Neither.  And I know he\'s not the one making the figures.

True story.  

One of my good friends is either an owner or part owner/investor of Rags.  Another of my friends gets the Rags for free through the same friend.

I had already been using TG for 15 years, and he offered to give me their numbers for free, but I turned him down.

He said, \"Dude you\'d rather pay for TG data than get ours for free?\"  

I said, \"Yep, you get what you pay for, but I do appreciate the offer.\"

Silver,
Close Hatches ran 9f in 3 races.  You can check Thoroughbred Horse Pedigree Query and in upper left type in her name.  When her pedigree info comes up you can click on Reports and the drop down menu will let you click on Pedigree, Stakes Races, etc.

Reminds me of the student who brings home a crappy report card and doesn\'t want to show the parents. During those times when I had a great report card  I couldn\'t wait to show them. If the numbers on the report card were not so good, I walked around holding my breath hoping they\'d forget to ask. Can\'t imagine their response on the poor card if I told them I would only show them if they gave me a 20 spot.

Both a north and south skinker blvd in st. Louis

Jimbo, good to see you back again.
Hey, did you see that Zenyatta and that other mare were inducted into the Hall of Fame?  Just kidding, welcome back and sorry business soured, at least you have your health, right?

R1  #1

R2  #7

R3  #11

R4  #9,#13

R7  #5

R9  #3

R10 #4

R11 #1,#10,#11,#13,#14

R12 #1 #12

Fu Peg 3.67
Giacomo 4.33
Mine That Bird 5.40
Am. Pharoah 4.33

Strike The Gold in 1991 the highest at 9.00

moosepalm,
From Nebraska here, no offense taken since we\'re just a bunch of hicks out here.

Thanks richiebee.

No.  I\'m done this time I promise.  I would have been done earlier but been dodging tornadoes out here off and on for 3 hours tonight and I figured if tonight\'s the night I bite the dust I wanted closure.   LOL
And to think earlier today I was drilling the link king. I agree RICH, and shame on me.

T,
One more mostly unrelated thought.  Another poster wonders why I used the 2005-2014 years as a sample.  10 years is easy to work with.  In that 10 year period we had 2 different $ 100.00 winners, several chalk winners like Brown, Orb, Chrome, Street Sense was chalky, we had Super Saver at 14.00 or so, we had Barbaro with the turf background and a bunch of horses entered that ran on or were introduced to synthetics.  I thought for a random 10 year period it took a lot of things into consideration.

T,
I\'m on board with that way of thinking. My point in the 4 preps was the others in the sample with 4 preps did very poorly.  Didn\'t mean Upstart would.  I would have been very happy had he brought his A game, cause I played him.
The two horses in the sample with 4 preps prior to the Derby were Verrazano and Keyed Entry.  No question, most serious handicappers gave Verrazano no chance at 8/1 and no 2 year old starts.  Keyed Entry had went backwards for 2 straight races after the negative and heading into the Derby going the wrong direction, it was no surprise he went off at almost 30/1.
Upstart had differences from both of those horses, and it was night and day.  He was moving into the right direction headed for the Derby, had the strong 2 year old foundation, and was 20/1.  There was stuff to like.
What happened, only a few people know.  I\'ve been told by the man himself I don\'t know what I\'m talking about with Upstart and I accept that.  I consider his Derby a non-effort for whatever the reason(s) were.
The reason I stated that I didn\'t like Upstart was the 4 preps prior to the Derby, I only had 2 horses that didn\'t have a snowballs chance in their Derby, now I had a horse that had the numbers, foundation, etc, but I went with the idea that there might be something about the 4 preps.  It was a guess on my part and I wouldn\'t have minded being wrong, especially at 20/1.
Thanks man, enjoy your take on things. (I really need to put this thing to bed).

sek,
I\'m gonna renege one time about being finished with responding.
2014-13-12-11-10-09-08=07=06=05 That is the 10 year period I used, I could not have been more clear. You insist on including Smarty who ran in 2004. My initial sheet SPECIFICALLY says the last 10 Derby\'s.  I didn\'t include Seattle Slew either.
I already explain Brother Derek more than once.  I don\'t care if he paired his negative, has NOTHING to do with this sample. NOTHING. He\'s in the #4 spot where he belongs in this sample.

I wasn\'t apologizing to you.  I was apologizing to TGJB and everybody else in the room.  
You are bringing up points with no merit sek. Please do a 10 year sample study on something and we will see if this old forensic accountant can offer suggestions.

sek. I don\'t engage in \"systems.\" I am a methodologist.  I never referred to it as a \"system\" I never inferred it would work, because it is still incomplete. If it \"falls apart in future years\" it will have been a fun project to do. You think this is the first time I started with a random sample and found nothing useful? I do stuff like this because its fun.  

That\'s all sek.  Put something that consists of 10 years of data together, cause I\'d love to discuss its merits with you.

sek,
I\'m sure everyone is as sick of this as I am, so I\'m gonna account for the horses I used, the criteria I used, and then you come back and inform me where else my, still not finished, information is wrong. At any rate, I\'m done responding to you.
Point #1. SMARTY JONES WAS 2004. I DID 2005 - 2014. Not even in the right year.
Brother Derek is in the 4th slot in the group of numbers 11-0-0-1-1. I know he ran a negative at 1 M.  He didn\'t win, that\'s my point on him. He\'s also included in the group of numbers of the horses with a 3 year old debut negative, he appears in the 4 spot in that group. ACCOUNTED FOR BASED ON MY CRITERIA, NOT YOURS.
Next point.  My criteria doesn\'t fail before Smarty ran in \'04, the year before I started the sample group.  Brother Derek is accounted for in two different sets.
American Lion ran his first negative in his 3RD START of his 3 year old campaign, so HE ISN\'T IN THE CRITERIA OF first or 2nd race negative number. I account for American Lion who ran 11th.  He appears in the first group of numbers that goes, 6th, 7th, .....11th.  ACCOUNTED FOR IN MY CRITERIA.
Greeley\'s Galaxy and Bandini ran negatives in THEIR 4TH OUT OF the year, they were not a 1st or 2nd start negative, but I have both in the group as 11th and 19th place finishes.
Soldat. I know he ran a negative in his 1st 3 year old race, he also ran 11th and you\'ll find him in the other 11th spot.  Okay?
Some of the other horses, I already mentioned like Greeley\'s Galaxy, Bandini, Intense Holiday, Verrazano, Itsmyluckyday, Dunkirk, Circular Quay, Keyed Entry, Afleet Alex, Bellamy Road.  Curlin is not even in the conversation because he ran his negative in his 3rd start. I BELIEVE I HAVE ALL OF \'EM, according to the criteria I used on the initial project.
I didn\'t single out Pletcher cause I didn\'t single any other trainer out.  This was about horses, not trainers.  

sek.  Would you please quit interjecting a horse like Smarty Jones who ran the previous year.  Would you please understand that horses that ran a negative in the 3rd or 4th start were not in THIS criteria.  You\'ve managed to merge different criteria all into the same sample group and that\'s not how it works.

TGJB. I apologize for having to defend something that I haven\'t finished all the components to yet.  I seem to recall you using a small sample on Baffert or someone in the seminar in order to alert the viewers that there is or may be an emerging oddity to look at.  When the initial sample is small, we use the numbers that are available at that time. Sometimes its pays dividends and sometimes it doesn\'t. As the years go on, the sample increases and then stronger conclusions are made or dismissed.  Initially, the unknown result still exists.
What I find, if anything, wouldn\'t even benefit me until the next Derby.
If sek chooses to address this post, that\'s fine, cause I\'m done explaining to him.
 
Thanks. And apologies to the guys for these exchanges.