Derby Figures and Evidence

[TGJB]

CH-- Send me an e-mail sometime with your background. I don\'t know if we will have anything, but it would make it possible to reach you if we do.

[Michael D.]

ahhhh, i see you want to change the subject away from the point in question, which is, why are you basically referring to \"most\" ragozin customers as idiots. that was the original point i made on the string. nice try there, not good enough though (if you noticed, i also made a post about the BC, and that will be discussed as well)... you do win on one point though, in the future, if i think something you say is way off base, i will not use the word \"stupid\", i will simply make jokes about your IQ... and if you want to get back to the subject of \"are horses are running ten to fifteen lengths faster at 10f and 12f on dirt than they were ten to fifteen years ago\", i would gladly address it again. i was just thinking about bid\'s 1:57 and change 10f run many years ago. i was also thinking about northern dancer\'s run in the derby. i think he did that in about 2:00 flat (about 40 years ago). how the heck do you explain that?? (i\'m guessing you would talk about a conversation you had with a track superintendent, although not from CD, and you might give a few facts about swimming pools).

[Chuckles_the_Clown2]

Michael D. wrote:

> ragozin group makes figures, and why they tie races together
> much less than you do.

I don\'t think the above is an accurate statement. To my knowledge the Rag method was to assume the track \"variant\" was a constant for the day unless there was a climatic event. Thats tying races together. TGraph on the other hand is on the advant garde regarding track speeds changing throughout the day. We know they do. All you have to do is consider the drying out track at Lone Star Park on Breeders Cup Day. If I understand it correctly TGraph uses the Rag method when the track produces race times for the day consisent with the track remaining uniform. When the track changes TGraph factors the changing track speed. Clearly there is some art to that. To my mind its art to counter bad \"science\".

But let me ask you this: \"Whose number is going to be more credible in this dilemma, the concern that scrutinizes and discusses their methodology or the concern that allows errors to go uncorrected and discourages debate?\"

CtC

[TGJB]

Michael, I rest my case. Great post.

[Michael D.]

CtC,
i use both products, and judge their accuracy on a day to day basis. my opinion changes from time to time..