ROTW - Preakness

[Holybull]

Hopefully others (or TGJB) can chime in on this observation after looking at the TGs of the Preakness.

Hypothetically, let\'s say you adjust every horses\' figures 10 points higher across the board.  The #\'s would then resemble a lower level allowance/claimer race.  If you then analyze the race would you consider the \"#7 horse\" still only 40% to win?   I understand the 2-week rest argument against him, but it just seems that if this was just the 10th race at Pimlico he would be way higher than 40% to win the race.

I guess my question is how much non-TG bias comes into play when handicapping?  IE knowing BBs foot history, Triple Crown history, etc.

[TreadHead]

Your premise is flawed.  A spring 3yr old is many times more likely to bounce off a negative 4 than they are a +6, that\'s the difference.

[Holybull]

TreadHead Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your premise is flawed.  A spring 3yr old is many
> times more likely to bounce off a negative 4 than
> they are a +6, that\'s the difference.


I would disagree.  Especially with all of the strong evidence about racehorses getting faster.  I think this has been discussed on this board before.  Almost every spring in fact.