How do your figures account for the apparent significant difference in footing in the turf stake at AQU on Sat? The rider is quoted thusly:

Migliore was relieved that his search for better ground on the soggy course paid off.

"That was close," he said. "I went out in search of better ground. We lost ground, but that was by design. I felt that I would find a better spot out there. I was just hoping I wouldn’t run out of ground. It worked out well. The turf was very soft."

Will you give the very wide trip winner a VASTLY superior fig traveling over somewhat firmer ground versus the rail skimming place horse which was mired in the deeper slower footing?

My idea is that you treat all paths equally, thus diminishing the efforts of horses that get stuck on deep dead rails. Just because you can't readily quantify the difference does not mean that none exists....and that hurts your figures and thus one's reading of the patterns.