Concur.  July 11th link is unavailable for the evening races.

When the figs aren\'t figuring for you with the super trainers, try creating an edge by focusing on the other angles that are talked about extensively here...weight, ground loss and tendencies.

Example:  June 12th Belmont Race 6.  F&M 1 1/8 on the turf, weights relatively even. Chad and Irad in the 10 post with the 3-2 favorite.

#3 coming off a long layoff with competitive back figures goes off 55-1.  Looking at TG sheet, she threw a big figure coming off a previous long layoff (tendency).
She breaks to front, gets rail trip and leads for a mile before #10, who gets a 3w/2w trip reaches her in mid stretch.  They duel to wire and fast closing #8 gets the nod in a three way photo.

Finishes 8-3-10.  #3 loses race by a nose and pays $40 to place, $13.80 for show.

TG Analysis - calls out #3 for use in the exotics and doesn\'t mention #10.  I assume the reason was a) value, b) competitive back figs, c) past tendency and d) potential ground saving trip vs potential ground losing trip for 3-2 favorite.  

If #10 gets the better of the trip, she wins the race easily.

Bottom line - if you\'re spending good money for the data, use the figs as the foundation, but keep a close eye on the tendencies. Value is getting harder and harder to find.

Does anyone know why DRF cancelled the 2019 WCH Tournament?  Received an email from them this afternoon offering a refund for the value of the qualifying seat.

TG - Nice job on today\'s ROTW.  A very nice exacta and a near miss for the win with the longest shot on the board.

Exotics:  2-3-4-10-11

Throw in the 7 lower.

Jerry wrote

\"I\'m not sure exactly which comments of mine you are referring to.\"

The post was from May 2, 2000 \"Figure Making Methodologies\"....A Classic

I was referring precisely to those situations that can\'t be tied to similar turn races with older hores.

In other words, can certain assumptions be
made based upon the pars of only the 2 yo races at the distance in question on the same track vs. leaving the box blank.  (Assuming that your data set is large enough to be meaningful)

I know that it flies in the face of your premise, but could it yield something accurate enough to be used in those rare circumstances.  I do realize that errors will compound down the road.

Jerry,

While the topic of baby race figures has been brought up, I have been wondering about something for a long time.  

I\'ve read the famous reply to David Patent where you spoke of the \"projection method\" of figure making.  It was probably one of the better posts that I have read on this board and I understand where you are coming from when you chose not to assign a figure to a horse for a particular race.  

What I can\'t understand is why a handicapper cannot collect data over a reasonably long period of time to get a representative sample of the performance of 2 yr olds over the same course and distance to get an idea of what may constitute a good performance today and what may not.

It may not be science so to speak, but it would be a step in the right direction.  You and others may already do this, but I get the impression that most figure makers like to tie to other benchmarks.

Your work is on the cutting edge in so many areas.  My question is...Can the data be tightened in these 2 yo races races by
not attaching to historic benchmarks such as those of older claiming horses, etc.?

TGJB

Thanks for the response and the insight.

Let me throw this out there.  

Are the 10 claimers in \"slot states\" of the same ability as 10-15 yrs ago seeing that the purses have quadrupled over the same time frame?

One would have to think that they attract somewhat faster animals when they\'re running for drastically increased purses.

Why would he want to anchor to something obsolete on those circuits?

TGJB

I don\'t read the Rag board, so could you expand on \"the use of claiming pars\" comment a little.  I\'m pretty sure I know where each of you stand but I\'m not 100% certain.

Dodie,

I do not believe that they compensate at the Texas tracks either.  I do not watch them first hand, but I can tell from calculating the par times with the temp rail up at various distances.  It is strikingly obvious.

I do not want to speak for Jerry, but I am reasonably sure that all of this info is factored into the figure already.  It is relatively easy to do.

Thanks for the input on the NYRA tracks.  I\'m guessing that places that do not change the location of the start to compensate for the temp rail probably stick out like a sore thumb to TG.

TGJB  
Are there courses out there that compensate for the added distance when a temp rail is put up by say, adjusting the position of the starting gate?

If so, are they sophisticated enough to adjust the run-up to match the run-up from the normal gate location?

Thanks TGAB.  I saw the special but didn\'t have time to read it thoroughly.

TGJB

There seems to be some interest as to how severe a bounce can be expected from Forest Music.

If you can express your answer in terms of percentages, in your opinion what is the more likely scenario?

0-2 Pts.  __%
2-4 Pts.  __%
4-6 Pts.  __%
6-8 Pts.  __%
8+  Pts.  __%

Thanks for the post.  I tried searching a few weeks ago when you first mentioned it, and I came up empty.  I found 2 today, 1st edition and 3rd edition.  

I am real interested in if, when, and how he  developed par times, how he treated horses of differing ability levels, and how he set up his database.

I\'m going to go out on a limb and say that this fellow must not have had a \"day job\", to be able to do all of this in 1936.

I almost forgot... did anybody have a \"day job\" in \'36?