I love these pissing matches.

And I have bought both T-Graf and Rags and have been more of a raggie of late, for, of all reasons, because I like the little sheets. I can take their product and view every horse's sheet and pattern at the same time. Handicaping fundementals are more important then ever in an era in which lots of bettors, including, I suppose, big ones, handicap on the fly.

I live near and bet the Maryland circuit, and I watch it closely. I also have, on the occasions I've bought the Rags, downloaded the T-sheets on the Red Board Room. I have, seriously -- and I'm not proud of my anal retentiveness here -- superimposed the fields sheet by sheet.

What I've discovered -- on a circuit in which "patterns" are usually laughable given the quality of the horses -- is that often-times, both sets of sheets are relatively close. Sometimes, they are very different. My own view is that the Rags numbers are slightly better, but it's an uneducated one, save for the fact that this exercize has probably demonstrated that both emperors' clothes can get pretty skimpy from time to time.

I love the arguments, mostly from TGJB, about the accuracy of the figures. I also am always sceptical when Len F. says a horse has an "explosive" pattern based on a half-point nuace in his pattern.

It's my view, moderately well educated, is that the inherent difficulties in producing figures of the quality that both shops purport to produce make pattern analysis a joke in a clear majority of cases.

Is a horse 3-wide or 4-wide? What if they enter the turn on the rail and fan out for the stretch? Charles Towns shippers? Oh please. Speed figures are meaningless there, and to the extent they are, Andy Beyer's are fine.

It's clear that both shops spend a lot of time, money and effort into producing their numbers. I assume the sheet guys with stopwatches and notebooks have been replaced by tapeheads watching the races on TVG or local replay shows available on satellite. Is either shop usually better than the other on a daily basis? I dunno. TGJB at one point said he does 10 tracks a day; obviously computers play a huge role, and that means garbage in, garbage out cannot be avoided.

Then comes the Triple Crown and Breeders Cup. Here, TGJB has done admirably. (I was at Churchill Downs for the 2000 Breeders Cup, and TGJB did very well, though he gave negative recommendations on a lot of horses who nonetheless had the "best pattern."

I can't make a lot of money betting a lot of different tracks. The sheets (lower case) don't provide enough of an edge, at least to those of us who want to go to the track and have a life as well. (Almost every horse in Md. with an obvious numbers edge or great pattern is a big underlay.)

If I were to make a lot of money at the track I would concentrate on a circuit or two, watch the figures and focus on track bias and trips. Trips, I think, are a far more important factor than the sheets.

Jerry, I will buy your Kentucky Derby Analysis and sheets as well as your Breeders Cup sheets. But tell me, here, why your daily product -- Laurel in December, for example -- is better than the Rags. I've looked, and I'm not convinced.

Again, I don't have a dog in this fight, but for every huge battle you pick over Wood numbers or the Derby, I, as a day-to-day (potential) customer need more convincing....