Two days ago the full extent of Scotland's recent record against England was pointed out to me by an embittered, raspy-voiced Scotsman.
"I cannae believe we've only beaten them twice in 20 years," he moaned.
Such is England's superiority he might have added: "It doesnae feel that often."
Indeed it is only six years, or 2,174 days is you prefer, since the Red Rose wilted in the Murrayfield Monsoon.
The teams have met five times since that day in April 2000, when apocalyptic conditions transformed a game of skill into a spectacle only separated from a cross between sumo, mud-wrestling and British Bulldog, by the presence of a ball.
And on each occasion the Thin Blue Line has been found to contain more holes than a rusty colander. Last year there were seven tries and a 43-22 thumping in which even the pedestrian Jamie Noon was transformed into England's free-running hat-trick hero.
The season before, something of a nadir in my opinion, Scotland kept their guests waiting on the pitch for ten minutes before deigning to appear.
Even then they failed to turn up and Fortress Edinburgh was razed to the ground not just on the scoreboard - if anything 35-13 reflected poorly on England - but in the manner of defeat.
Make no mistake about it, England played poorly that day but Scottish rugby was so emasculated, not just by the traditional inequities but by the scandalously inappropriate coaching of Matt Williams, they could have fielded an age group team and still stood a chance.
There were four English tries that day, four more in 2003, four in 2002 and six in 2001. In reply? An average of ten points a match and just four Scottish tries in five years and half of those can only be considered consolation efforts.
England, therefore, will cruise to a sixth successive Calcutta Cup when the sides meet at Murrayfield again on Saturday. Probably, but not necessarily.
For the first time since the turn of the century, the hosts' ambitions must extend beyond damage limitation even though they are not due another win for four years. 1990, 2000, 2010.
I have been accused of writing the literary equivalent of slurry in this column on several occasions, unfairly in my opinion. This time I admit I am tiptoeing rather too close to the cesspit but I beg you to allow a dreamer one week off.
There are, after all, genuine reasons for optimism to think the next glorious victory might be a matter of days away.
Not least the fact that the Thin Blue Line is rather less thin. Look at the way the French hordes were repelled in the opening stages three weeks ago. It was frenetic and sometimes desperate but it was also more than a collection of blokes hurling themselves at their foe and hoping for the best. There was organisation as well as determination there.
It showed seven days later when they papered over the absence of Scott Murray and, having been reduced to 14 men, scored two tries to Wales' three. Scotland's defensive system is sound.
In attack they have rediscovered the verve of the mid-90s. Off-loading in the tackle, forwards and backs interchanging harmoniously and they have, in Sean Lamont, a genuine threat out wide for the first time in a decade.
The one concern will be up front. Murray's suspension deprives them of their one truly world-class tight five forward. I fear for their front row, so mystifyingly exposed in Cardiff ten days ago. Sheridan, Thompson et al must be licking their lips at the thought on gobbling up Bruce Douglas and Gavin Kerr.
It is their one obvious weakness and presumably one England will do all they can to exploit - which doesn't bode well for their claims of winning in different ways. Up-the-jumper time it will be.
Unless Scotland can widen the game by feeding Lamont and Chris Paterson with fast ruck-ball and bringing Hugo Southwell in from full-back. Do that they could cut the English to ribbons and the party would begin four years early. Here's hoping.
* Brian Dick is a Scotsman
* What do you think? Visit our messageboard and give us your opinion. *
