I have to give someone on the Rag board credit, he did ask Jake how "credible" their Preakness figure is. Jake of course said "the number is solid". Which is good to know. And since that's true, Jake will have no problem explaining how they came up with it, if someone would be kind enough to ask them. Guys, asking for an explanation is not "challenging" the figure.

Here's the thing. The way they did it, every horse in the race came up 2 or more points better or (in all but one case) worse than both their previous figure AND their top, so they clearly didn't do the Preakness off the horses that ran in the Preakness. And, of course, it was pouring rain before (and during) the race.

Think of it this way. If that had been the first race of the day, and they had cancelled afterward, would that have been how you did figures for the race? With the figures the horses ran having no correlation with the figures they had run in the past, and if so on what basis? If the answer to that question is no (which it most obviously is), what did Jake base the Preakness figures on? It can only be other races on the card-- they tied it to independent events.

As I said, it's figure making malpractice. And I'm pretty sure if Ragozin was still around he wouldn't have screwed it up.

On a lighter note, the BRIS computer generated figures gave Fame And Power a 108, AP 100.