It is true that if one takes a broad approach that is that simple the figures creep in one direction or another, and it is also true that individual figure makers have tendencies that make them more or less conservative-- Ragozin, for example, treats off tracks the same way he did when he was starting out, when the tracks reacted markedly differently to water. He gives out far fewer good numbers (especially tops) on off tracks, which is incorrect since the newer tracks of the last decade or so have more sand, and are for the most part just fast tracks which happen to be wet, as opposed to the sticky, slower clay tracks of the past.

But in general it's not that simple, since you have to move the figures you assign for each race as a solid grid, and look carefully at how the number you assign fits into the context of the various horses. To see what I'm talking about, take a look at the BC numbers we posted. Look at each race, and see what adding or subtracting one point, two, three etc. to all the horses in it does to each horse-- and that's not even dealing with the question of seperate variants and thinking about the day as a whole, which I have spent a lot of time discussing.



TGJB