That was a bit slick there Chrome.

'Furpy' ? I don't think so.
In fact your stats. actually prove the furpy correct, which is that it is harder to WIN on heavy tracks [if all thing are equal besides track conditions] than on good tracks.

Stats can be used as 'evidence' to support almost any incorrect conclusion. Mistakenly, I think you have drawn one here.

Your figure perfectly represent 2 things about heavy tracks. One is clearly shown, but the other is the [hidden] uneven playing field in the comparison.

Slightly more favourites win races on heavy tracks, but what is hidden here, is that after scratchings the fields on heavy tracks are a lot smaller than those raced on good tracks. Naturally the smaller the field the better the favourites perform, as races over all distances have far fewer runners in heavy contd. and the smaller the field, the less the favourites pay overall.

'X' number of races with 'y' no of runners per race, raced on both good and heavy tracks would produce a very different stats. outcome if x and y were equal under both good and heavy conditions. Of course they are far from it. !!