My line: \"Weight will cost more lengths at longer distances, but a length is more important at 5f than at 10f.\"
Your reply, in part: \"This is purest bunk. There\'s no such thing as a more important length.\"
Poor HP, who has been so peaceable hitherto. Would you rather break one length slow in a hundred-yard dash or in a marathon? A point is worth about one length at five furlongs and about two lengths at 10 furlongs. Please read the TG introduction. Then look at a beaten-lengths chart. Then, as someone on the Derby List once said, get some milk and cookies before we move on to the alphabet.
Not since you refused to admit that Kelli Williams is the most beautiful woman on earth have you written anything so silly. Hegel would be disappointed in you. Enjoy your trip.
Would you rather break one length slow in a hundred-yard dash or in a marathon?
I thought we were talking about weight. What does this have to do with carrying weight? The effect of weight over distance, which is what we were talking about, has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with this point. Your original comment,
: \"Weight will cost more lengths at longer distances, but a length is more important at 5f than at 10f.\"
is senseless because you could say \"a length is more important at 5f than at 10f\" REGARDLESS of weight, no? Weight is an independent factor and treated as such, el brain-o.
But I guess we\'re going to skip over weight now and move onto your penetrating analysis of what constitutes this \'more important\' length.
Maybe TG should add a notation to op (off poorly) so it looks like this in sprint races - opSLWMIAA (meaning the horse was off poorly and the Sprinting Length Was More Important According to Alydar).
As for your patronizing admonition to read the intro and look at a beaten length chart, I\'ll just wave this off. I will point out, however, that you argue like a woman. You start talking about something, and really discussing it (weight), and then you just veer off into new territory (more important lengths) when you run out of gas. HP
Okay, boys. Both of you are good guys, and the problem was that neither of you made your point completely clearly- you both understand the weight/lengths thing. Now go out to the racetrack and play nice. Incidentally, HP, once you indicatetd I knew you I looked up who you were, and I never would have guessed. Yes, you would rather talk than listen.
Jerry, mon chapeau, he said my comments on weight were wrong. This is what I said.
Weight - a relatively tiny component assuming we are talking about a relatively tiny difference in weight. If two horses were likely to run 3\'s and one is carrying ten pounds less I\'m probably going with that one (ground loss?), and in this example, it\'s a major component. Common sense would dictate the longer the race, the more the weight matters.
First off, this is CLEAR. Any clearer and you could walk through it. Second, this is absolutely in line with TG methodology and related dogma. Third, he said it was wrong!
If this is wrong, how can you say he understands the weight/lengths thing? Then he went off on his dizzy tangent about the relative importance of lengths at different distances (a completely separate issue).
I know you like the guy. I like him too. Even though it takes him fourteen thousand words to say \'maybe\'. If he talks like he writes he\'s got me out-yakked by ten freakin miles.
Don\'t forget my overall mastery of these frequently debated concepts, mon plume de derriere. HP
Hi HP. You forgot to give me some credit for calling \"Drops of Jupiter\" song of the year.
\"Maybe TG should add a notation to op (off poorly)...the horse was off slowly and the Sprinting Length was more important according to Alydar.\"
Maybe you, HP, should read the words that are on top of the ROTW every week: \"Each path wide is worth about one length...at TODAY\'S DISTANCE that equals...of a TG point.\" It varies according to distance, and off poorly would too. You are making a fool out of yourself, and I am thoroughly tired of your shi#.
\"If two horses were likely to run 3s..Common sense would dictate the longer the race, the more weight matters.\"
No. Common sense would dictate that you look at the TG introduction page. 5 pounds = one point, REGARDLESS of distance. That is the methodology (I hate that word) you said you were in line with. Giving extra credit for lighter weight at longer distances is double counting because weight/distance is in the formula already. 5 pounds = one point. Forget the distance. Just look at the weights and adjust. And if you want a TG-Rags beaten-lengths chart, let me know. I picked up a really good one several months ago. None of that \"approximately\" crap.
\"You argue like a woman.\"
Thank you. I had a lot of practice. My ex-girlfriend makes Camille Paglia sound like Chrissy of \"Three\'s Company.\"
\"There is no such thing as a \'more important length\'.\"
See above. And quit wrapping those skinny quotation marks around words I didn\'t write. I wrote: \"A length is more important...\"
\"I do not consider [weight] differences of less than five pounds.\"
Yeah. That fifth pound does all the work. Fuc# the first four. I can see you\'ve given this a lot of thought, HP.
\"I know you like the guy. I do too.\"
No, HP. You don\'t like me. That has been quite obvious for some time, and the reason for it is equally obvious.
I don\'t want to start a war of quotes, especially with the threat of Nietzsche hanging in the air, but the turn this debate has taken brings to mind the final remarks of the Duke of Mallberry, one of my ancestors who, while not a cowboy poet, did know Nostradamus & supposedly came over on the boat with the great-great grandfather of the dopester who uses the nom de guerre Hank the Angry Dwarf, to wit: \"From a scientific standpoint, it is indisputable that if someone spits in the ocean, all things being equal, the water level must rise. In the real world, of course, all things are never equal, whether the subject is how fast a particular horse can or will run, or whether someone has the discipline to stick to the issues and make his or her best argument without resorting to personal attacks. Some day, many yrs in the future, one of my progeny will attempt to engage in a series of cyberdebates with one who calls himself Aly.....\" Sadly, he never lived to finish that sentence.
Aly, you were the one who, a short time ago, called HP a bright guy who would do the right thing & solicited his opinion. I went along because his \"resolution\" of the trainer info debate seemed like evidence that he was operating in the real world, where rigid adherence to any orthodoxy can be an expensive proposition indeed, & because all debates must end sometime. When all is said & done, HP got it right on both issues & what he said should have been the last word. To react this way after you requested his view is unseemly.
There is not going to be any miracle of time & space which allows you to make a comeback in this debate, but even after all you\'ve said I\'m hopeful that there will be future debates which will \"get things rocking\" & perhaps allow all of us to learn a thing or 2. In order for that to happen, you\'re going to have to come to grips with the fact that we aren\'t dealing with the unsolvable mysteries of the universe & none of this is or should be personal. You\'re also going to have to figure out some way to extricate your teeth from HP\'s ankle.
\"Maybe TG should add a notation to op (off poorly)...the horse was off slowly and the Sprinting Length was more important according to Alydar.\"
Maybe you, HP, should read the words that are on top of the ROTW every week: \"Each path wide is worth about one length...at TODAY\'S DISTANCE that equals...of a TG point.\" It varies according to distance, and off poorly would too.
What varies according to distance? I don\'t get it.
\"If two horses were likely to run 3s..Common sense would dictate the longer the race, the more weight matters.\"
No. Common sense would dictate that you look at the TG introduction page. 5 pounds = one point, REGARDLESS of distance. That is the methodology (I hate that word) you said you were in line with. Giving extra credit for lighter weight at longer distances is double counting because weight/distance is in the formula already. 5 pounds = one point. Forget the distance. Just look at the weights and adjust. And if you want a TG-Rags beaten-lengths chart, let me know. I picked up a really good one several months ago. None of that \"approximately\" crap.
I said common sense. Aly baby, how about this. Carry 125 pounds on your back for a block. Then carry it on your back for two blocks. Let me know how it goes. I don\'t think I\'m the only one making a fool of myself!
If I carry 115 pounds and race you one block, the 10 pound impost you carry will affect you a certain amount (assuming all else is absolutely equal). At two blocks it will affect you more (YOUR \'BREAK\' NOTWITHSTANDING (Holy cow! - you can break like the wind for all the difference it makes in this argument!)), and all other things being equal, it\'s going to help me more the longer we go. I didn\'t need the TG intro chart to figure this out. You can think about this when you handicap or not. It\'s all you man! Freedom!
The 5 pounds/1 point formula applies when comparing numbers of two horses. Like if two horses can run 3\'s, and one horse is carrying ten pounds more, that horse would have to run a 1 (assuming all else is equal) to win. I get it fine without the \'intro\' and my point(s) stand.
And yes, the first 4 pounds don\'t matter. It\'s the fifth one that breaks \'em. I\'ve talked to horses about this and I KNOW.
I like you fine, but you threw in that thing about the weight (I was wrong!) and I didn\'t like it. You\'re at least as wrong as me, given the points above. Where I come from, your best friends always do the best job of insulting you.
Mall\'s no soup thing was funny. HP
As Sally Fields might say: Does that last post mean you like me too HP? Really like me? If you want funny, think Sean Connery trying to be hip in that movie trailer when he exclaims: \"You the man,now,DOG!\"
I\'m going to leave it you to figure out how to send me the chart, as Derby1592 recently pted out that my email address has been \"suppressed.\" Email addresses appear to be just one more example in the long list of oppressed groups whose rights don\'t mean a thing to the \"Man.\"
While I applaud your call to \"Freedom\" HP, the fact that you believe that you have talked to horses & seem to be using CAPS LOCK MODE more often has me a little concerned. At this pt I\'m asking you, Alydar & everyone else if we can\'t please end this debate & quit beating what is now a very dead horse?
Hey, I\'m down with that, bro. Or should I say \'dog\'? I like everybody and everybody likes me!
The alternative could be that Aly and I race down streets of varying distance carrying weights on our backs (maybe we could carry real jockeys - I have the strength of ten men!). JB can have the film rights.
You\'re probably jealous of me. He said he was \'thoroughly tired of my shi#.\' I wore him out! You had a whole 15 point battle with him and he was still ready for more from you. HP
HP wrote:
>
> Hey, I\'m down with that, bro. Or should I say \'dog\'? I like
> everybody and everybody likes me!
>
> The alternative could be that Aly and I race down streets of
> varying distance carrying weights on our backs (maybe we
> could carry real jockeys - I have the strength of ten men!).
> JB can have the film rights.
>
> You\'re probably jealous of me. He said he was \'thoroughly
> tired of my shi#.\' I wore him out! You had a whole 15 point
> battle with him and he was still ready for more from you. HP
TG--Okay, I said I would stay out of this as long as possible, and it was a good one.
1-5 pounds = 1 point at all distances.
1 point = about 1 length at 5f, 2 lengths at 10f, WHETHER IT IS A POINT OF ABILITY OR A POINT OF WEIGHT.
2-I agree that characterizations of people and their behavior is best left to be aimed at those bad faith posters with agendas who truly deserve them.
Chucles, Plever, those who slander business competitors, and a few fringe lunatic Ragzoin customers come to mind. Those who simply disagree with us don\'t. (Can\'t appear to be playing favorites.)
3-I hated Finding Forrester.
4.-Speaking of girlfriends, mine is about to leave for Iraq to research a book on the Kurds.
HP wrote: \"What varies according to distance? I don\'t get it.\"
A lost length, due to ground loss, off poorly, weight carried, etc., is more important the shorter the race. This is because the time (about a fifth of a second) the nine feet or so of trouble or added weight adds to the horse\'s final time is more important the shorter the race. And this, in turn, is because a fifth of a second is a bigger percentage of the, say, 57 seconds it takes to run 5f than it is of the, say, 120 seconds it takes to run 10f.
According to the chart in front of me, this is the value--in points--of a length at several different distances:
.96 at 5f, .80 at 6f, .60 at one mile, .48 at a mile and one quarter.
The slide reflects the increased importance of a length (or an inch, or 20 lengths) at shorter distances.
You also wrote: \"You\'re at least as wrong as me, given the points above.\"
That is monumentally false, but it is well said, Pangloss. Now you must cultivate your garden.
1 point = about 1 length at 5f, 2 lengths at 10f, WHETHER IT IS A POINT OF ABILITY OR A POINT OF WEIGHT.
So the 5 pound difference in weight is worth MORE at a longer distance. That chart is fascinating, but I guess you weren\'t happy with this as the last word. My lawn looks like CRAP! HP
*** You guys are driving me nuts .
A length and a fifth of a second are WORTH MORE at shorter distances , but they are NOT weight . You are comparing apples and oranges here . According to TG 5LBS = 1 point AT ALL DISTANCES - PERIOD , END OF DISCUSSION . Beaten lengths are irrelevant to weight carried . I assume that the reason this is taken as gospel is due to the fact that at shorter distances the energy required to attain maximum velocity from a standing start is as significant to a horse as carrying weight for additional furlongs , but the additional furlongs are run by a horse already in motion , therefore the additional distance travelled is not a significant factor in measuring effort based upon weight carried.
This is an assumption , as i am not an engineer .
The following is a direct quote from JB re his post on figure making methodology . \"We also know that 5 pounds = 1 point , which both Ragozin and TG use , while a good estimate is not accurate . But since we can\'t get the body weights of the individual horses , it will have to do .\"
Not exactly a ringing endorsement for a nit picking discussion .
Now you guys can shake hands , and quit the pissing match . bj
Your absence was driving me nuts, bj.
What I was doing makes sense if you read this entire string, including the part that I inadvertently detached. This is the sentence of mine that inspired HP to repay 10 months of compliments with a bunch of idiotic insults:
\"Weight will cost more lengths at longer distances, but a length is more important at 5f than it is at 10f.\"
This sentence is perfectly true, but HP didn\'t understand it. I then said the same thing in different words: \"Five pounds = one point, regardless of distance. A point is worth about one length at 5f and two lengths at 10f.\" HP didn\'t understand that, either, but when JB wrote the same words, HP made the most preposterous declaration of victory in the modern era.
I got a little tired of HP\'s refrigerator-on-the-back garbage because the sentence that started this said the same thing: \"Weight will cost more lengths at longer distances...\"
HP devoted several insults to my \"A length is more important at shorter distances\" line. THAT is why I brought up the beaten-lengths chart. Looking at one is the easiest way to understand the concept. I could have shown the same thing with a speed chart, but I don\'t have a TG speed chart, and I didn\'t want to bring Beyer into this.
Beaten-lengths are relevant to weight carried in the sense that if all else is equal, five extra pounds will produce a one-length loss at five furlongs and a two-length loss at 10f, this despite five pounds equaling one point at all distances. This point was central to HP\'s confusion, and my discussion of beaten lengths was an attempt to end it.
Welcome back.
JB: Please give me a list of every word of mine that you disagree with. Don\'t leave anything out. I feel like arguing with you now.
Please tell your girlfriend that I have encyclopedic knowledge of all things Kurdish. If that\'s not good enough, go ahead and tell her that I am Kurdish. I am itching to be interviewed.
Hi BJ. You will notice that Alydar chose not to repond to what you said (\"Beaten lengths is irrelevant to weight carried\" - bless your heart), and instead \'responded\' by rehashing his points and argument with me. So it doesn\'t really matter what you said, Aly\'s just going to repeat himself again.
Alydar is having an argument with Mall. I posted. Alydar responds and say I am \'wrong\' about weight (just a throwaway line). I respond and he says I am insulting him. And now I am \'confused\'. Of course characterizing someone as \'wrong\' or \'confused\' is NOT insulting. Even now, in response to YOUR email, he remains patronizing despite the fact that several folks (including you) have pointed out the central flaws in his argument. And he repeats it again.
Given your post (especially the \'mixing apples and oranges\' - that is EXACTLY what Aly was/is doing) and JB\'s post I can now bail out on this. Especially since there is no point in talking to a guy who is going to repeat himself, regardless of any points made, apparently by ANYONE, and then say he is offended in the bargain. This isn\'t an exchange of ideas, it\'s a one-way street.
A mark of intelligence is that you can disagree with someone and it doesn\'t affect whether you \'like\' them or not. HP
I like bj very much. His explanation of why he thinks five pounds = one point shows that he doesn\'t understand either. Read his stuff about \"the energy required...\"
The points-time-distance relationship is at the heart of this.
I responded to his point in my last paragraph.
I lost all respect for you, HP, after the Chuckles-AIDS stuff.
The rest of your post here is dishonest and stupid. Yes. I am insulting you.
I will not re-hash the argument. You did NOT respond to his point in the last paragraph. What you were doing (as opposed to responding) was trying to co-opt his argument, with your arm around his shoulder, while telling everyone how much you like him.
A \'response\' would have been - \"bj, you don\'t get it\" (that\'s what you\'re saying now, right? - why didn\'t you say this before?). I\'m glad you like him, and I\'m sure he is thrilled even if he doesn\'t understand you. Under these circumstances and given your method of discourse (\"welcome back bj, you don\'t get it, but I missed you\"), I can live with you calling me dishonest, stupid or anything else.
As for the Chuckles-AIDS thing, I don\'t know exactly what you are talking about, but since this must pre-date this string, if you lost all respect for me back then, I\'m wondering why you didn\'t mention that when you mentioned my name in the first place when you were going at it with Mall. You\'re a good one to talk about honesty pal. And your perspective is a hoot.
Good luck with the \'points-time-distance relationship\' thing. Maybe JB will give you a separate space on the website for your theories - Aly\'s Corner. This way we can clear the board of this rubbish once and for all. HP
You know, I actually like all three of you guys (Alydar, BJ, & HP) because aside from
writing well, when it comes to handicapping,
I feel I can learn from you. I don\'t post
much here anymore for numerous reasons,
but a big part of it is just what this thread
shows. Degrading or be-rating someone because they don\'t understand is different from doing the same to a blow-hard who can\'t
walk the walk. You three guys obviously can
walk the talk so ease up a bit.
I am of the opinion that weight is NOT
a factor at races shorter than 7f and
that only imposts of 121 or better are worth
concerning ourselves with in 7f races.
As the distance increases weight is more meaningful and is even more dramatic
on a wet track (horses covered with mud
are in effect carrying more weight). This
last point isn\'t much of an issue with speed types because they won\'t be hit with
mud until they are through, if at all.
Nunzio
HP: bj was wrong. I was confused by his post at first because he put his sixth sentence in the wrong place. It should have been his fifth sentence. He thinks 5 pounds = one point at all distances, short and long, because the start of the race, when weight must be lugged from a standing start, takes a bigger chunk out of short races than out of long races.
In truth, 5 pounds = one point at all distances, short and long, because 10 furlongs is twice as long as five furlongs and a point is two lengths at 10f and one length at 5f.
I do like bj. I have been saying that for a year. There are two reasons I say it: 1: It is true. 2: I have a feeling, which could VERY WELL BE WRONG, that it means a little something to him when I say it.
I have not been honest with you. You are right about that. I appreciated that you defended Noam Chomsky, and I liked some other stuff that you did a long time ago. But I am trying to be honest now.
*** I\'m not going to add any further comment to the great weight debate . It\'s really not that important anyway - per every 5lb spread add or deduct a point , i think i get it .
As for you two guys HP and Alydar , i think it is a shame that after all the idiots
we have exposed and ridiculed on this board - it has come to this . I\'ve read most of posts and i certainly have respect for both of you . This conduct is not representative of what you guys are about .bj
Don\'t forget about the \"HP 5 Pound Minimum Theory.\"
.20 + .20 + .20 + .20 = 0
He should oversee the exchequer.
OK. I\'ll stop now, bj. But I sure hope JB responds to my other post.
Okay, bj was wrong and his presentation baffled you. You like him and think he puts some premium on what you say. And you are \'trying\' to be honest with me now.
Since being honest is an effort for you, I wish you luck with this. The \'first four pounds\' thing was a joke (which most people would get based on me saying I talked to horses about it).
I\'m going to stop monopolizing space on the board, as this topic (including the revelations about your character) is exhausted.
It figures you have to beseech your big bro JB to get involved. I met plenty of guys like you in the schoolyard who fell back on this kind of thing when they were out of gas. How candy-assed can you get?
As for the \'psychological\' implications, I don\'t think I called Aly names even ONCE (before now). HP
I\'m not going to leave it on that note.
HP wrote: \"Okay, bj was wrong and his presentation baffled you.\"
Yes. He was wrong about why five pounds = one point at all distances, and your failure to see this speaks volumes.
\"The first four pounds thing was a joke (which most people would get based on me saying I talked to horses about it).\"
See your 2-27 post. It is on a different string. You were NOT joking. You went into \"I was joking\" mode when you were called on it. By the way, your 2-27 post was the one in which you said you wouldn\'t be able to discuss this subject for a few days. It was also the one that began the vitriol: bunk, horrible sentence, etc.
\"Since being honest is an effort for you...\"
Here is how I was dishonest with you: I continued to be nice to you even though you had been circling overhead like a carrion bird, waiting for a \"mistake\" that you could pounce on. I knew exactly what you were doing, and I was trying to prevent it by being extra nice to you. But it didn\'t work. This fight was going to happen at some point. Your mistake was choosing a subject you know nothing about.
\"It figures you have to beseech your big bro JB to get involved.\" \"How candy-assed can you get?\"
Yeah. What does he know about this subject?
For the historical record - this is what started the \'vitriol\'
HP: Hegel stays, and look for Nietzsche to get a bigger role. If you don\'t like it, don\'t read it. AND YOUR COMMENTS ABOUT WEIGHT ARE WRONG (yes, that is my CAPS LOCK added). Weight will cost more lengths at longer distances, but a length is more important at 5f than it is at 10f. (Can\'t appear to be playing favorites, you know.)
So there\'s no \'being extra nice\' or anything else. I\'m wrong! In my response, I said I do not consider weight differences of less than 5 pounds (I don\'t!), and then later on I made a joke about it. A devastating indictment you serve up there Aly.
I apologize to other posters for taking up the space (again), but as you can see by Aly\'s characterization of this whole thing -
(\"I knew exactly what you were doing...\") he has gone off the deep end.
As for JB,
ALY - \"Weight will cost more lengths at longer distances, but a length is more important at 5f than it is at 10f.\"
JB - \"1 point = about 1 length at 5f, 2 lengths at 10f, WHETHER IT IS A POINT OF ABILITY OR A POINT OF WEIGHT.\"
It\'s not everyone who can take a simple and useful idea like this and turn it into a lot of speculative crap, so take a bow.
I don\'t need any further clarification on this from Jerry, and I would be (mildly) shocked if he posted anything on your \'more important length\' ideas. Jerry\'s a busy man, and there aren\'t enough hours in a day to address your goulash (though I\'ve tried). He certainly hasn\'t said anything to support your ideas so far, but that doesn\'t mean you won\'t try to twist something around to suit your argument.
Your gyrations with bj\'s emails are hilarious (there was nothing in them to support your point of view either). You can have the last word (and I\'m sure you will!). Good luck with your space/time/distance/important-length mishegas. You might be better off sticking with your psedo-intellectual postings that have nothing to do with racing. HP
Will both of you guys please knock it off?
Hey Jerry, nothing from nothing, but I\'ve been trying to knock it off for days.
\"The rest of your post here is dishonest and stupid. Yes. I am insulting you.\" -- Alydar
You could have said something then, but you chose not to. I guess I should let this pass, huh? I\'m sure if someone said this to you, you would take the high road. I agree with something an earlier poster raised - he would never say something like this to my face. He is a creature of the email era. The guy\'s a jackass and you have stuck up for him more than once. And given the fact that you have stuck up for him before, me ripping him (with ample provocation) rates equal time.
If you want to play referee, get it right. You have my word I will not respond to him anymore regardless of what he says. HP
HP: You ordered me to stop talking about Hegel and to stop making intellectual references. What you quoted was my reply to your order, which you gave right after I praised you.
JB\'s quote: \"A point = about one length at 5f and two lengths at 10f.\" In other words, weight costs more lengths at longer distances, which is what I had written: \"Weight will cost more lengths at longer distances.\"
The rest of JB\'s quote: \"WHETHER IT IS A POINT OF WEIGHT OR A POINT OF ABILITY.\" In other words, ignoring four pounds of weight, as you suggest doing, is the same thing as ignoring three quarters of a point of ability (actually .80), which equals about a length and one half at a mile and one quarter.
JB: You could have stopped this any time you wanted to. You chose to stop it now.
HP: 1: Your insults PRECEDED mine. 2: Tough guy rhetoric from 3OOO miles away is unbecoming.
For the record, I was in Florida for 3 days- I tried to stop it before I left.
Every disagreement does not rate nuclear response. The importance of being right varies in proportion with the importance of the subject, fellas.
Jerry, If you go back (2/26 \"the last word\") you will see the \'insults\' Aly is referring to were simply good-natured jibes which I directed at Aly and Mall (who were locked in a tense battle). The title alone would indicate that there was some humor involved, unless you are as married to your opinions as Aly is. I certainly didn\'t say anything on the level of him being \'wrong\' about anything. If telling him to drop Hegel is insulting perhaps his sensibilities are too delicate for this forum. There\'s no tough guy rhetoric either; I\'m only pointing out that he wouldn\'t call me wrong, dishonest or stupid to my face.
Mall, who I called patronizing, got it in the spirit in which it was intended and joked back in return. Aly, who brought me into this in the first place, did not. I shouldn\'t have been drawn in in the first place, and I\'ll be careful before taking the bait from now on.
As for the importance of the subject(s), I didn\'t think they were that important either until Aly proceeded to lay on level after level of his own nonsense on top of perfectly simple and useful ideas.
I\'m going back to work. Now I blame YOU for going to Florida, Mr. Self Indulgent. HP
OK, JB see what happens when you go on vac. No more vac. for three yrs until graph racing has closed!!!!!TGJB wrote:
>
> For the record, I was in Florida for 3 days- I tried to stop
> it before I left.
> Every disagreement does not rate nuclear response. The
> importance of being right varies in proportion with the
> importance of the subject, fellas.
>
>