>There is also the issue of long term patterns-- rate and degree of development, layoffs, which efforts previously set him back, and for how long, pedigree (late or early), age (the studies don't differentiate between 5 and 8 year olds), etc.

I understand, however with the additional data from the TG Studies, which by the way I think are very good, the handicapper is presented with sometimes conflicting evidence to the TG Trainer Based Profiles. So which one should the handicapper weight more heavily, and I ask that knowing that there is no single answer. We are probably looking at a case-by-case decision but are there guidelines??

Another good example over the weekend was Stellar Jayne. The Study indicated a 35% likelihood of running back to her TOP which made her equally as fast as the 3-5 favorite Ashado. Stellar Jayne was 10-1. However confusing the decision making process was the Trainer Based Stats indicated that in this category the Trainer himself was 34% likely to run a horse who would completely X.

This sort of, I Zigged when I should have Zagged and I Zagged when I should of Zigged can become frustrating.

Guidelines please from anyone who wants to weigh in.