated running lines, leaving the experienced handicapper guessing about who ran first, second and third. MSI, McB, Rdnt Tlnt are some real examples:thumbdown:
2) Reduced workout lines, often omitting key workout info. :surrender:
3) Scant room remaining, for the handicapper to input data and write notes.
4) Reduced spacing between data lines, making perception more difficult. :yelling:
Perhaps the most unfriendly user problem with the "magazine" format is past performances were never supposed to be analyzed in a magazine format, with the field spread over FOUR pages. It is supposed to be easy for the user to compare horses in preferably a Single View! Sifting through Four Pages or more (the Kentucky Derby will probably be spread over 6-8 pages is unacceptable, especially when you go back to review the race and have to do it all over again, thumbing as you go.
This last and main problem is inherent in the new format, and the new format will also prevent new info/data, to be added. Handicappers loved the Form they have been used to for decades. Under the old format new, improved innovations could be accommodated. Instead, the new format defies logic, as it makes the info that is important, harder to decipher and more difficult to access and use.
Comments