Quote:
|
Originally Posted by NTamm1215
So basically you're saying the best field of the year had two complete bums that set the pace, neither of them having any chance? If I give you some more time can you elucidate how any of the remaining ten horses were useless as win prospects?
Your argument in this discussion has gone from saying that the pace was slow, to which I responded that it was not, to then saying it was slow again, to which I responded that it clearly was not, to now saying that it probably doesn't matter because the horses who set the pace had no chance. That's inexplicable.
Even the most mundane, elementary, and ordinary pace analysis regarding the Classic is going to make it clear that it collapsed. There were three horses in the top 5 at the 1/2 mile mark who were 11-1 or less and they finished 5th, 10th, and 11th respectively.
NT
|
What field was better? Instead of my twisting words, I do believe had Regal Ransom had run in the Woodward he would have had a better chance in that race because that field was far less deeper than the Classic. You made my point in a way without knowing it, the Classic field was a deeper field so obcourse RR had less chance, it is your words that called him a bum, I never did.