I'm confused. You say that the west coast horses are superior this year, but then reneg and then say that the horse doesn't have to win the derby. Aren't we talking about the derby? Then what's your point? Serious question: is English your first language?

I'm beginning to think PG had an internet sex change.

The true shocker of the day... the buffet in the Equestris Room was outstanding today.

But not nearly as good as the Oxtail I had from the West Indian Food stand.

You're a brave man.

Are you kidding me? The best food in the place.....no doubt.

Jones said last year that FF was the most talented 2yo he had ever trained. It was just a matter of FF getting his mind into the game.

Love the beef patties there.

Oxtail... you're more exotic than I.

I just had the best egg noodles I've ever made.


on an unrelated note, what has Pioneerof ever done to suggest he might belong in the Kentucky Derby ?

btw is gangsta

Why don't you be true to your word, just once, and leave me on ignore.

Not for my benefit, of course, but for your own.

:tro:

No doubt. But what exactly do we base tossing POLY horses on? This has not really been address here (or anywhere).

Wouldn't I be in a position to make a better decision concerning those horses that have already run on dirt?

It would, of course, be nice to be able to always make decisions on what we have seen, but that isn't always the case, and in this year's Derby, if you are betting, you have to make a decision on Pioneer of the Nile, as he is one of the favorites. Here's what we have.....a horse that ran fairly well in his debut on the turf, and then ran slowly in a bunch of synthetic turf races, while earning a reputation based on the names of the races he ran in and not on his actual on track performances. Could he improve on the dirt? Of course, but he likely won't ( as few horses are proficient on all surfaces ), and at the odds he will be, based on how he has performed, he is a good horse to bet against.

i'm basing it on the belief that most horses aren't dual surface horses. a few are-barbaro and big brown handled turf and dirt with aplomb, while curlin the great (:rolleyes: ) for example did not. i'm inclined to go with a horse who has exhibited where he is at his best.

horses can hit the board on the one, but translate board hits to wins on their best surface.. i want revenge is one example, street sense is another. he beat hard spun in ky, but HS turned the tables at turfway.

exactly


It's possible that he will be as good as his odds on dirt, but not very probable.

Let's be more precise. I don't indulge in speed figures but from what I've read here POLY races grade out slower. I don't know if CJ (or someone else) has a POLY to DIRT conversion worked out. If this is the case, and POTN's races are 'historically' SLOWER then my point is not a makeable one. But, 'slower in relation to what'? is my question otherwise. All I know is that this horse has finished ahead of all the horses its faced in CALI. Some of them have done nicely elsewhere.

Tell you this much, and I am NOT a FAN of this horse. I'd be more comfortable tossing Quality Road and Friesan Fire (and I will). I know they can't win without perfect trips. I don't know what this horse can do on the dirt, however.

we're all in the same boat on that score.

Oxtails are exotic?

Have people never been to anything better than Arby's?

Come on, I love Arby's.