foster brooks, lenny bruce.

carrot top, bill hicks.

let's stop bringing bad comedians into serious topics.

thank you.

wow you dont like Bill Hicks or Lenny Bruce? Whom do you consider a good comedian?

it was a comparison of era's.

bad, good.

you missing the point, you knowing bill hicks.

Foster Brooks was more like the 70s; he may have done stuff in the 60s but the Dean Martin roasts were 70s. And Bill Hicks I thought was the 80s or maybe the 90s.??

hicks did brilliant work in the 80's so you are essentially correct. his career was about 1980-1993. and brooks became well known in 1969 so again, my bad.

thanks for harshing my mellow.

my point was that foster brooks was a one note appeal to the lowest common denominater. he was as funny as cat crap on a radiator.

replace lenny bruce with richard pryor. same point.

bill hicks is irreplaceable.

Did any of those guys go off as the m/l favorite for the Kentucky Derby? (Sorry, just trying to swing the thread back on topic without there being a non sequitur.)

Not to knock Curlin as he's nice and Smart Strike's enjoyable, it's just goofy how some horses are coming into the race this year, be it preps at 3, number of preps period, or what have you. It would almost be kinda funny if a horse that met Somer's rules of thumb won and you had trainers just throw up their hands in confusion. Can somebody do me a favor and put up the top few Beyers from Derby hopefuls? I'm just curious if any of the ones that are getting gushed about don't have a top Beyer approaching what is normal for a Derby winner in recent years. It's not the be all end all number but yet another fun thing to play with.

I think about the preps thing, in the case of horses before, I figure they were trying to get more than 2 in and if they couldn't it was due to some soundness issue or something happened. Doing it on purpose is a whole new ball game, esp. if you have a trainer good with bringing horses off layoffs. That said, I think some trainers are a little cocky thinking it's just about physical readiness (on the other hand, folks like Carl Nafzger know darn well what they're doing with the horse's total package, it's about horsemanship). Sure the horse could get the mile and a quarter in good time left to his own devices but with 19 other horses, some serious dirt in his face in all likelihood and the various other things that go on, well it's mental seasoning too. A horse might seem more professional in a prep than in that field with that big a grandstand roar coming at them. Even if one of them shows some major class and overcomes the newness to win, it'll still be the exception rather than the rule. I don't think it indicates a trainer's found the secret to getting a horse with a good head on its shoulders. They might've just gotten lucky and any other horse would've been screwed.

Blue Grass was a weak prep due to the early pace of the race as slow as one has ever seen. The horses did not get anything out of the race unless you call the 3 furlong dash to the wire worth noting? Horrible prep for them. It will be interesting to see next year who skips that Blue Grass to avoid that pathetic poly track. It did nothing to improve the foundation needed to move onto the Derby.

And tell me how you determine that Scat Daddy is no Barbaro? Based on what? Scat Daddy is better positioned going into the Derby than Barbaro was. If Scatt Daddy wins the Derby does he then compare to the great Barbaro? Would think so huh...

Java OUT

Oh wow! How many lengths is he going to win by then? 15? 20?

Absolutely agree with this statement here. Scat Daddy is a more accomplished runner than Barbaro was at this same point. At the very least, they are on a very even par. Whether or not he can duplicate Barbaro's feat and win the Derby remains to be seen. Truth is, he could run just as well and still not win it because he's facing a better group that Barbaro, IMO. But I think a lot of people look at what Barbaro did in the Derby and let it cloud their judgement of what was the general opinion of him before the race. Before the race, most people thought he was a definite factor in the race and had a good chance of winning but NOBODY could have predicted he was going to dominate the race the way he did.

I may be the only one on here that doesn't know but......what the hell is a RAN curse? I've been in this game for over 20 years and have never heard of that until I read that phrase on here a week ago. Anyone care to fill me in?

No offense to u but any "formula", "angle", "system", etc., that can include Teuflesberg, Storm in May, Sedgefield, Sam P., and Liquidity in it........but can't include Circular Quay and Curlin..........should be thrown out of the nearest window. Now, just because it does include Nobiz, Hard Spun and Scat Daddy, should one of those three win, I don't think it can be said that the angle was correct. They could have won no matter if CQ and Curlin had met every criteria. At some point, shouldn't what u see with your eyes take over and all of this silly angle stuff be left alone? Anyone on here old enough to remember when horses were judged by how good THEY were, not by some silly formulas, speed ratings, or curses?

I think the derby angles are a nice tool to consider for the Derby.. including the three preps angle.. but, to me, Barbaro broke more than the RAN curse last year.. His first prep of the year was the Tropical Derby on JANUARY 1st.. then the Holy Bull on February 4th.. then the Florida Derby on April 1st... so from January 2nd to KY Derby day, he had TWO preps.. (13 weeks leading up to the race.) --yes, I know technically he ran 3x in 2006 before the derby(but would you have tossed him had the Tropical Derby been Dec. 31st, instead of jan 1??)
As far as 'hitting a brick wall' in the final 8th, Barbaro could have easily faced that some concern as you are putting on SS and CQ... IMO.
So, I agree getting 3 preps is a big positive for a contender, but not essential under the right circumstances.
though, again, I think the angles are a useful tool in general.

LOL!!!

It's an angle, KG, not a definite rule of thumb. For the record, I don't like Quay or Curlin, but my reasoning isn't because of dosage points.

Well, a newbie with only 20 years of experience can't be expected to know such things (that's a joke!). Seriously, as Juliette Lewis would say, "since you asked!":
RAN Curse refers to breeding lines. RAN (Raise A Native) is arguably one of the greatest sires of the 20th century, if you check the Derby winners over the past couple of decades, you'll note that a huge number have RAN in their sire's sire line. I haven't checked but I wouldn't be surprised if about half the runners in this year's Derby have same. Despite that huge success and his production of successful broodmare sires, until Barbaro "broke the curse" last year, no runner with RAN in his dam's sire line had won the Derby. Wonderful horses such as Point Given had failed. There are breeding theories (LH+, stamina from dam) that could explain this...anyway, I would still be cautious of a horse with RAN in dam's sire line in the Derby...doesn't apply so much to other races although both the Preakness and Belmont have fewer winners than one would expect.

Thank u. I guess I have never heard of it because I think breeding and dosage stuff is the most overrated and useless information one can use in handicapping.

I wish I felt the same way... how do you bet first time starters?

Everybody's different...RAN is a very influential sire though, in fact two of your "top horses", King Glorious and Smarty Jones descend from RAN in male tail or sire's sire line.

Usually, I don't. But when I do, I like to look at workouts, the riders and the trainers. I will say this though about breeding. In the case of first time starters and in the case of a horse trying something for the first time (say a dirt runner trying grass for the first time), then I do give a look to breeding. I think that is the only time it can be helpful, when trying to figure what a horse may be able to do. But once they have run, especially a few times, and shown what kind of ability they have, I throw it out of the window.

oh god no :eek: :eek: