Jerry,

For me, the reason I buy the T-Graph figures now, is I like the component of ground loss incorporated into the figures. I understand that you have also built weight carried into the figure. I have heard Beyer and a few others argue about weight and the effect or lack of effect it has on horses and while I tend to agree with you, I would think this is a more debatable point than ground loss.

It seems that ground loss is just a mathematical calculation and there should be no debate as to whether it is important or not. The only debate that people can make is if/when an outside bias at a track exists, how much does this mitigate the ground loss and how do you weigh that.

However, assuming no bias, what is the argument against incorporating ground loss into figures? (I think "no bias" is the case for the majority of racing days as personally I think track bias is the most over-diagnosed thing in the game and the guys on TV make it worse).

I kknow this question should go to Beyer and not Jerry, since Jerry is the who DOES incorporate it into the figure, but I know of no message board for Beyer, and I am guessing that at some point in some public forum, Jerry and Andy have probably debated this point.

Jerry, do you know what the argument "against" ground loss is?

I am very curious, especially in light of all the ground lost by Bandini and the very low beyer figure given the horse in the Bluegrass (relative to his T-Graph figure)

Thanks

Jim