Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SniperSB23
Don't you get it though? Everyone is an expert handicapper so if the race didn't turn out like they expected then they need a reason, it couldn't possibly be that they might not have capped the race perfectly, it has to be a bias.
I'm guessing there was probably a little bias, I don't think it was anywhere near as pronounced as people are making it out to be though and did not have a major impact on the outcome of the races.
|
Oh, no,all 5 previous grade 1 winners of a sprint are off the board in the B C Sprint,but you could have seen that pure as f'n snow by capping.The sheets,and every other capping mechanism all pointed to the 5 previous grade 1 winners all being out of the tri in this Grade 1.We are not talking about winning here.I am talking about hitting the board.You're telling me that good handicapping would make it obvious that the previous 5 grade 1 winning sprinters in the race(as well as TM Bling) were gunna run out of the money? You make no sense.ZERO.Deny,like the Churchill Shills that you are,but people who know how to cap,know that track was f'd up.This is what almost always happens when a mistake is made.Deny the obvious.Attack the messenger.The problem is that all the evidence is on one side,It is overwhelming(as I just gave you about n grade 1 winners even hitting the board in the sprint.)No matter what,if you don't want to see it, you will deny the words of trainers who admit they benefitted by a quick inside strip.Why would they say this? Why would ONEIL say it was obvious the inside was the place to be? Why? It makes no sense.All the Churchill Shills can say is that people who lose blame the track surface.Oh,never mind the BC SPRINT Winning trainer also said it.What is your reason for him saying it? Come on.Make some sense, you shills.