Here is a quote from the last one that I find baffling:
Quote:
But in the Equibase ratings, Carrick earned a 103 while Robert Bruce got a much higher 122
...
Siegel said Trackmaster didn't have an Inter-Track Variant for 10 furlongs on the turf at Arlington, and Carrick's Secretariat performance came over a “good” grass course, the only “good” turf race that day at the distance. The turf changed to “firm” by the Arlington Million.
|
So a horse ran a slower time on an allegedly faster course (firm vs good) and was given a rating 19 points higher by a computer. How does that make any sense?
