1-- Fastest and greatest are two different things. Yes, athletes (human and equine) are much better now, but there are giant differences in nutrition, conditioning, \"sportsmedicine\", etc. I agree completely with Jimbo\'s analysis of Ruth-- probably would not be a stickout today as he was physically then, but by the numbers he\'s in a class by himself, relative to his competition.
2-- Having said that, in our sport there are ways to evaluate ability and performance. That\'s what we do here.
3-- I don\'t want to see \"pigs\" or \"garbage\" here any more. We\'ll give Miff a special dispensation for \"slow NY bred rats\", that\'s a little different.
4-- Ragozin figures can\'t be used to compare horses from different eras. Until about 7-8 years ago they were still relying heavily on pars-- I know this because I debated the subject with Friedman on the Ragozin board, he said so himself, and by the end of the conversation he understood why that was a very bad idea. Sure enough, a year or two later, at the DRF Expo in Vegas, he said they no longer used them.
Briefly, using pars assumes that horses do not get better or worse as a group (species) over the years-- that a 10k claimer will be the same in 1970 and 2010. As a practical matter, that means the figures you create are only useful in comparing horses from the same small time period-- you could tell how fast Dr. Fager was compared to the 10k claimers of that time, for example. They would tell you nothing about how he compared to any horses from different eras, whether stake horses or not. If horses are getting faster you won\'t catch it-- by definition, you are forcing them back to a predetermined average.
This is just one example of some basic problems in Ragozin\'s approach-- he makes a lot of assumptions that have no basis of any kind (horses not getting better over time, track staying the same speed, etc.), he uses a lot of averages (pars, one track speed for the day). Those are methods you use when you start a data base, because you don\'t have accurate data with which to make decisions, but they are not the ones you use once you have a data base and are refining it. Example-- it\'s right to use par for 10k claimers when you don\'t have figures for the individual horses. But once you do, you make the figures off THOSE horses, not a generic 10k claimer. And you look at what happens throughout the day, rather than assuming the track stays the same.
