Good news, Ragozin customers-- they got the beaten lengths right for the Preakness (wanna bet they checked that a few times before they posted those numbers?). They did make a pretty significant error with the ground for RHT (probably didn\'t catch him dropping in on the second turn), and less important ones with some of the trailers, but at least there is no 3 length error like in the Derby.
I am not defending Ragozin, as I have not used their product. But I do have a friend that used their product for the Derby and Preakness. And I bought the Derby seminar and the Preakness from Thorograph.
I can\'t speak for who got the \"beaten lengths\" right, but I can speak for the fact that from my perspective Thorograph and Ragozin both blew the Derby and Preakness. No edge to either one. Neither one of you guys like Smarty Jones in either race.
So, I don\'t know that TG should be using the Preakness or Derby as an indication of product superiority.
Isn\'t the bottom line in handicapping, picking winners? To me it is and T-Graph (specifically Jerry Brown), missed both races. As did Ragozin.
The \"general public\" seemed to get it right this time, making Smarty 3 to 5 and he wins.
Handicapping comes down to a matter of opinion and odds (hence the expression, \"that\'s what makes horse racing\"). Beaten lengths and ground loss are a factual matter-- you either get them right or you don\'t.
Your post brings to mind something I\'ve been wondering about for a while. Does TG have a system for making corrections to figures, when you decide you\'ve made a mistake (not that this happens often)?
I assume that the answer is yes with respect to factual errors like ground loss or beaten lengths, but I\'m really more curious about whether you sometimes correct the variant for a race based on later races run by horses in the race (as Beyer might now be inclined to do with the Rebel).
I didn\'t really utilize T-Graph for the Derby, but I factored it in my pick and I did cash my Derby bet.
For the Preakness, I relied only upon T-Graph and bet only Tris and Supers and cashed. Post race, I felt the T-numbers unquestionable. I\'m not saying they always get it right, but I\'m pretty sure the amount of attention placed by T-graph on the preps and Derby make them superior to the others.
When will you be posting your Preakness numbers?
Thanks.
I do review occasional individual races, as opposed to days-- I actually looked at 4 yesterday. They are always ones where there was just enough information to make a figure (as opposed to the ones which would be pure guesses, where we leave boxes-- Ragozin does make figures for a lot of those, like the Kee 2yo races), but only one that is probable, not solid. Examples are races where there are some horses who have already run in the race, but not often enough to give you a solid base, on a day where the track is changing speed, or it\'s the only sprint for 5 races, or something else like that. I don\'t like doing figures retroactively-- it reinforces errors, which can compound itself since you base future figures on current ones-- but I\'ll do things that way when absolutely necessary.