" 1-- Len, you got it wrong, again. Jimbo made clear that he was using
Beyerguy's log-in, and why, in his first post on YOUR board. "

I regret how harsh this sounds, but I thought Jimbo got exactly what his posts, on both boards, deserved. Actually,
the"name calling" you object to started with Jimbo(pigs, etc). Until
recently, I've enjoyed Jimbo's posts, as I've mentioned to you. However,
when he says he supervises 100 programmers but can't manage to figure out
how to get a password on the Rags BB, or find Len's post, I have to wonder?
Then come his posts of "outrage" at the Rags BB comment on TGJB's legal
dispute with Chris. Isn't he at least a little curious about Derby1592's
position? Didn't he form any sense of Chris' character in all of this time?
Those issues cast a pall on the sincerity of all of his posts, and certainly
on the seemingly feigned objectivity of his comments regarding studies that
compared the two products.

Isn't it odd that there's hardly a word of support here for
Derby1592? He was one of the most revered posters on this board(he was my
personal favorite here, though there are several I enjoy reading). One day
he's guest ROTW analyst, the next day, anathema. What
kind of "lock-step" mentality exists here? Isn't sp curious about this
sudden turn-around of fortunes, especially since he elaborates on his
perception of JJ's. I don't expect you to give legal positions/information,
nor to give air-time here to a defendant in your law suit, but the axe does
seem to fall more swiftly, completely, and menacingly here than the simple
guillotine over there.

"You guys are still around because I am a better person than you are."

Are you suggesting that somehow, on this board, that kind of statement
stands as a fact-based methodology comment?

"despite giving you[The Sheets] a huge head start, "

For you, TGJB, and all others who may wonder at how some of the
controversial posts originate, speaking only for myself, that statement is what prompts most of the
jabs I poke at TGJB. On this BB, readers would be led to believe the
implied intellectual distortion that TGJB, Pittsburgh Phil, Buddy Abadie and
Donaldson(or whoever else is convenient to the position that dilutes TGJB's
reliance on Ragozin for his beginnings in this business) put together a
consortium that generated this whole vision of single number,
effort-pattern, variant-based assessments of probabilities(that has inter-track reliabilty) as an approach to handicapping. TGJB makes it sound as though he trained the Ragozins, and even generously gave them a head start in the business!

TGJB's approach has it's advocates, and likely has it's own merits, it's
just not as portrayed on this board. I like downloading the ROTW here, and
reviewing the analytical comment. I value the support for cleaning up the sport. I listened to the Expo audio. I applaud the business success of entrepreneurs, including TGJB. However, if you've read Ragozins' book, or listened to the tapes, you already know Friedman clearly acknowledges his humble beginnings in this business as a student of Len Ragozin. That whole piece is glaringly absent over here. The absence of that humility, honesty and integrity is the substance of my objections here, and many of my posts, and predisposes me to doubt TGJB and favor Chris in wondering about what happened with Derby1592.

I don't know if this will stay up or not. But, if it does, I ask that you, as readers, please make your best objective attempt to glean the essence of what I am saying here, then see if TGJB responds in a way which shows that he acknowledges an understanding of what I have said(I don't expect any agreement from him, just enough of a response to show the capacity for acknowledgement of anothers' point of view).