Ha!... yea, that's why I like Toroidal Bend 
It is a simple flat model that I want to use as a starting pattern.
I made the mating part, slightly squished version using the Warp command (Warp is a -very- weak command as you have very little control). This one uses the curve-circles you see inscribed. I then offset the outside surface and flattened the quilt (another really messy command!). That flattened quilt is the pattern for the mating part.
I also had to report a bug with toroidal Bend today. It will be submitted as an SPR. I tried to remove the curves from the toroidal bend but one circle remained. It wasn't listed but when I tried to delete the associated sketch, it wanted to delete the toroidal bend. Something got corrupted and PTC will have to take a look.
This is what I was after...
For the flatten quilt, I had to leave a cylinder in the center so the origin "point" would be close enough to the model... and then it tells me the x-direction was -too- close to the model. That command is like pulling teeth.
I am satisfied that with a roll-press, the two parts could be formed to within acceptable limits of the model based on the two flat patterns I now have available.
This was the challenge I was hoping the Toroidal Bend command could solve in a single step... the slight flattening of the "forward" face but still maintain a relatively coincident surface at the pivots (ends).
With the warp tool I was able to "freeze" the ends while moving the face in +Y and moving each half one material thickness in +/-X (fix the bounding box at 50% and 100% on each side). What is lacking in the warp command is specificity. It is a "general" move. You can control the bounding box well enough but the move deltas have no available references -except- the limits of the bounding box. This makes the geometry modifications "relative" and much less precise than I would normally want.
In this case, it is "good enough" (GAWD I DISLIKE THAT PHRASE!).