Jerry,
I\'ll give you the same courtesy that you extended me in your last email.
Methodology: I set up an Excel spreadsheet and input the names of each horse in two separate columns -- 1 for Rag. 1 for TG. I will then subdivide each column into \'sprint\' \'route\' and \'turf\'. I will then input the numbers from the respective brand of sheets into each spreadsheet until all numbers are entered and properly segmented.
Then, for each horse and each type of race, add the numbers and divide the total by the number of races, thus generating 1-3 data points for each horse (sprint, route, turf).
Next, I will take the average for sprint, route, and turft and subtract each number in the respective categories from the average, creating a \'deviation\' in the adjacent column. Add the total, divide by number of races, and voila, another 1-3 data points for each horse.
Next, take all of the data points for sprint, route, and turf for both Rag. and TG, add them, divide by the number of horses in each sample size and I will have the average numbers for sprints, routes, and turf for each product as well as the standard deviation. Then, compare TG to Rag. The consensus is that TG numbers will be several points faster and that the standard deviation will be smaller. Just how much is what I would like to know.
Anything else?