No, I'm not Alydar. The only Alydar I know is when I was a kid my dad took me to see those triple crown races, and I was always rooting for Alydar -- the start of a life long obession! I could give you my full name if you need it.

First of all, thanks for such a detailed response. I appreciate the time you took to write that. One thing I've always found about thorograph folks is that you all are EXTREMELY generous in so many ways.

On point 1: Every super should be as professional and dilligent as Porcelli. The track Biases in So. Cal. regularly give me fits though that's the main circuit I play --they could take a lesson from Porcelli. I'm not saying their job is easy b/c they have their own unique problems to deal with, but the 2003 Del Mar season was an absolute nightmare regarding the ARBITRARY changes in the track condition, and anyone who played it seriously knows that. So I'm in total agreement with you on your main point.

On point 2: I'm concerned only with Southern California racing, and I again agree with you -- my formula that I've come up with after many years of tweaking is designed with Hollywood, Del Mar, and Santa Anita in mind & I know it doesn't work combining supposedly similar races from different tracks. Interestingly, my numbers with maiden races are highly accurate -- those and European races are my specialties. On many days, I'll use my figs. in maiden races and use t-graphs for the other races on the card, and I've hit many pick sixes that way. I'm smart enough to know where I'm good and where I need help.

On point 3: Well, of course, you guys do this for a living. For Del Mar I watch every race, but during the rest of the year, I'm lucky to go two or three times a week, and there's no substitute for one's own perception. Even in the examples you mention, the human element always comes into play. What if the guy you've got observing water trucks or whatever has a few too many beers one afternoon or has to go to bathroom and the truck goes by when he's inside -- I'm not trying to be funny but I'm always surprised that people can watch the same race or the same day's racing and come up with so many different conclusions. Again, this isn't a knock but t-g's and rags, for example, always discriminate against horses who run on the rail and inflate figs for horses that run wide -- well in So. Cal. the rail is more than likely never the place to be -- there are far more biases than you guys seem to notice -- maybe there'll be an X next to a horse a couple times a meet, but I could tell you many many more days than that when the rail is not the place to be --I factor biases into my variants -- I'm not aware that anyone else does that. As far as all those other factors, like wind for example, are you out there measuring the wind for that minute or so the race is going off or are you relying on weather forcasts or some guy in the grandstand saying it was really windy against runners in the backstretch -- I think you are trying to make it more scientific than it actually is. I think I have as much information as anyone.

on point 4: well, I guess I would love to know how you use past figure histories because I don't -- certainly I will wind up questioning a number or not even making a number for a race or two here and there if the number I come up with seems very unlikely given the past history (you all can't really do that - I suppose people would go crazy, but I'm not selling these to anyone), that I understand, but all I go by is the data for each race, and I view each race as unique with a thousand or more variables that will never be repeated.