This is a silly debate. All the races count, but even on the most strongly biased days horses can still win going against the grain. The idea is to look at the all the horses' performances relative to what you would have expected given a neutral track. If there's "substanial evidence" that a certain style or path was outperforming/underperforming relative to expectations the track might have been biased. It has nothing to do with how many winners there were even though that might be a typical scenario.

I didn't handicap that card, but I looked at the results for that day (and the day before) and based on odds and finish (not a detailed analysis) it sure looks like inside speed was an advantage in sprints.