HP:

Your response basically underscores my subtextual argument, that Figures are a "Chicken or The Egg" proposition. Your assertion that a "1" early on burns ability later is a defacto bolstering that the "1" is legitimate. This is pure Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.

As for going back and seeing how others ran in the race in question, how else would you know whether a figure is accurate, or stands up to scrutiny? Let's say I grant you that a single other animal out of the 2005 LA Derby has floundered to regain a figure he got that day (and it's my understanding TG asseses figures for all in a race based on what they think was reproduced by another entrant in the race). OK. But all of the first four home running poorly subsequently? In 4 months NONE of them ever ran anything to confirm that "1" of High Limit's is legitimate? In fact, have ANY of them won a race of any kind? Anywhere? If subsequent races reveal the LA Derby was chock full of those headed for the claim box, am I supposed to conclude that High Limit's "1" that day against those kind, or even in his maiden race debut sprint, is the equivalent of Cigar getting a "1" for any of the stakes he won?

Figures (TG, Rags, Beyer) are subjective assessments, period. No matter what their inventors or adherents claim. To say once a "1" is granted it's immutable, (in fact as you claim bolstered by whatever scrutiny is applied to it), is the equivalent of proud & openly admitted membership in The Flat Earth Society.

M3