By Jack Werk

For years we’ve been trying to explain what’s wrong with using “the whole population” as a measure of opportunity for crosses. By now, it’s well known that a rival nick rating service does exactly that. They’ve been using it as their main selling point and knocking WTC’s eNicks system because we don’t do it that way. Well, there’s a reason why we don’t. They just haven’t figured it out yet.

Bill Oppenheim

In his January 6, 2010 TDN column Bill Oppenheim makes his position very clear:

“This is a big thing with a lot of people now, how things ought to be measured against opportunity in the general population. I used to think it would be better if I could do that, but I don’t think so any more.”

Just because something seems to make sense doesn’t mean it’s going to work in the real world. As Bill goes on to suggest, the problem is that you’re comparing the 2% of the thoroughbred population that counts as superior with the 98% that only represents opportunity. Anybody can understand that the real opportunity is concentrated in that 2%. The other 98% is just not the same.

But what really got my attention in Bill’s column was his explanation of his study of Northern Dancer inbreds. The way he organizes that study is a primer in the way the Werk Nick Rating is calculated. Thanks for clearing that up, Bill!