Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER
Notice how you didn't start this thread innocently.You started it to fight about the track that day. The reason nobody complained to the track super was because they didn't want to be accused by this guy of blaming the track for losing a race.That is what he accused people of doing in the article,and why you think people want to face a load of that crap from him is beyond me.What are they gunna do? Go to his office and tell him that horses on the outside are struggling on that track? He would laugh at them ,and do what you folks have done all day,and month on here(anybody who speaks of the track condition is a sore loser etc.,etc..) As far as QLM goes, your not familiar with this filly.If you were,you would know that she got very little pace to close on in the Oak Leaf(yet made a nice move on a heavily speed favoring Anita track to get 3rd.)They went a 47 or something,and then simply sprinted for home.She closed anyways.If Churchill was in any shape at all for the outside horses,she would have come in a good 2nd-3rd-4th.Your probably right that Anna wasn't gunna be run down from behind after those splits,but I know QLM was better than shown on that piece of crap track,and she returned to win the Moccasin on just 2 weeks rest.
|
you are without a doubt, and everyone here will see it, infusing your own beliefs into my intentions. You're saying that I didn't start this thread innocently. I
absolutely did. I've had enough of the bias controversy. You and others believe it exists, myself and others believe if didn't. There is no right answer, and i'm okay with that resolution (if you're not, that's your problem, not mine). I presented this thread (please reread the original post) as an interesting point of view that many on this board may not have otherwise come across. Again, you're infusing an agenda on my posts that simply isn't there. It was so that posters on this board could see what Lehr had to say for himself which I thought was interesting (and which in the original post I said was "interesting" -- notice how "interesting" here and "interesting" there are the same word PLEASE!" I am a strict believer in the fact that words speak for themselves....)
So basically I haven't said that those who thought a rail bias exists are dumb -- I've just said that I don't believe it. I can't imagine a more fair way to look at it. I'm being diplomatic, and YOU are making it confrontational. That's your issue and not mine. You love QLM. Fine, I don't. But don't pretend that with easy splits, that QLM somehow
deserved to run well enough for a check. If she ran well enough for a check, she would have....(SHOCKER) gotten a check!