Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
http://troyrecord.com/articles/2009/...b562231384.txt
Another misguided attempt to knock the messenger. I especially like his "research". In a sport where a huge majority of followers already feel that trainers are cheating (regardless of the actual amount that are) defending Dutrow is a slap in the face to the game. Surely 100% of trainers aren't clean but defending Dutrow and Wolfson like HE HAS ANY PROOF THAT THEY AREN"T CHEATING is much worse than any offense that Beyer has supposedly committed. This is like saying that Osama bin laden might not be guilty because Bush had no proof that Iraq had WMD. There is a reason that these guys are under suspicion. It isn't paranoia started by Andy Beyer.
|
Great post Chuck. I love the "you can look it up" line. Guess what? I did, and there isn't a single horse in the whole book that even remotely comes close to the big jump up of This One's for Phil. He is acting like improving from a late 2yo race to and January 3yo race by 36 points is common place. It might be for horse that ran horribly once or twice, but not for horse with two open length wins, including one in a stakes!
He could have cited at least one horse, couldn't he? I found several horses that improved more than 20 points from 2 to until the end of June at 3, but all did so routing with the exception of Smoke Glacken. Further, ALL of them did it in steps over time, not in one giant leap.
The real debate here is which writer is more clueless, Kling or Plonk?
02-04-2009, 11:15 PM
Linear Mode
