Friedman finally posted the last race from Preakness Day, along with some comments. I responded, and its almost certain to be deleted. This is taking up an awful lot of time, so unless there is some new angle on this, I'm going to leave it alone until they post their Belmont Day numbers.


1- By your own admission, you split sprints and routes on the day, which right away invalidates the logic behind the Wood Memorial and Belmont Stake figures you have defended before—that it is correct to give out unusually fast/slow figures for the only 2 turn race of the card based on the 1 turn races. That is why I forced the issue, and spent $1000 to do it.

2- In the middle of the Preakness card, you have the sprint/route relationship 3 points different from the end of the card. That’s HOW you were able to get this last race close—which was my point (one of them). This also goes to 1, above. And yes, you would be better off taking off more.

3- On the contrary, my guess is virtually NO trackwork was done between the Preakness and the last, what with trophy presentations, interviews, etc. Far more likely that extensive work was done in the hour between the Schaefer and the Preakness, readying it (speeding it up) for the big race—you, of course, tied those 2 races together, forcing you to give out ultra-slow Schaefer numbers.

4- Ask Marshall which sheets are ahead head-to-head. He’s a good guy, I’ll be glad to give him the money. I’m guessing he hasn’t told you about all the times we ended up looking better—you don’t handle dissent very well.

5- By the way, I just noticed that you actually have the grass course getting substantially SLOWER (4 points?) through the card, while drying out, no less. Care to explain, especially in light of the horrendously slow figures for races 5 and 7?

6- You will be posting the Belmont card, won’t you?



TGJB