Jimbo,

Appreciate your diligence and thoughts. Some rather lengthy comments follow about the game we all love and the challenges it poses everyday.

My perspective:
I've been playing horses a long long time. I can recall fighting with my sibs about who would get First Landing in the race of the week program that was shown on WOR Channel 9 (maybe WPIX 11) in the late 50's.
Lived in Edgewater NJ at the time and my dad worked at Lever Brothers (one of the many manufacturers that dotted the Hudson River on the Jersey side. It was so long ago that I used to swim in the Hudson River under the GW Bridge!!
AS I adoleseneced, Canonero II go me hooked on the Classics and Beyer turned me on to speed figures.
Did some crude numbers of my own that gave me Bold N Determined (10-1) over Genuine Risk and the undernourished Hugable Tom at $9.00 against my father's advice.

Over the years, style and substance for most players has changed ....some more than others. I have met players that focus on lone speed scenarios, trainer patterns, pedigree, tote action and "stats" (% type bets).
I really don't think better or worse of any handicapping style. After all, handicapping is an art form not a science. Their is no magic potion that can be bottled and sold to guarantee a positive ROI (if there was each pick would be like Bimelech in the 1940 Derby-- 1-99).

TG's have most definitely improved my ability to make money at the track.

My style:

1) Determine shape of the race (need to leads, pressers and deep closers).

2) Determine probable fitness (looking for the obvious only)

3) Determine # power (of those who pass the fitness test who is too slow, or, better yet, who is obviously very fast.)

4) Develop a betting strategy depending on odds, # of qualifying horses etc. (sometimes the strategy is to pass. sometimes to box, sometimes just flat win betting. Since I pick 4 a lot, this style lends to spreading in hotly contested races and keying if possible in one or two of the legs).

The TG's have played an instrumental part in almost every facet.
1)The pattern analysis I have learned over the years (from readng both boards, attending seminars, perusing books on the subject, sitting with experienced and sucessful players and most of all just by attending the School of Hard Knocks), has greatly enhanced my ability to determine what I call Potential Fitness.

2)The fine fine numbers produced help eliminate non-contenders almost at the glance of an eye. ( 2 very recent tosses--Tapit and During in the weekend stakes)

3) The extra trainer, pedigree,(I love the dam side stats) and now pattern stats offer the ability to fine tune selections.

In sum, Jimbo, you srike me as a serious and thoughtful player grapppling with "Style" issues.
Analysis of any sample created before odds, scratches, track conditions etc are available isn't all that useful. I would focus, instead, on successful plays and determine what factors contributed to that analysis.
Best of luck
Bob