Northern Stag #

[TGJB]

Here are the 3 sprints from the day NS ran the big number. We actually added about 2 relative to the third one, a little less compared to the other. I would point out the figure for Zito\'s horse is just as freaky for a 3yo filly as NS\'s is for an older male. But if you add to them, you have to add to all.

First-- one big new top, everybody else well off their top.

Third-- one paired top, one horse 3 points off their top, everyone else 5 or more off their top.

Sixth-- one big top, one pair, everyone else 7 points or more off their top.

Total-- 18 starters that had previous tops. Two new tops, one paired top, 15 horses running 2 or more points off their tops, most a lot worse than that.

As I said at the time, this was one of the toughest days I ever had to do. Try it-- give me other scenarios, even if you cut  all the races loose, which I didn\'t do (a couple of points over the course of a day is very little, especially when it\'s in increments, and particularly when there is water in the track).

http://www.thorograph.com/hold/kee042305.pdf

TGJB,

I\'m not even going to try to make sense of that day, but I do have an insight.  It may be of dubious use, but I know it\'s correct and it may be helpful.

I did a study of off tracks many years ago. One of the things I noticed was that the average margins between horses expanded relative to fast tracks on very sloppy tracks (on some days very dramatically).

I don\'t know whether it was because of mud being kicked in the face and bodies of some of the runners in the middle and back of the pack, some horses loving the mud and others really hating it, a combination of both and other factors etc...  All I know is that it happened often. Because of that the normal beaten lengths charts would routinely produce figures that made no sense.

I had only 3 choices.

1. Give the big winner a huge figure (which they invariably did not duplicate) in order to give the other horses a figure that made at least a little sense.  

2. Give the winner a figure that made sense (that they would often duplicate) and give everyone else a much slower figure than they usually got.

3. Same as 2, but make a note about the day that the average margins were \"x%\" greater than on the average fast track day. I would then use that information to make better sense of the performances by horses that were well beaten.

Number 3 was not accurate enough to be used for a product that is for sale, but #1 and #2 often produce such preposterous figures  they have to be ignored anyway.

With your resources, there\'s got to be a way to at least make a notation similar to what I am suggesting if not find a solution that would be worthy of sale.