Ask The Experts

It\'s only fair,  We inject the pools, they inject the horses...er, except on the days when they don\'t.

https://www.paulickreport.com/features/the-friday-show/racing-in-the-courtroom/

Loved the narrative.  There\'s an old story about throwing a frog in boiling water, he will jump out without getting burned.  Put same frog in tepid water and slowly bring to boil and he\'ll cook before knowing to jump.  Life\'s \"heat\" is insidious,especially in this game. Zayat is at full boil.  Refreshing to read that you are \"uncooked\".  Keep \'em coming.

Cornfused?

Socal, so does Brereton.

Taken from Horse Races Now site:
https://www.thoroughbredracing.com/articles/jones-either-we-eliminate-problem-or-problem-going-eliminate-us

Difficult to draw any conclusion from this set of 3 races since the first one, r2, was won by a Cannizzo, the second, r5, by Jacobsen (his entry finished 1-3, both run today), and the third by RR. Regardless of the condition of the dirt, there was \"magic\" in the air.

Doesn\'t logic suggest that when the drug protocols tighten, the horses will go back?  Derby numbers seem to me to have gotten uniformly slower since 2007.  Again, it seems, just on the face of it, that changes in PEDs monitoring may allow more error to slip into numbers which rely more heavily on projection methodology (what a horse has done in the past with perhaps lesser drug monitoring). If true, the surprise would be if 19 didn\'t go back?  As much as I hate the drug culture in racing, and appreciate your determined outspokenness about it, I think the changes from one venue to another would create havoc for number-makers.

I did take the survey, and I liked it.  I have not seen the results, nor had I read Ken\'s post until you mentioned it.  I don\'t think Ken uses either product so I doubt if further comment would be of use.
No poll is perfectly free of bias.  Therefore all polls are vulnerable to criticism, whether informed or not.  A quick read of the write-up Ken cited reeks of the uniformed naysayer variety.  
I think it is an unfortunate paradox that those who use the patterns of TG or Rags as a primary handicapping tool are likely to be more sensitive to the effects of enhancers, yet, if one samples TG and Rags users, one introduces selection bias.
Similarly, if it were a poll about the integrity of the pools, or costs of ownership, capturing my responses in an attempt to broaden the survey base would be detrimental since I do not focus enough on either to have a useful opinion.  
Where are the full poll results posted?  Can anyone access the poll questions now?  
Sent from my iPad