Sheets v. Thorograph v. "the Xtras"
 

My friend loves the Sheets, heard good things about Thorograph and seems the Xtras seem to be a newer version of the other two... My question is does anyone have a preference or any recommendations on which ones might be better for certain meets, surfaces, distances, etc?

Before you decide to utilize the "XTRA"s', request a personalized photo of the person creating the product and then make your decision.

The preference in these quarters is for Jerry Brown's Thoro-Graph product(s)... While I have to admit straight out that I have a business relationship with T-G, I also can say I began using the figs after Jerry gave out the 1995 Derby trifecta in an analysis piece in DRF. His confirmation that day of my interest in Thunder Gulch, Tejano Run and Timber Country as the key to plays helped me earn $3,800 on about $100 worth of wagers. I was hooked after that.

Thoro-Graph's trainer and sire profiles and pattern stats are value added elements to the analysis over and above the raw performance figure data that I find invaluable. I will say that I find the dirt figs are generally more useful than the grass figures... (However, I did catch an enormous turf stake exacta in the Four Star Dave a few years ago when Tubrok (20-1) looked great on T-G as a use under Dr. Kashnikow, and I had the $400+ exacta 5x as a result.)

As to the other premium fig products, I haven't looked at Xtras and I don't care for Ragozin.

SB

More important than any numbers you are going to get from any service is watching the horses run yourself, knowing the induvidual horse. I use one particular fellow in regards to numbers, and I couple that with what I know to claim a lot of very good horses. This guys figures are second to none, but they arent availible to the public. If you are using a public number system I would hold the ragz in much higher regard than the others.

The goal here is to find winning plays. None of the sheets say bet this horse, or don't bet this horse. They simply give you some additional data to use in "your" analysis of the race. I would suggest giving each product a proper scientific evaluation. Decide on a length of time you will use them and an amount you will use to wager in that period. In the end, hopefully, you will have found which of the products is most helpful for your handicapping and wagering style. Good luck!

I've toyed with all of them, more with T-Graph than the others simply because they allow you to look at a "race of the week" and often have similar promotions to get you educated on their product without having to pay retail prices during trial and error.

X-tras will send you previous days sheets to let you learn that way, which is a very good P.R. move on their part to introduce you. They use similar sheet formats and incorporate pace figures, while TG and Rags dismiss pace as an important factor in most instances.

At the end of the day, I think all figures have their positives and their negatives, and really don't think any figure is significantly better than another. "Sheets" style figures are better for identifying patterns and more importantly, they don't drive prices down like Beyer's do. Nothing wrong with Beyers if you understand how they are created, except they are so mainstream that top figure horses get hit hard at the windows. I actually prefer objective figures to subjective figures that sheets provide. That way I can make my own judgements without somebody trying to quantify the effect of going wide or carrying a few extra lbs.

The critical thing with any of them is learn what you are looking at and how best to use them. I'm amazed at how many people use Beyers (or other) as their primary handicapping tool and have no idea how they are calculated.

Do you have a link to their website?

I had the unique opportunity to grade TG vs Rag for about 14 days of usage for a study I was helping with. This being said, my opinions below

1) TG are 'easier' to read, not necessarily the pattern but the layout of the actual sheet

2) TG is more scientific with there number as they are extremely meticulous with their data

3) I am actually the opposite of Kasept as I find the turf numbers to be more consistent then the dirt numbers, as far as how horses were running. This could easily be a matter of myself being more comfortable with turf horses as they run more consistent numbers. Dirt horses tend to be spotty regarding efforts.(example, I have seen turf horses run the same number like 10 races in a row)

4) There is no RIGHT way to read a sheet, just like there is no right way to read the form, it is all how your brain processes data and things that catch your eye

5) I feel that TG provides a better opportunity to contining learning their product. Jerry Brown is CONSISTENTLY on his message board talking about things, spewing tons of information that only adds to the learning curve. While I will not dispute that Freidman is an OUTSTANDING handicapper, probably the best in the US, but he tends to take this better then you approach when talking, at least from my experience

6) Rag's website is absolutely horrible, you would think when charging $35 a track that they could put 10k into bettering the website(I feel this is important because the days of the form and going to the track are becoming few and far between for most people)

You have to take all the info you an gather and decied where and what to bet. Different systems will take the same race ad come up with diffferent contenders. They will take a previous race and upgrade a performance because of trouble or a bad trip while others will interprit as the lack of talent caused the troubles or bad trip. All of these services dont give you a winner. They give you info. You need to learn to use it. The best and most costly thing is the knots you get on your head with mistakes you make.

Thanks! :)

www.thorograph.com
www.equiform.com
www.thesheets.com

Triple thanks! :)

Thanks...
 

I appreciate all of your insight. From this end, I don't think the T-G materials are worth much... I have had decent luck with "the Xtras" (despite not asking for a picture) and read Len Ragozin's book once a year whether I need to or not (a must read, if you can find it). I find the pace numbers very helpful on the Xtras and have a continuing appreciation for what "the Lens" do (that being said got killed on In The Gold at the B/C last year on their advice). I realize you are all very good handicappers, but take Mr. Byk's advice and read Betting Thoroughbreds by Steve Davidowitz's book; absolutely great...

Well, today the T-G materials helped me lay out the key horses for winning plays in all 6 of the races at BEL that I capped...

Three 'straight' exactas.. and 2 more box exactas..

Two tri keys.. Two tri boxes..

One 'straight' tri..

And the 17-1 "Longshot Alert" winner in the one race where I missed the exotic candidates..

Bottom line is that any and all of the premium products are "worth something" if the info is applied in a manner where if the horses run for you, you score...

And yes, Davidowitz' book continues to be the best single tome for advancing knowledge and formulating a successful personal wagering approach.

Well then, I don't understand your initial post when you started this thread:

Did you gain all that knowledge in between 9/12, when you first posted, and 9/13, when you suddenly had opinions on all 3?

Something's screwy.

--Dunbar

Dunbar I must admit that post made me Chuckle. :D

I honestly thought Len's book was the worst of the 20 or so handicapping books I've read in the last several years. Absolutely no insight into his figure methodology, ala Beyer's "Picking Winners." Basically a 200 page commercial for Sheets, his massive ego, and a bio of his life as a Socialist.