RailUK Tickets/Trainsplit - filtering discussion

[ainsworth74]

Mod note: Split from RailUK Tickets discussion

There's an issue with the size of search window that Trainsplit uses.

Which reminds me! I think there's another slight problem with the logic Trainsplit applies to search results meaning it excludes good journey options which the passenger would definitely want to know about.

Take for instance Marske to Middlesbrough. Two Northern services per hour through most of the day at xx04 and xx27 with return options at xx53 and xx24. Journey time is around twenty minutes. If you search that up in Trainsplit however it only shows an hourly service the xx27s from Marske and the xx53s from Middlesbrough because these are around two or three minutes faster than the other trains (due to having a call at South Bank). But I would expect that 99.9% of passengers would want to see both services rather than only see one service! You can manage to get them to show by selecting cheapest (through most of the day) but obviously the default is "Best Value" which filters out half the trains for the sake of a couple of minutes shorter journey!

You also struggle a little bit at some of the margins. If you search for outward journey with "Best Value" at 0800 the first option it will show is 0913 but there will have been 0804, 0827 and 0904 which I feel should have been shown by a search asking for departures after 0800 but I think this is due to a mixture of Off-Peak becoming available from 0900 (meaning it's ignoring the more expensive 0804 and 0827) and the 0904 being slower than the 0913.

It feels like there needs to be a smidge of optimisation for shorter journeys here perhaps? If you were doing a long distance journey, potentially with changes, then heavy filtering makes sense but in this example of a direct train over a short distance (in both time and mileage) it feels like it should just show all the trains between the specified stations without trying to worry about saving me a couple of minutes but hiding half the services, or hiding three trains after my desired search of 0800 because of the journey time and off-peak/peak fare interaction!

 

[Class172]

It feels like there needs to be a smidge of optimisation for shorter journeys here perhaps? If you were doing a long distance journey, potentially with changes, then heavy filtering makes sense but in this example of a direct train over a short distance (in both time and mileage) it feels like it should just show all the trains between the specified stations without trying to worry about saving me a couple of minutes but hiding half the services, or hiding three trains after my desired search of 0800 because of the journey time and off-peak/peak fare interaction!

Perhaps there's an argument that could be made that all direct services should be returned, but the existing filtering logic for any other journey is retained?

 

[mangyiscute]

I do agree that often some services aren't shown which I would expect to be shown - for example, when I search for journeys back from somewhere in the north west to Reading, it often won't show any via London options or very few, even when I choose "fastest" - it would be nice to see them, although I can't imagine it would be easy to tweak the process to show these but also not ruin the rest of it - I usually just play around with the via and avoid to get the journeys I desire.

 

[Adam Williams]

But I would expect that 99.9% of passengers would want to see both services rather than only see one service! You can manage to get them to show by selecting cheapest (through most of the day) but obviously the default is "Best Value" which filters out half the trains for the sake of a couple of minutes shorter journey!

I think it's fair to say that there's some views that these filters do more harm than good, internally. I've spent far too much time explaining why certain journeys got hidden because the "value score" (computed using dark magic) wasn't good enough.

The grid sort of forces it to some degree, though, as it's only able to display up to 4 outwards and 4 inwards journeys - but other approaches are being explored.

Perhaps there's an argument that could be made that all direct services should be returned, but the existing filtering logic for any other journey is retained?

I think personally it depends on the person doing the journey search and their priorities. You might get folks searching on the WCML who never care about slow, overtaken journeys if they're travelling on expenses - and displaying them there is frustrating for them. You'll also get more price-sensitive customers who would consider an Avanti Advance .. for the right price. I don't think that what other TIS suppliers do here is necessarily the right answer either (Trainline's approach is notably bad at surfacing cheaper alternative journeys).

 

[Class172]

I think personally it depends on the person doing the journey search and their priorities. You might get folks searching on the WCML who never care about slow, overtaken journeys if they're travelling on expenses - and displaying them there is frustrating for them. You'll also get more price-sensitive customers who would consider an Avanti Advance .. for the right price. I don't think that what other TIS suppliers do here is necessarily the right answer either (Trainline's approach is notably bad at surfacing cheaper alternative journeys).

Agreed, for the average user it's probably not too relevant. Obviously there's a whole can of worms that could be opened in terms of how journeys are prioritised and ranked and how the 'dark magic' does this, but could a solution be to offer a toggle in the advanced settings to force all direct journeys to show? Perhaps this is already a part of the 'intensive search' option, or if it isn't, could be rolled into it? I must admit I don't know what that option does underneath, but my assumption is it lowers the threshold for the 'value score' so more show up.

 

[ainsworth74]

I think personally it depends on the person doing the journey search and their priorities. You might get folks searching on the WCML who never care about slow, overtaken journeys if they're travelling on expenses - and displaying them there is frustrating for them. You'll also get more price-sensitive customers who would consider an Avanti Advance .. for the right price. I don't think that what other TIS suppliers do here is necessarily the right answer either (Trainline's approach is notably bad at surfacing cheaper alternative journeys).

Yes it's tricky. There's certainly some scenarios where you want that sort of additional filtering that's offered by "Best Value", "Cheapest", and "Fastest". York to London was another example that came to mind where you've got a mixture of non-stop fast LNER/GC services, semi-fast LNERs and ever other hour an all stops LNER as well as opportunities to change at Doncaster. Being able to filter between all the options by what you're actually after (fastest and don't care how much or cheapest don't care how long it takes) is very helpful in that sort of situation.

Indeed I've used the filters like that on a few occasions where I my priorities between price and time varied!

But I do think there's some areas, like I illustrated above, that the filtering is getting in the way of what 99.9% of passengers want. Marske to Middlesbrough has no APs, there are no cheaper routes, no significantly faster/slower journey opportunities and there's no useful splits. The software just needs to show all the trains that meet the time criteria enetered and the fares that would apply without worrying about price, speed or the combination.

Appreciate though that what I'm saying is easy but I imagine much harder to actually implement