I hear your point Derby and as always you do a fine job with statistical comparisons.

My preference would be to compare Derby Horses running "0-2-pair" patterns with what their projected Preakness effort would figure out to. Secondly, I'd give some weight to the statistics re: 3yr old races in May coming off a "0-2-Pair" patterns.

The other issue to me is the development from the 2yr top. How does 3 or 4 point development factor into X races off an "0-2-Pair" history?

I just don't think you can accurately project the probability of a negative 1 at this point or an X. We're in a whole new ballpark regarding 3 yr olds and speed. And I don't know that the old data can reflect upon the new trends. I'm still not completely comfortable with this. I don't know Jerry's pars and variants. I've come to believe he doesn’t really create variants any longer. I think he utilizes cross reference, split between one turn and two turns, (Jerry correct me if I'm wrong about that) but I've seen the numbers drop amazingly over the last 3 years. I swear I can remember an uproar about Officer running a 4 or even a 6 as a juvenile.Irrespective of that its clear that whatever figure you want to assign the horses the development from 2 has not been huge.

What I will do when the Preakness is over is compare the probabilities you posted with the results. We'll see how well the old stats hold up.

I hear your desire for jerry's new statistical breakdown and I'm quite sure you are uniquely positioned to take advantage of the data with your mathematical mind.

I'd add you did not indicate your projected negative number probablities for Eddington. Was that an oversight, or did dismiss him because no probabilities were statistically available?



Post Edited (05-10-04 21:19)