How closely did Chad Adams, Mike Hilley and Jamie Lawrence align with the panel’s majority opinion?
Executive summary
Chad Adams is closest to the three-judge majority in this extract: 89.7 out of 100, matching 522 of 582 eligible horse-pair decisions. Mike Hilley follows at 88.8, and Jamie Lawrence at 86.8.
The comparator matters. Hilley is closest to the printed Final order at 89.5, ahead of Adams at 88.3 and Lawrence at 85.4. Giving every class equal weight also swaps second and third place in the majority ranking.
These are agreement scores, not assessments of judging skill or fairness. The extract supports 582 comparable pairs across 40 classes. Missing entries remain unknown; the two identical attachments are counted once.
The scorecard
The primary SI score asks a precise question: when the same two horses appear on all three cards, how often does a judge put them in the order preferred by at least two judges? Every eligible pair has equal weight. A score of 100 would mean agreement on every observed pair.
Agreement with the panel majority and printed Final
Scores and placement diagnostics
| Chad Adams | 89.7 | 88.3 | 32/39 | 140/255 |
| Mike Hilley | 88.8 | 89.5 | 31/39 | 137/255 |
| Jamie Lawrence | 86.8 | 85.4 | 29/39 | 129/255 |
Read the margins with the method
Adams’ majority lead over Hilley is 5 pair decisions out of 582, or 0.9 percentage points. Hilley’s lead over Adams against Final is 7 decisions, or 1.2 points. The panel majority and Final differ on 12 eligible pairs; this observation does not establish a tabulation error.
When each of the 39 classes with an eligible comparison receives equal weight, the majority scores are Adams 89.5, Lawrence 87.6, Hilley 86.9. Larger common fields have more influence in the primary score, so the lower two positions depend on weighting.
A leave-one-out check uses only pairs on which the other two judges agree: Adams 86.4% (380/440), Hilley 85.4% (380/445), Lawrence 83.2% (380/457). These are useful additional views of the same cards, not independent evidence of accuracy.
Judge profiles
Chad Adams · 89.7 / 100
Adams matches the majority on 522/582 pairs and takes the minority side on 60. His first-place selection matches Final in 32 of 39 classes with at least two listed horses (82.1%), the most of the three. He matches 140/255 printed Final slots (54.9%). He leads the primary and equal-class majority measures.
Mike Hilley · 88.8 / 100
Hilley matches the majority on 517/582 pairs, with 65 minority decisions. He leads agreement with Final at 521/582 pairs (89.5%). His winner match is 31/39 (79.5%), with 137/255 exact printed slots (53.7%). His second place under pooled majority weighting becomes third when every class counts equally.
Jamie Lawrence · 86.8 / 100
Lawrence matches the majority on 505/582 pairs, with 77 minority decisions. His winner match is 29/39 (74.4%), with 129/255 exact printed slots (50.6%). He is third in pooled pair agreement and second in equal-class majority agreement. His more frequent departures in this extract do not explain why he differed.
Notable differences to inspect
Each judge has a clear example where one horse’s placement is well apart from both colleagues. These are prompts to review the performance and applicable standards, not proof that a card was wrong.
- Lawrence — extract class 2: SHES MY ROCK SBS is 8th on his card versus 2nd on both other cards and Final. His whole-class majority score is 8/15 = 53.3.
- Hilley — extract class 32: SLICK RICK 3A is 7th on his card versus 1st on both other cards and Final. His whole-class score is 12/21 = 57.1.
- Adams — extract class 33: ONE KNIGHT RODEO is 7th on his card versus 1st on both other cards and Final. His whole-class score is 8/15 = 53.3.
Class 20 gives Hilley a zero score from one eligible pair. That is one reversed comparison; its small denominator is essential context. The table below shows denominators alongside every class score.
All 40 classes
Search the class names, sort any column, or select a row to inspect its printed placements. Scores are out of 100. Extract order is a navigation aid, not an official class number. A dash means no eligible pair; the single-listed-horse class receives no majority score.
Class-by-class majority agreement
1 | TRAIL PLEASURE/WHTA RIDERS CUP | 15 | 80.0 | 73.3 | 93.3 |
2 | AMATEUR TWO YEAR OLD MARES/GELDINGS | 15 | 93.3 | 80.0 | 53.3 |
3 | YOUNG TRAINERS 35 & UNDER/WHTA RIDERS CUP | 21 | 90.5 | 90.5 | 85.7 |
4 | COUNTRY PLEASURE AMATEUR | 10 | 90.0 | 90.0 | 90.0 |
5 | MARES/GELDINGS/WHTA RIDERS CUP | 15 | 80.0 | 80.0 | 86.7 |
6 | AMATEUR FIVE YEAR OLD STALLIONS | 3 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 66.7 |
7 | ALL DAY PLEASURE AMATEUR | 21 | 90.5 | 90.5 | 85.7 |
8 | FOUR YEAR OLD (CANTER)/WHTA RIDERS CUP | 1 | 100.0 | 100.0 | 100.0 |
Extract 1 · TRAIL PLEASURE/WHTA RIDERS CUP
| 125 | BLACKLIST | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 |
| 114 | IMAGINE DRAGONS | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| 136 | DEAD BEAT DADDY | 3 | 1 | 5 | 3 |
| 103 | LAZARO LB | 4 | 5 | 4 | 4 |
| 139 | HAMPTON ROAD | 5 | 4 | 6 | 5 |
| 104 | ENTICED | 6 | 6 | 3 | 6 |
Methodology and limits
SI means Super Intelligence here as the report’s title. The SI majority agreement score is a custom descriptive index created for this analysis. It is not an official judging score or a measure of intelligence, correctness or fairness.
Calculation: for every class, keep the horses explicitly ranked on all three judges’ cards. Compare every pair of those horses. The majority is whichever order at least two judges choose. Divide each judge’s majority-aligned comparisons by all eligible comparisons, then multiply by 100. The pooled headline uses 582 pairs: 380 unanimous and 202 split. A pairwise majority need not produce one consistent overall ranking.
Coverage: the common-card method covers 582 of 770 possible pairs among the printed Final horses (75.6%). Horse sets differ across cards in 17 classes. The omitted comparisons are unknown. Cards ending at eight do not establish where unlisted horses would have ranked.
Other measures: the Final score uses the same eligible pairs, but compares them with the printed Final order. Winner agreement uses 39 classes with at least two listed Final horses. Exact-place agreement uses all 255 printed Final slots, including the single-listed-horse class. Equal-class scores average per-class rates; leave-one-out scores exclude pairs where the other two judges disagree.
Source and checks: Pasted text.txt and Pasted text (2).txt are identical and counted once. Two independent parses matched all 160 ranking columns and principal totals. The extract lacks an event title and session dates; this report makes no verified event attribution. The preparation date is not an event date.
Interpretation: this is a description of supplied cards, with each evaluated judge included in the primary panel majority. It cannot establish performance quality, intent, favoritism, error or broader judging tendencies.
About The Author
