TGJB,

I'm not even going to try to make sense of that day, but I do have an insight. It may be of dubious use, but I know it's correct and it may be helpful.

I did a study of off tracks many years ago. One of the things I noticed was that the average margins between horses expanded relative to fast tracks on very sloppy tracks (on some days very dramatically).

I don't know whether it was because of mud being kicked in the face and bodies of some of the runners in the middle and back of the pack, some horses loving the mud and others really hating it, a combination of both and other factors etc... All I know is that it happened often. Because of that the normal beaten lengths charts would routinely produce figures that made no sense.

I had only 3 choices.

1. Give the big winner a huge figure (which they invariably did not duplicate) in order to give the other horses a figure that made at least a little sense.

2. Give the winner a figure that made sense (that they would often duplicate) and give everyone else a much slower figure than they usually got.

3. Same as 2, but make a note about the day that the average margins were "x%" greater than on the average fast track day. I would then use that information to make better sense of the performances by horses that were well beaten.

Number 3 was not accurate enough to be used for a product that is for sale, but #1 and #2 often produce such preposterous figures they have to be ignored anyway.

With your resources, there's got to be a way to at least make a notation similar to what I am suggesting if not find a solution that would be worthy of sale.