Miff-- I know who is right by doing what I do for a living. What you are really asking is not why I'm right, but how an outsider can tell.

First of all, a lot of it can be independently confirmed (honest guys, I didn't write this question myself, even though it looks like a batting practice fastball). And when I say that, I often do give evidence to show you how you can know. Like--

With the Florida Derby ground. Ragozin gave HF and NC the same number, based on having NC 4.5 wide on average for the second turn. At the time I said it was wrong, and I also said anyone could go to RaceReplays.com to see for themselves. I want to point out that SINCE I beat Ragozin over the head with this PUBLICLY, they stuck to it AGAIN in an article in the Thoroughbred Times, and DIDN'T CHANGE THE FIGURES FOR THE DERBY PROBABLE SET THEY SOLD THEIR CUSTOMERS THIS WEEK. Once again, they made the most cynical of calculations-- they have virtually no on-line business, and their hard copy customers don't know they messed up, so why admit making a mistake? Better to give their customers bad data, for the biggest race of the year. I have to tell you, AGAIN, if I was one of their on-line customers who is reading this, I would be asking questions. LOUDLY.

Other examples-- the phantom off-poorly and ground errors in the 04 BC sprint, Touch Of The Blues in the BC mile a couple of years ago, the 3 length error Ragzoin made in the Derby figures last year, resulting in a 1 1/2 point INTERNAL error (not a judgement call) within the figures for the biggest race of the year, bad ground for the Wood in 03. In all these cases I said anyone could go to watch the replay themselves to decide. And in TOTB's case Ragozin did go back much later, after things calmed down, to change the ground-- don't know about the others.

When it comes to variant decisions, you have two ways to go-- one is deciding whose theories make sense (Ragozin's are detailed in his book, i.e. that tracks never change speed except for extreme weather, mine in the Expo presentation found in the archives, backed up by a fair amount of science). The second is to look at what evidence is available-- from how the figures hold up, and from those races I post so you can look at the figures and the logic. On those rare occasions Ragozin does the same, I usually end up cramming yet another error down their throats. And those are on the BIG races.

You can also draw conclusions from everybody's willingness to answer questions, other than with "We're right. Trust us, we wouldn't lie to you". At least those who aren't brainwashed can.



TGJB