Re: "The number is solid". (695 Views)
Posted by:
TGJB (IP Logged)
Date: May 21, 2015 12:33PM
Touchgold-- You're completely not getting this. It's not about resulting, but even regarding that, let's clean up a couple of things.
First, Ironicus was off a new top on both sheets, and there were several faster horses on Ragozin, although he was a little faster relative to the field. Second, two horses ran better figures in the race, including the one I put up. I had a conversation with the owner of that horse (a Ragozin client, by the way), and told him he had a big shot if they sent and dropped in, none if Rosario took back. Guess what he did.
But none of that is what this conversation is about. When I talk about Ragozin figures and how they have completely gone off the deep end, I discuss a) methodology (see the top of this string), and b) whether the figures even make any sense, like the Competitive Edge thing and others. I bet against CE-- that he won was not the point.
If you want to se the difference between the conversation you're having and the one I have had here maybe 100 times over the years, ask Jake on their board how they came up with the Preakness figures. It's the difference between the first post on this string (and others by me just on that one race), and "the number is solid".