Jerry,

I thought that I implied an answer to your questions in my previous post but here are the direct answers:

You wrote:

1- If the difference is not terribly significant, then that would be something of an aha to whom? Aha meaning what? What difference qualifies as "terribly significant".

Per my last post, this is a subjective measurement, but, let's say that Ragozin and Thorograph lines were actually of similar 'smoothness' e.g., std. dev. within 10% of each other. I think that would have qualified as an 'Aha,' in that there was less difference between the two products than I believe most people would have thought. I can't prove this but I bet that if you asked people to take a stab at quantifying how much smoother TG lines are than Ragozin, most would say something significantly more than 10%.

2- If the difference IS terribly significant (as hopefully defined by you in advance), is that also an aha?

It might be, but if the prevailing view is that there is a big difference in std. dev. then the 'Aha' would muted.

One last disclaimer before I toss the Sheets I printed out to do this study -- the point was never to make one product look good or bad. It was just to synthesize some of the differences in the results that the two methodologies produce, not from a betting results or numbers accuracy perspective.

I will be on betting hiatus for awhile, but look forward to cherry picking some posts that catch my fancy.