What is incorrect is that you need to build in some kind of variant to get any kind of useful pars. Horses are more consistent than track conditions. If you look at the history of horses that run well in a race, the pace and final time, as well as the pace and final times of other races on the card, you are going to come up with much better numbers than you will using pars.

Quick question...what figure did you give Invasor's BC Classic, and what figure did you give Magna Graduate a few weeks ago on the inner dirt?

Invasor: a 124 on my figures, 1 point = 1 length (which works out to approximately a 113 Beyer.) He had run a 126 (Suburban) and a 125 (Whitney) in his previous two, Bernardini had run a 124 (Jim Dandy), 124 (Travers), and a 122 (JCGC). Premium Tap had run a 117 (mini-stake against SK), 118 (Whitney), 119 (Woodward). Note: I was very happy with this number, as Premium Tap ran a 120 in the Clark.

Magna Graduate: A 118 (about a 103 Beyer). Obviously the BC day CD race was a throwout for comparison purposes but his one other race I have in the database was a 119 (the Discovery.)

I only asked as by most time charts, Magna Graduate's races comes back gigantic. You must be doing something right in my opinion, though I came up with similar relationship using mostly projections.

To be clear, I rarely if ever use projections to modify single races. I use projections to come up with the overall variant for the card. I don't like splitting races out just to make them fit prior history, I need additional evidence.

The 9.5F distance is (obviously) seldom used, which the time charts don't account for- that's probably why the strictly-computer-generated figures don't get a good number. If it's a REALLY wacky distance like that 2 mile race they ran a couple weeks ago... I don't even bother with it. Just pull it out of the day's formula and have it as an "N/A" figure (not like a 2 mile race figure is worthwhile anyways!)

What's the MINIMUM number of races you prefer to have a variant "group" on a specific day? For me it's 3. Once is an abberation, two is a trend, three is a defined set of correlated results. (Of course, occasionally you'll have a day like the Jim Dandy where the first 2 dirt races were an obvious split thanks to the weather.)

I prefer three as well, if it is at all possible.

perhaps if you put lemons forever in a match race with seek gold, one of them would see the winners circle again. oh, and just for fun, drag colonial colony into the mix. maybe sinister minister as well!

Danzig:

I wouldnt throw Sinister Minister's name in with those others: Colonial Colony, Seek Gold and Lemons Forever.

Why? Because Sinister Minister doesnt win races because of pace collapses. His effort in the Blue Grass was extraordinary. Sure it may have had something to do with the track, but he was simply the boss that day beating some fine horses like Bluegrass Cat, First Samurai and Strong Contender. He also was good before that race winning a few in some very fast times.

He then ran a dud in the Derby but so too did about 3/4 of the field. He returned at Del Mar and was again not so good but it was off a layoff and thats not his favorite track.

Point is, when he is good enough he wins races, regardless of what others do. Lemons Forver, Seek Gold and Colonial Colony need races to fall apart and horses like Perfect Drift to hang. Big difference.

i put him in there since he hasn't backed up his breathtaking performance in the bluegrass. probably not as similar to the others as they are to each other, but hey, one has to win--i assume he would be the one!
i know some accuse a front runner of theft when they 'steal' a race on the front end, much like the tin man in the arlington million. but imo a confirmed stone closer is as much a thief, as he is there to pick up all the pieces at the very end but only if the pace is right on and they manage to stay clean and clear.

Yes I would agree with front runners taking too much criticism when they win races like the Tin Man did. Sinister Minister would have beaten any horse alive that day. To be fair he only had 2 chances to back up his big Blue Grass win and one of them was the Derby. He went fast as expected and faced pressure. Total throwout of a race in my opinion.

Do I think he is as good as his Blue Grass? No way. But I would rank him a lot higher than those other 3 plodders you mentioned.

Hopefully the Minister gets back in a race soon and another chance to validate who he is or isnt.