sek,
I'm sure everyone is as sick of this as I am, so I'm gonna account for the horses I used, the criteria I used, and then you come back and inform me where else my, still not finished, information is wrong. At any rate, I'm done responding to you.
Point #1. SMARTY JONES WAS 2004. I DID 2005 - 2014. Not even in the right year.
Brother Derek is in the 4th slot in the group of numbers 11-0-0-1-1. I know he ran a negative at 1 M. He didn't win, that's my point on him. He's also included in the group of numbers of the horses with a 3 year old debut negative, he appears in the 4 spot in that group. ACCOUNTED FOR BASED ON MY CRITERIA, NOT YOURS.
Next point. My criteria doesn't fail before Smarty ran in '04, the year before I started the sample group. Brother Derek is accounted for in two different sets.
American Lion ran his first negative in his 3RD START of his 3 year old campaign, so HE ISN'T IN THE CRITERIA OF first or 2nd race negative number. I account for American Lion who ran 11th. He appears in the first group of numbers that goes, 6th, 7th, .....11th. ACCOUNTED FOR IN MY CRITERIA.
Greeley's Galaxy and Bandini ran negatives in THEIR 4TH OUT OF the year, they were not a 1st or 2nd start negative, but I have both in the group as 11th and 19th place finishes.
Soldat. I know he ran a negative in his 1st 3 year old race, he also ran 11th and you'll find him in the other 11th spot. Okay?
Some of the other horses, I already mentioned like Greeley's Galaxy, Bandini, Intense Holiday, Verrazano, Itsmyluckyday, Dunkirk, Circular Quay, Keyed Entry, Afleet Alex, Bellamy Road. Curlin is not even in the conversation because he ran his negative in his 3rd start. I BELIEVE I HAVE ALL OF 'EM, according to the criteria I used on the initial project.
I didn't single out Pletcher cause I didn't single any other trainer out. This was about horses, not trainers.

sek. Would you please quit interjecting a horse like Smarty Jones who ran the previous year. Would you please understand that horses that ran a negative in the 3rd or 4th start were not in THIS criteria. You've managed to merge different criteria all into the same sample group and that's not how it works.

TGJB. I apologize for having to defend something that I haven't finished all the components to yet. I seem to recall you using a small sample on Baffert or someone in the seminar in order to alert the viewers that there is or may be an emerging oddity to look at. When the initial sample is small, we use the numbers that are available at that time. Sometimes its pays dividends and sometimes it doesn't. As the years go on, the sample increases and then stronger conclusions are made or dismissed. Initially, the unknown result still exists.
What I find, if anything, wouldn't even benefit me until the next Derby.
If sek chooses to address this post, that's fine, cause I'm done explaining to him.

Thanks. And apologies to the guys for these exchanges.