Steve-- this is the right kind of question. It is easier to show this stuff than to explain it, which is why I often post the races (like the Jockey Club), so let's wait until I post the figures for the day to have the specific discussion. But a couple of points:

1-- Very few of the significantly changed variants involve pulling one race loose, as opposed to a slide, unless there are different circumstances-- 1 and 2 turn races, sealed track, watering (or not watering), runup differences, etc. Having said that, you don't always know the different circumstances-- especially if you don't believe they make a difference, and don't look for them. I posted about this after the Belmont this year in response to a post of Len's.

2-- When I pull a race loose, it's not good enough to know that it is obviously wrong to do it with the surrounding races. It has to be clear what the RIGHT correction is. If it's not clear, I leave a box, no figure. If it's pretty clear but there is a chance it's wrong, I do a figure, but review the race later when the horses have run back.

3-- To really KNOW whether the Ragozin figures in question were implausible, you would have to see his sheets for those races, with the figures they assigned-- for ALL of them. If you saw his BC sheets, you saw what he assigned several of the Gold Cup horses-- let's see what those sheets look like if he posts BC sheets with figures done.

4-- Here's the flip side of the example you gave. Let's say a card is cancelled after one or two races. You would of course have to make figures based on those races alone. But if they ran the rest of the card, Len is saying that would be wrong-- you would have to use the later races an make an average, even if it's in conflict with the conclusions you would draw FROM THOSE HORSES THEMSELVES.

5-- Your description of my comments (GI vs allowance) were an oversimplification, the same one that was made by Michael and others. If you read my responses to them from a few days ago (especially my post on the "One More Pop Quiz" string at 7:12 p.m.), you'll see what I really was saying. Short version-- it depends on ALL the horses in those specific races (see 3, above).

6-- What those who have not made projection figures don't get (especially if they have read Beyer or some of the earlier books which push the use of pars) is that it's not just about the winners. When you have a tight data base using weight and ground you use lots of horses within each race to make your figures.

7-- But yes, one of the tough questions you face is what to do with a runaway winner-- do you give him a big one, or just assume the others collapsed and he ran as usual. That came up with the first big one War Emblem ever ran-- the race before the Illinois Derby. We were the only ones to give him the huge jump. It comes up a lot. But with stake horses it's reasonably easy.

More after I do the day.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 10/30/2005 06:38PM by TGJB.