View Single Post
  #59  
Old 03-11-2008, 02:48 PM
hoovesupsideyourhead's Avatar
hoovesupsideyourhead hoovesupsideyourhead is offline
"The Kentucky Killing Machine"
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: florida
Posts: 16,278
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER
Yes,you're wrong(as well.)You both have a bias against horses who have raced over synthetics.He has had 4 races(fired in all of them.)Ran well in 3 stakes on 3 different surfaces.Shows a lot of competitive fire.Solis says the horse is a baby still,and gunna get better.He says he is very special.He is one bad ride away from running 2nd to the horse that is the favorite (right now) to win the derby.Somehow he is not a legit derby contender? I am not the one saying something negative about a horse.You're the 2 ruling out a horse as a legit derby contender.Do you see me doing that to a horse? No.You 2 have the closed minds.It's your opinion.It's a negative opinion that I think is not based on anything sound.He has 3 wins and a 3rd.Even if you think he isn't good enough right now,how in the world can you say a horse with 4 races can't improve enough to contend.It is just sloppy.I repeat.It's a negative opinion about a horse.I have not stated a negative opinion about a horse here.I simply stood up for a horse who I think is being ruled out waaay to early by what is mainly an anti-synthetic bias.The horse simply hasn't done anything wrong yet.Even if you think he hasn't done enough right yet,what would make you think he can't improve enough in his 5th and 6th races to be a legit contender.Until he does something wrong,he is a LEGIT DERBY CONTENDER.I have the positive horse opinion.You've stated a negative horse opinion.
yankee bravo voted for bush..
Reply With Quote