Jerry,

I ran down to OTB yesterday afternoon about 10 minutes before the 8th race when I saw Royal Affirmed scratch out of the race. I was looking at the T-Graph numbers and saw how fast Celtic Memories was compared to the even money favorite Fortune Writers. I was concerned about a speed duel though and didn't decide to bet until I saw the scratch. Anyway, I ran down and made a bet on the horse and then saw a $10.00 horse with 1 minute to post pay $7.20. But anyway, the purpose of this email is not to redboard. Let me get to the point. I was talking to somebody at the OTB (usually not a good thing) and explaining why I loved the 1, whom he also loved, saying the horse was fastest on his figures also. I asked him what figures he used. He mentioned he used Ragozin. After the race, we got into a discussion about figures. I explained I have been only been using the T-Graph numbers for a few months and he said he had been using Ragozin for many years. I asked him why he used Ragozin instead of T-Graph. He gave me three reasons, one of which I think is stupid, but the other two I think are worth asking you about.

First off, I should explain he mentioned he has become friendly with Len and picks up his figures often in person.

The three reasons he said he thinks Ragozin is superior were:

1. He thinks the negative numbers in Thorograph are "confusing" and finds it ridiculous that cheap claimers can run "2's" and "3's". This is obviously the reason I think is stupid. A scale is a scale. Personally, I wouldn't care if you started at 1,000 and went down from there. But to each his own.

2. He said that Len had explained to him that "Jerry Brown makes up changing variants during the racing cards as a product differentiator, basically fudging the change in variants".

3. He said that Len told him and he also noticed that "T-Graph comes up with way too many pairups compared to Ragozin" and that makes him question the accuracy of the figures.

To point #2, I had recently listened to your discussion of track variants in the archives and you convinced me that the variant changes. However, what I can't figure out is how you measure it? How can you tell what the moisture changed from, when the shadows showed up, exactly how much water is put on the track. To me, knowing the variant changes and trying to account for it accurately are two different things.

To point #3, I am just curious if you have ever heard this before. I found it a bit strange.

Anyway, don't go on the defensive here, I am not trying to attack you at all, I just found the conversation with this guy pretty interesting and thought it would be good to get your feedback.

Jim