What I had in mind for the contest was stake races only, weekends and holidays, at 10 or so tracks, over 6 months. For my part we would point people to the Red Board Room so they could see the rationale (or irrationale) behind the selections, and ask questions. The results would not be proof of anything, particularly if they are close, but if they are not they could possibly rise to the level of evidence, much more so than those of a short-term handicapping contest with a big field that places a premium only on playing longshots, and playing entirely differently than you would if you were playing day to day. Regardless, it would be an excellent vehicle for attracting and introducing non sheet players to sheets.

About a dozen years ago, a guy named Jim Bayle of a Vegas company called Sport Stat did some studies similar to the one you describe using TG, Ragozin, and several other services. Ragozin did better than us (although worse than some others), and Bayle later decided that the studies were not done in such a way as to be conclusive (I think it was a relatively small sample). So he decided to do it again 3-4 years ago, and Ragozin, us and several other figure makers gave him figures daily for 10 tracks, for 6 months. He was going to do a bunch of studies-- best last figure, best of last 3, take last 3, throw out worst and average other 2, etc. After collecting all the data Bayle decided the project was taking too much time away from his handicapping (seriously), and never ran the studies.

I would be very happy to have someone credible (DRF?) do a similar study now.



TGJB