David,
1) The bet was, you find 2 older horses in the same stake that you think are 80% or more to go back 6 points on Ragozin from their most recent figure, and are running back on the same surface(turf/dirt, and not an off track on the day we're betting about), same distance(1/2 turn), and at the same circuit. I'll take even money they both don't do it, on Ragozin. If they both are 80% you're about a 2 to 1 favorite, so that's a big edge. And in the original question, we weren't going to the second power, but the sixth.

2) Friedman won't address what they did with the turf races unless he has to. As you say, if they have the turf getting slower, it's interesting. Why not ask him, and if he says they do (they do), ask him how much? If you're intellectually honest, you will.

3) You NEVER dealt with our point on tighter ranges--that it can't be done unless either it's right, or I screw around with the relationships within a race. Please do so now--show me how it can be done. Earn my respect--answer this one directly, for better or worse.

4) Re: your back and forth with Mandown, what would constitute the analysis you speak of? You are asking me to prove a negative--my point is that the relationships in question (1/2 turn, speed throughout the day) are NOT fixed--that's why you go through the exercise of using the histories of the horses. Over time, if your thinking is correct, your data base gets tighter and tighter. Over time, if you use bad assumptions, it gets worse and worse.



TGJB