Upper Nile,

Thanks for the advice. Here is the enigma, at least to me. Presumably, somebody who knows how to handicap using the "full sheets", writes the analysis.

The original posting has a lot of negativity and was a bit reactionary, as I was up late with insomnia and frustrated at myself for allowing the analysis to talk me off of 2 winners.

But the core problem I really wanted to get at was that I believe that several parts of the T-Graph thesis are wrong. I tried to start that discussion a few weeks ago and only JB got involved. I wanted to hear from others. The two big ones I have the most trouble with are the disregard to "class" and "pace". I think I am pretty much directly quoting JB when I say that he posted "class is not a factor, period". The best example I can think of to dispute this is maiden special versus maiden claimers. How many times have I seen a horse showing brief speed in a MSW race then fading to be beaten by 20 lengths, earning an awful figure (beyer or T-Graph). Then he drops to maiden claimer and wires them. The difference between MSW and MC is huge to me. Am I to believe that this is an "illusion"? I do believe that sharp trainers move horses up the claiming ladder and that good horses runnning for 20k price and go to 50k races and compete. But this is certain situations, not warranting "non-existence of class as a handicapping tool".

And pace? How many times have we as handicappers seen a horse who has shown speed and been pressed in previous races, collapsing horribly, suddenly get "brave on the lead" when allowed an uncontested lead. It happens. Pace matters. So does class.

My suspicion is that there is no EASY way to incorporate class or pace in the T-Graph methodology and so it is easier to say "it doesn't matter".