Okay, Let's See

[TGJB]

Just to make it clear, the recent outbreak was instigated by Jake’s revisionist attempt to make me, my company, and lawyer (and friend) look sleazy. Plever tried the same thing a few months ago, and I’m not going to turn the other cheek.

The backstory, briefly: About three or four years ago, I informed Friedman, face to face, that his employees, and specifically Charlie Nebel (Jim’s mentor in Florida), were lying about us regularly. He said he certainly believed Charlie was lying about me, because Charlie hated me. When I asked if he was going to do something about it, he said no, he didn’t really care. Question to Phil Roland--what would your reaction be to that?

In any event, we went out and hired a private detective who taped  Ragozin employees, catching them lying about us. Problem was, when I discussed the situation with Joe Friedberg (one of the top attorneys in the Midwest) he explained the facts of life: To win a lawsuit I would have to prove actual damages on a case by case basis (very difficult), and that Ragozin or Friedman had knowledge it was going on. So I just sat on it for a while, grinding my teeth.

Then, at Gulfstream, a little more than a year ago, the lying and assorted other crap increased, and we got calls about it from customers both there and in Maryland. Friedberg and I decided that at the very least we could call Ragozin on this stuff in public, so in the future he wouldn’t be able to claim he didn’t know, and so that the small percentage of sheet players who come online would know what’s going on. So we sent him a letter, along with a couple of the transcripts, and published the letter on this site.

To this day the Ragozin office has not responded, in this or any other forum.

So, as to the logorrhea of the last 24 hours:

1) On tape we caught both Nebel and Alex Katzoff (who works in Ragozin’s office) telling a potential client(our detective) that we don’t use observers--no ground loss, and no hand times. If you were a potential (or current) client, do you think that might affect your decision as to which data to use? Nebel also said this to a friend of mine who was producing the Triple Crown telecasts for ABC, who called me on the spot. There were also several other lies detailed in the letter: outselling us 10-1, etc.

2) I have stated since Day One on this site that one of my goals was to get the Raggies out from under the rocks and out into the open where I can deal with them, which is why I have encouraged Jim (Jerry Jr.—Jim humor) and Soup to post here. They have come with bad intentions from the jump, as anyone can see—their attitude and comments speak for themselves. Now imagine that going on at tracks in New York, Maryland, Chicago, Florida, California, and New Jersey on a daily basis, where I’m not there to refute it. Since only a tiny percentage of the market gets to hear the truth, do you think the no-trackmen stuff and other lies hurt my sales?

Phil Roland—I think you would have to agree that even knowing nothing else the Ragozin office’s failure to respond to my lawyer’s PUBLIC letter makes it extremely likely they are guilty, so let me see if I understand your position:

a)   Intentionally lying about my business is acceptable.
b)   My calling attention to it and attempting to stop it is unacceptable.

That about right?

3)Re: Knockoff, briefly. There is not a single thing I can think of that Ragozin invented—even the graph was his father’s idea. He assembles a lot of elements that others had already worked with and was the first to market ready to use figures in the U.S. Connie Merjos, who was Ragozin’s NY trackman for 25 years and goes back to Julie Fink and the Speed Boys, almost had a stroke when he read Ragozin’s book claiming credit for everything but the starting gate. I certainly agree that Ragozin’s figures were far better than any that preceded them, and that the graph made them much more useful.

When I was in Ragozin’s office he said repeatedly that anyone could take speed charts or anything else they wanted—“What are they going to do with them?” Meaning, it’s not about charts or formulas—it’s about skill, a tremendous amount of work, and a big overhead to gather data and do other work.

You also might have noticed that we stress the differences between us and Ragozin, not the similarities. Does anyone really think no-one should have competed with or improved on the Model T Ford? Knockoff shmockoff.

4) Quote from Soup’s post yesterday: “If you’ve got a legit point, you shouldn’t have to lie to people.” Couldn’t have said it better myself, and I’m sure he’s just outraged at the lies of the Ragozin employees.

5) If Jim and Soup want to pursue this further, I’ll be glad to re-post my lawyer’s letter, but I suggest you bounce it off Jake first.

Meanwhile, on more important stuff: We’ll be posting the Belmont Day card today, and invite comments. Any thoughts on why Friedman isn’t posting theirs? How about if I told you there was a big split in the variant? Can anyone see where it is?

[HP]

I don\'t know jack about making figures, but it looked to me like something started changing around the 4th or 5th race (on dirt). I\'m sure I\'m wrong. HP

[Brettfavre]

 \"Phil Roland?I think you would have to agree that even knowing nothing else the Ragozin office?s failure to respond to my lawyer?s PUBLIC letter makes it extremely likely they are guilty, \"

Not in this state pal. Maybe in Minnesota.

[Mall]

My guess is that it is the Bel itself. Rags did post the prerace 6/8 sheets & they are still up if anyone wants to do a comparison.

[Friendly]

Geez Jer,

Can you see how your paranoia and grandiosity has consumed your very being?

What do you want me to do? Refute the lies in your letter point by point? Cause I can - I\'ll be your Huckleberry. I\'ll do it for sheets and giggles. I know you won\'t accept my answers any more than I\'ll accept your\'s but at least the truth will be out on this board.

It\'s up to you bud. If you really feel that this stuff is helping your business and you have a lot of time to kill, then we\'ll go through it. Just be prepared to eat a lot of crow in front of your supporters.

[Anonymous User]

Jerry

I thought I knew a little something about Interference with a Business Relationship. I clearly didn\'t. I did not realize a case by case damage claim was gonna be necessary to shut up your detractors. At 25 bucks a shot and the necessity for each of your witnesses to testify, I understand why a lawsuit hasn\'t been filed. Have you or has your attorney considered an injunction? I\'m certain you know what it is, but for the readers, it\'s a tool to prevent someone from doing something that harms others. The violation of the injunction can subject the individuals violating it to jail time and I believe contempt of court fines. The judge has a fair amount of discretion in determining the extent of the fines is my understanding. Though there may be a maximum amount pursuant to statute. Unfortunately, the contempt of court fines won\'t go into your pocket. It will go to the State. Another of the little schisms that make all law a joke. In my opinion all law is unadulterated bullshit. But now I understand you\'re passion and frustrations. On rare occasion I've challenged your figures. I can't say with certainty I was correct. I also cannot say you were invariably correct either. No figures are mathematically precise without tolerances. Hell, GM, Ford and even Boeing know that. Your figures however clearly point out solid to exceptional horses that sometimes slip by other figure makers. As far as the tracks go, hell the damn things are snakes. They undulate unbelievably, and with experience, I am much more in accord with subjective figure production than pure objective figure production.

At any rate, it\'s not fair to take it without trying to level the playing field. It\'s eminently professional to ardently support your position, especially when defamed and chastised and I\'ve understood that's what you do.

I still think this thing is best settled with a fistfight and I\'m getting old but I volunteer to be a "jouster."

lol

Tabi

[PhilR]

to tgjb

I said I was outta here, but you called me out (in a respectful way) so I shall respond

1. My initial post was obviously not well worded....I did not mean to infer that Ragozin was the \"good guy\" and that you are the \"bad guy\"....I realize that there are Rags posters who come over here for no other reason than to stir the pot and vice versa..and his comment a few weeks back questioning your work ethic was outta line..so I am well aware that this goes both ways

2. to answer your question regaring \"how would I respond to a Rags guy lying about my business and then admitting to it.....I would have been pissed off,,,,,

3. to answer your question regarding their ignoring of your letter,,, which implies they are guilty....I\'d say no,,,,definitely possible but not a certainty by any means....

I will attempt to re-word my point....There are those customers who are die hard Rags supporters and there are those who are die hard Thoro users, both positions are extremely clear....I am neither...I use the Rags because I\'ve had success in the past....I\'ve spent many hours at the track with friends who are Thoro users....We usually find that your products show similar lines....When there is a difference, I\'d guess it\'s about 50-50 as to which numbers appear to be correct, so I\'d call it a wash as to whose numbers are more accurate....tho I do envy their ability to download and the additional stats are certainly handy at times..

Very few of us know either yourself or Ragozin...and I\'m sure that if we sat down with him he would be just as critical of you...Not knowing either of you, most of us decide to ignore this on-going debate about morality and variants...His decision to not respond to your issues means one of three things.
1. you\'re right
2. He chooses not to get caught in the debate,,,if innocent he sees no reason to defend himself
3. some of both

I don\'t know and can\'t make that determination without knowing either of you (tho someone did call me a jackass earler without knowing me,,,,and he might be right)..

It appears you have a solid business plan, and clearly your business model is superior to his...His decision to not allow for electronic downloads bothers me in a big way....You have a huge competive advantage in this area, and if I were you, that\'s what I would be focusing on....

but you on the other hand have admittedly decided to focus your marketing on negativity...a stance I have never supported (rather political or business) and because of this I have still not made the switch...tho your statement from the other day that I never will is totally inaccurate..

You\'ve stated that your negative campaign has been successful, so who am I to argue with success....If your current strategy draws in more new clients than it keeps away,,,I wouldn\'t expect you to change


This is my first time posting on either board, and in general I\'ve been treated respectfully...I said I\'d never get involved in one of these long drawn out strings, but I guess I was wrong....

Best of luck

[superfreakicus]

REPOST (broken thread):

---------------------------------------
\"3)Re: Knockoff, briefly. There is not a single thing I can think of that Ragozin invented—even the graph was his father’s idea. He assembles a lot of elements that others had already worked with and was the first to market ready to use figures in the U.S. Connie Merjos, who was Ragozin’s NY trackman for 25 years and goes back to Julie Fink and the Speed Boys, almost had a stroke when he read Ragozin’s book claiming credit for everything but the starting gate. I certainly agree that Ragozin’s figures were far better than any that preceded them, and that the graph made them much more useful.\"


sorry --- I stand corrected.
you completely ripped off ragozin\'s dad.



ps

\"They have come with bad intentions from the jump, as anyone can see—their attitude and comments speak for themselves\"

please link me to the post I\'ve made here calling \'you and your pals assholes...\'.

as I\'ve stated many times before, I have no grudge against you, and I registered here for the HP/DP contest --- that\'s not so nefarious.
if you can\'t understand this, after repeated posts, I\'d guess you\'re either illiterate, or a paranoid moron.

funny how life is --- everybody cries when they think they\'ve been slandered, but does that ever slow them down in slandering others.....?

[superfreakicus]

I SAID, \'NT\'!!

[Alydar in California]

JB should consider reposting the reply he gave to a question I asked in the second half of the year 2000: \"Why did you leave Ragozin?\" The answer was very long, possibly close to a record. It included a discussion of managing horses for the Esposito brothers, an insane winning streak at the windows, jealousy, getting squeezed by Ragozin in a manner that would leave him owning half JB\'s stable, \"walking\" between Genuine Risk and Codex, \"going nuts in the Hamptons,\" learning that breeding stock eats too, and several other things. I couldn\'t find the reply in the archives. The posts from those months seem to have disappeared.

[Anonymous User]

The negative campaign is a very effective and persuasive tool, provided you are honest in pointing out the adversaries' flaw. But some are so proficient at the negative campaign they can imply falsehoods and tell outright lies and become successive with their spin. Clinton comes to mind and I suspect Rags are following close behind.  The \"Can\'t we all just get along crowd\" just wants to hear what pleases them. That crowd has no interest in inequity or impropriety. All they care about is what can you do for me today? But if a combatant turns the other check and tries to just get along in the face of an attack. He\'s gonna lose. Always has always will. Clinton was so good at it when they came after him on Perjury, Obstruction of Justice and Abuse of Office all generated by Usurious Pathological Sexual Behavior he responded by pointing out with the aid of his colleague Larry Flint that most men have sexual motivations. It was a canard or red herring, but many people lacked the acumen to see the real issue was about an accosted female employee and a man's evasion of his conduct in her lawsuit before a Federal Court of Law. The analogy is not perfect, T-Graph appears to be the wronged party and is hitting back on point, but the point is: \"Tell us throwing mud back hurt Clinton.\"

[superfreakicus]

I think what you read must\'ve been the script jerry\'s working on.

[superfreakicus]

Tabitha ---

as evidenced by the Belmont, you are the type of person who will contrive any excuse, concoct any fiction, to put yourself in the \'right camp\', no matter how big a loser you are backing.

according to you, you haven\'t even bought this great product in 7 years --- what\'s your interest in being here?

[Two Bucks]

The REAL issue with Bill Clinton is that the other side couldn\'t beat him at the ballot box, and was insanely jealous of his popularity, that they used the Politics of Personal Destruction to try to bring him down. They spent 50 million dollars to let us know that Billy Boy got a blowjob, and diverted 75 or so FBI agents to harass Monica when they should\'ve been investigating terrorists. And seeing what an awful job the current president is doing it\'s too bad he couldn\'t have run for a third term because he would\'ve won again. Seems like this tactic of \"destroying the other guy\" has infected every aspect of society (apparently including the speed figure industry), where someone can\'t raise themselves without bringing someone else down.

[Anonymous User]

Still taking credit for a mis-step at the break?

But I thought u backed Perfect Dread? Some handicapping strategies are easy to articulate. For instance: \"I don\'t play publically acclaimed favorites\". No real thought involved. You wager stictly upon a premise that even if the favorite wins the odds will be too low to warrant wagering upon that favorite. So you toss most all 6-5 horses and wager on those with big chances. Horses like Perfect Dread. Oh sure I think he was better than he showed, but who really thought he had a prayer to get 12 marks with courage at the end?

No Superman, we both lost the Belmont, my horse just always had a bigger chance than yours is all. And as I\'ve said before, if I had actually WON the Belmont, I wouldn\'t be taking credit for a good horse missing the paying spots due to a gate mishap. I\'d just say thank you Turf Gods and leave it at that. Oh, but wait...I didn\'t win the Belmont...lol.

I\'m certain others don\'t want to know your wagers, but tell us what big favorites are you taking shots at today? It\'s an odds based thing.

lol

Tabi