Mall, I was not trying to be a contrarian with what you quoted as though this was your own personal belief, but rather the fallacy of taking a reading of the track surface after morning works and after the last race and saying we now know what the condition of the race track was throughout the day.Baloney!
There are numerous occasions where the track condition does not change over several racing cards. However, on the instances where the track condition is changing, not just on a daily basis, but changing after a couple of races, even without changes in climate, the variant must be adjusted or the resulting quantification is flawed.
I will give another anecdotal example. The Breeders Cup was run at Churchill (forget the year) and Concern was the Classic winner.
In the first race that day they ran a 100K listed stake sprint for Fillies and Mares going six furlongs. The winner ran the distance in 1:09 and 3/5. Two races later ( this was when they ran the Sprint as the first race on the Breeders Cup card) Cherokee Run won the Sprint in the exact same time. Surely no one believes the horses in the listed stake were equal to the best sprinters in the world. The winner was not a run off the picture victor, she won by maybe two lengths in a typical Pat Day handride. Meanwhile, only two races later after no rain, temperature drop, or sudden shift in wind, Mike Smith gave Cherokee Run the kind of ride only he could give back then. Shoulders pumping, the stick moving at the speed of an AK-47, to get this horse up in time. Does someone actually believe the condition of the race track did'nt change and both horses should be given the same figure?
TGJB you have now shed some light on why Chilluki was such a prohibitive at Gulfstream in the BC Juvenile Filly. Your numbers showed her as being only modestly fast (straight 7's) and she had distance limitations. If Ragozin gave her a number in that first race then the Ragozin players had to be fooled into believing that she was cycling back to this number. Wonder if Ragozin gave his players a refund after the race was run?
Nunzio, Beyer was not as quick as you might remember in adjusting his figure. As a matter of fact, I believe at the risk of putting a blemish on what is truly a legendary career, Beyer went on the defensive. Let me explain. Later that summer Beyer went on a trip to Del Mar and wrote a column, that was printed in the DRF, stating that Chilluki was the next Ruffian. I repeat, Chilluki was the second coming of Ruffian. What was the foundation of his argument, the 110 Speed Figure he gave her in that first race and the fact she had not lost since. Beyer himself should have known the number was flawed with each subsequent race because Chilluki only ran in a range of 93-97 on his scale. Since Beyer does not believe in the bounce theory how could he explain such a subsequent drop-off in performance. Simple, put her on par with one of the greatest horses of all time. You are kidding me!