Changing the Scale

[JimP]

I think you should change the scale. Shift it back to the positive range. And while you\'re at it, convert to whole numbers rather than quarter points. Those two changes would make the figures much easier to read.

[Easy Goer]

I\'m guessing you live in the tropics? It sounds like it is hard for you to read a newspaper in which the temperature is reported as -10 degrees Fahrenheit (i.e., 10 below zero).

I wholeheartedly agree that it would be much easier to read the weather report if it was quoted as \"450 degrees Rankine\" or \"250 degrees Kelvin\". [The Rankine and Kelvin temperature scales will never be altered with an arbitrary adder, since they already represent absolute zero which is the absence of molecular motion.]

Along these lines, when I make my own personal figures, I give a horse that doesn\'t break from the gate a zero (absence of motion), and everybody else gets a large positive integer, just as you suggest. The higher the number, the better the performance!

Seriously, what troubles me about applying an adder to the current TG scale, is that the downward drift of figures is likely due to problems with the figure-making methodology, and although they are apparently small (or non-existent according to the owner of this web site), I find it of great interest to see if the drift continues without trying to hide or trivialize it with an adder.

Sure you can make arguments about how hard it is to handle negative figures (if you\'re using a slide rule), but my small vote asks you to let them lay where they fall...

[thomas]

I\'ve heard John Kerry deliver better skits. Don't give up the day job.

[TGJB]

Easy Goer-- Don\'t know if you read \"Are Racehorses Getting Faster\" on this site, but you should.

If we announce the change, and add to ALL the horses in the database (we store back to figures of 92), you\'ll still be able to track the \"drift\".