"A win in the heavy at Eagle Farm doesn't translate to being a good thing at Ipswich in the heavy. All tracks are different when slow or heavy."

But remember I'm talking about really only one variable and when assessing a horses ability, the track that it races on would certainly be a consideration and I wouldn't expect a winner at EF to race well at Ipswich if it was (for arguments sake) 0 from 5 starts at the track.

There is a saying horses for courses. Some tracks suit some horses - be it long straight, tight home turn..... and these would still be considered when using one's selection method regardless of track condition, would it not?

Agree that the track does respond differently in different section - seen may meets called off becauise of one small section being not up to racing standard.

But what is it about Wet tracks that overide all the other factors a punter considers important and viable, not viable when the track is rain affected. What stops the logic in it's tracks?

I don't know the answer. It just doesn't make sense to me. I can only go on my results and the actual track condition - not the performace of the horse in a particular going - has no bearing on my results.

Just can't find a logical answer as to why most ratings/methods perform at their worst when they are used on rain affected tracks.

People often do their form based on a track being dead or better, why not when dead or worse?

......... who know's what the answer is.

__________________
Stix
.......Giddy Up..... !!