Kev-- it's because, as I said before, with Ragozin "correct" does not mean correct. It means that they ran the data through their process, and whatever came out, came out, and is "correct" by definition. Their process is an extremely dogmatic one built on lots of assumptions (for example that the track stays the same speed no matter what is done to it-- like on 7/27 at Saratoga), and has nothing at all to do with real world considerations, or common sense.

In the case of the 2 grass figures, they got BOTH wrong by about 3 points-- Shakespeare should be 3 faster, Gun Salute 3 slower. Don't know what they did to get there in each case, could be almost anything.

But I do know they will keep talking about "condition" plays based on fractional forward moves.