Two things. Yes, it does seem unreasonable on the surface to see that big a jump. So I do think that to an extent, you have to adjust the figures to what's reasonable. For me, it's what reasonable? When I see one change, it can make sense to me even if I don't agree with it. When I see multiple changes on the same card and they go back and forth, that's what seems like it uses too much judgement and not enough of just presenting the data and letting the follower interpret for themselves. Let today's race be based more on today rather than let previous races for a bunch of horses under a bunch of different circumstances have too much impact.

Second thing. Regarding that runner up and what he got last time, what was the race like? Who was the competition and what was the pace? What track was it on? I have seen horses that when left alone, can run 22, 44, 109 and win for fun. That same horse, if challenged up front or outrun, can run 23, 46, 110....and be nowhere to be found at the finish. One race, you'll see a horse run his best race while you might see another horse in the same race nowhere near his best because the goal is a bigger race later.

DMR Betty Grable S: Mo See Cal - (Uncle Mo) P. Miller/F. Prat

AQU Nashua S (G3): Pickin' Time 82 (Stay Thirsty) K. Breen/T. McCarthy

The runner up ran 2nd in his prior race to the horse who ran 4th in the Nashville race Saturday. He stalked the pace and was outfinished by that horse. I don’t doubt he ran a career best against Nashville but a 17 point jump seems unlikely.