Jimbo wrote"

Second question, would it matter to you how the horse's figure was run? (in other words is a "2" a "2" no matter what, as far as coming back on short rest). Would a "2" running on the pace, in a heated battle for 1 1/4 be tougher to come back from in 2 weeks than a "2" achieved by dropping back to last and then coming very wide around the far turn, losing ground? I know that from a quality perspective, a 2 is a 2 is 2..... But from a "coming back on short rest", would you rather be coming back off an effort where your horse ran hard the whole way, or just ran hard for the last 3/8 of a mile. "

I am aware that Jimbo is awaiting Jerry's reply to his questions but I thought that I would throw some twigs and wood to the subject at hand...

First off...I want to go on record that I am a big fan of the Sartin Methodology but their membership is currently closed for new members; but I am a bigger fan of all aspects of handicapping... This has been one of my lifetime hobbies.. Therefore, I always stride forward with an open mind.

I have some perspectives on form cycle patterns which I learned from Thorograph which I had purchased some years back... and I had the opportunities to learn about numbers-figures from many sources...Bob Selvin and Jeff Siegel's Handicapper's Report, the Racing Digest, and from a good fried who made his own numbers but this friend went on to a bigger passion in his life--stocktrading and left the game....

From my past associations and from my humbling education, I have learned that if two horse earned the same numbers (final times-wise) the horse on the lead for most of the race expended more "energy" versus the horse who only ran the last part of the race coming from far back...

In the rematch...Jim Bradshaw summed it up best by saying that he will always take the horse who was closer to the pace if the same two horses were to race each other in a rematch.
"Lil E. Tee won the Derby but Bradshaw would go with Pine Bluff in the next race"...There are no general conclusion being implied here since the evaluation of a race depends on the "matchup" at hand which is most important.

Another example would be Silver Charm's Santa Anita Derby Race...Silver Charm dueled with Lukas's Sharp Cat through some wicked early pace fractions( something like 45 and change and then 109 and change for the early fractions). Silver Charm lost to Free House in the Santa Anita Derby but Silver Charm would go on to win the Kentucky Derby beating Team Valor's Captain Bodgit who had one of the top two sustain lines going into the Derby along with Silver Charm.

For many years, some of the Derbies were won by one run deep closers like Gato del Sol, Strike the Gold and Monarchos. Some of these one run deep closers were lucky to win another race in their lifetime... In their respective races in the Derbies, the stars were aligned in harmony as some very fast early fractions were carved out leading to a meltdown of the early pace horses....

Each methodology has its own benefits and place...the key awaits those that can put it together on a consistent basis where the only factor that counts is one's ROI at the end of one's persuit in handicapping...