>Evidence is another matter<

There is plenty of evidence that the pace was fast enough to understate how well RIM ran.

1. The fractions were very fast.

2. After 25 years of watching horses run I can tell when they are running very hard and when they are running well within themselves and what happens as a result of each.

3. The overall race development

>Of the other 2 in that duel, one was much slower (the Texas horse),<

No doubt he was slower and that would partially account for why he stopped.

>the other was Peace Rules, who I was betting to run poorly <

I was willing to concede that Lion Heart's disaster did not prove that distance was factor even though I predicted he would spit it out when challenged by Purge. It could just as easily have been the pace.

>Do I think a slower pace would have caused RIM to run a faster final time? No.<

As far as I am concerned the evidence supporting the proposition that speed horses run faster figures when able to run on a loose lead in a comfortable (but not too slow) pace is overwhelming.

>Do I think it would have caused PD to run slower? No.<

It takes an extremely slow pace to have an easy to measure impact. However, that does not mean there are not effects between zero and "easy to measure". It's just fairly difficult to isolate them because there are so many factors impacting performance and because not all horses have the same levels of acceleration, stamina etc... So there is no formula for it.

I understand your stress on science and what can be measured accurately as opposed to the subjective opinions of various handicappers, but I think it is fairly obvious that RIM ran a lot better than PD.



Post Edited (09-02-04 15:29)