Right. And for those who missed it, somebody (not me) took my post at the top of this string and put it up over there, where there were a couple of responses to it, and then about 45 minutes later it was \"disappeared\", with no response, as if it never happened. It should be obvious to anyone following the history that if they had a response they would love to stick it to me, so their failure to do so becomes evidence they don\'t. And their failure to change a figure they know is significantly wrong-- on the Derby winner, by 1 1/2 points, or the major beaten length error in the 04 Derby-- is evidence of... what?
Most of Ragozin\'s customers are old-timers that don\'t use computers and buy hardcopy at the tracks or have sheets shipped, so they don\'t know there\'s an issue. And that\'s Friedman\'s calculation-- better to have a few people know than have many see they have changed a figure that important, and ask why. But you have to wonder about those who go online, know about this issue and all the other outright mistakes I\'ve brought up just in BIG races, and don\'t utter a peep-- as Terry Malloy said, \"I was rattin\' on myself all those years\".
And of course, it makes you wonder about all the day-to-day work, since you would think they might pay a little extra attention to the Derby (which has a 20 horse field, so we have 3 different people do ground, and check them against each other).
If anybody sees a set of Ragozin\'s Preakness sheets, I would love to know whether they fixed that error.
