Mall, you raise a very interesting issue in your last post, and especially with the line, "The biggest difference is that the sheet players are using figs & fig handicapping concepts instead of the 130 factors of some of the HK teams." The issue is one also raised by Mark Cramer (in my opinion, one of the most brilliant handicapping authors out there) in one of his books (I forget which one): is it better to focus on a few (or even a single) factor that has what Cramer calls "wager value" (e.g., TG fig patters) or factor every piece of information relevant (maybe even more than 130 factors) to the race outcome into the handicapping decision? To paraphrase Cramer, "If you find a profitable angle, don't mess up a good thing with 'handicapping'. As the number of factors that go into a handicapping decision increase, the more that decision will converge with the betting public's decision". Interesting ideas (I think).