There's no stars in racing? Is that right?

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Kasept

It doesn't bother me that the best now are 10 lengths short of the best then. That list represents a variety of horses that have stuck around, have very credible resumes and fan recognition. They all meet criteria to be a star runner in today's environment. What they are versus the best of yesteryear isn't germane to the initial point being made.

Just because nothing I see in the theater these days holds a candle to the eras that produced Citizen Kane, Gone With the Wind, The Bicycle Thief, All About Eve or Sweet Smell of Success doesn't mean there haven't been good films made since that were enjoyable.

The experience of the moment is as good as you choose to make it. And I know you love racing...

Sure there are OK movies/horses on the tracks but they aren't stars..In the case of Kip they are bearly squares .. Commentator needs 8-12 weeks between starts and has never won in my memory when he wasnt afford an easy lead and has never won when headed. I get as much pleasure from Reptilian Smarts as I do from a slug like Music Note. At the very least Reptilian fills the box every few weeks and makes a boring Feb. 12 bearable. Watching that one paced Music Note plod past a few distance challenged fillies is painful in a G1. Stars are surely the wrong description. You are fishing and frankly your audience aint buying it.. They know better!