Hey Ragozin Guys

TGJB · August 16, 2003, 11:19:15 AM

Someone told me that Ragozin has Spoken Fur winning the Mother Goose with an 8, slower than her nw1x allowance win in Kentucky before Frankel got her. Is this true?

Frank · August 16, 2003, 03:50:52 PM

8- to be exact.

Frank

TGJB · August 16, 2003, 03:53:54 PM

Did he really give her better for the first level allowance win, which she won by 1 1/4?

Frank · August 16, 2003, 04:02:40 PM

7+ for the N2X, 9\" for the N1X, 11\" for the CCA Oaks.

Frank

TGJB · August 16, 2003, 04:15:43 PM

Thank you. Does anyone actually believe that the Mother Goose and CCA went in worse figures than the CD allowance (which she won by a neck, by the way, I was looking at the nw2)? This is independent of the result of the Alabama-- I put up the winner (whom we had going forward in her last), Friedman liked Birdtown best and thought the winner was value, according to Thoroughbred Times. But does anyone with common sense actually think the Mother Goose blowout wasn\'t much the best race of this filly\'s life?

TGJB · August 16, 2003, 05:34:39 PM

Addendum-- I just went and re-read Friedman\'s comments in T-Times, and the table giving Rag numbers on some of the horeses. The first two finishers in the Alabama both came out of the same Delaware race, which Ragozin had WAY too slow.

Silver Charm · August 18, 2003, 05:27:33 AM

Haven\'t we brought this up many times before??

What were the repercussions? I was called a bozo, ignorant, partisan, toady sicko among others that were fit to print. One can imagine what was said behind closed doors.

The MO is clearly attack the source, don\'t defend the figure. Why, because the figures can\'t be defended in case such as these.

jbelfior · August 20, 2003, 06:30:17 AM

The funny part of this is that Frankel was quoted in the papers saying that Spoken Fur had regressed in her last two races.

Maybe they should write a new book entitled \"The Ragozins Must Be Crazy.\"

Joe B.

TGJB · August 20, 2003, 09:26:41 AM

When I get some time (probably not until at least September) I\'m going to get into what is in (and not in) that book, and a far more important book I recently came across. The most important claim Ragozin makes-- accuracy based on \"science\"-- is one I have debunked here often. It turns out that the second most important one (which any public credibility he has comes from), one I never questioned myself in all the time I was associated with that operation, is demonstrably a lie as a matter of public record. Proving once again that when it comes to that crew, there is no such thing as being too skeptical.

I\'m not going to do this until I have the time to do it right and handle the inevitable follow-up, but two hints for those who want to get a jump on it and do some research-- Ragozin\'s deal with the Thoroughbred Times, and a guy named E.W. Donaldson.