Dr. Riot are you milk or meat? In your prfessional opinion as an expert, is it likely that Rags to Riches had "a busted pastern" as suggested by Chuck, when she went thru a complete battery of testing?

I'll answer for her since she already answered this exact question.

"No, a busted pastern is impossible to miss. They were looking hard for some instability or defect, yet couldn't find one. Yet that instability was real, it lead to the busted pastern."

Gotcha just wanted to debunk Chuck's comical representation that a horse had a "Busted Pastern" and everyone missed it..

You see here is the issue..You bold something which is completely subjective.. Nobody knows for sure if Rags took a bad step and bustd something or if there was some issue that some ex rider thought he or she was feeling. What we know is that the filly did not have a busted pastern and the rest is all conjecture..CORRECT? There is fact and there is assumption assuming Rags had a busted pastern is pure BS

are you sure you are on your meds?

Sure it could be a random event. Probably about a 1% chance of that.

How do you debunk the truth?

Unwittingly you make my point for me. That is that until something is painfully obvious it is mostly conjecture.

No what we know was that there was an unresolved issue and that ultimately there was a fractured pastern. Why anyone would think that this wasn't the issue all along and was simply not detected is beyond me. You don't have to be a genius to connect the dots.

No, but you do have to have the ability to question the official line.

D

I guess you didnt read or have a hard time accepting Dr. Riot's post that it is impossible for a horse to have as you described a "busted Pastern" and have it not be detected..

Feel free to explain to Dr.Riot how she is completely wrong about this, This should be a good one

I love you but your killing me.. A magical busted bone that mordern technology couldnt identify but an ex rider could. You buy this at the same store Jack bought his beans.. Haven't you ever heard of an athlete with a strained leg hurt another part of their body because they were favoring the minor injury? sounds way more plausible then the impossible?

any other Bubbameisers you believe in?

Technology is not infallible. Far from it.

Neither are behind the scene BS stories that are based on hear say and second party information.

Well, yeah, however, it would seem readily apparent that the rider was on the right side of things.

Why because the end result justify his/her story?

Yes.

You don't view that as compelling evidence?

Absolutely not ..I veiw it as people reverse engineering BS.

So you believe the other mystery injury that they also apparently missed caused the actual injury?

There is also no evidence that the Easter Bunny or Santa Clause don't exist so it is plausible that they actually do?

Why do you think this is hear say or second party information?

Do you seriously think that I actually took the time to make this up? LOL

Freddy is out of his mind. I like the whole "well Dr. Riot says" thing when "Dr Riot" agreed with Chuck from the start.