12/26-27 (SA): Malibu, La Brea, Oaks (G1's); Frankel (G3), Logan

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

So for me to say a horse that's won a grades stakes race at 9f can run long is silly and nonsense but for you to say that a horse that's only won stakes at 8f and under and was easily beaten in her 9f race and much less than dominant in her 8.5f race is........you know what, nevermind. The point is proven.

He’s right....this is high quality trolling...or at least an attempt at it.

You view Gamine as the second coming, but here you speak of her not so glowingly. Charlatan ran well. Before we crown him your newest best horse ever can we see him run again in the next 6 months?

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

He’s right....this is high quality trolling...or at least an attempt at it.

You view Gamine as the second coming, but here you speak of her not so glowingly. Charlatan ran well. Before we crown him your newest best horse ever can we see him run again in the next 6 months?

He's not right. I think the same thing about Gamine as I do Charlatan. I believe she will stretch out and win top level races going two-turns and 9f. I believe the same thing about Charlatan. I'm consistent in that I think the combination of their talent + the depressed level of competition will lead to bigger things for both. He can see it with Gamine but for anyone to suggest the same with Charlatan is silly, even though the evidence points more towards Charlatan doing it than Gamine cause at least he's won at 9f while Gamine was handled easily.

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

He's not right. I think the same thing about Gamine as I do Charlatan. I believe she will stretch out and win top level races going two-turns and 9f. I believe the same thing about Charlatan. I'm consistent in that I think the combination of their talent + the depressed level of competition will lead to bigger things for both. He can see it with Gamine but for anyone to suggest the same with Charlatan is silly, even though the evidence points more towards Charlatan doing it than Gamine cause at least he's won at 9f while Gamine was handled easily.

What he is saying (I think) is the hyperbole that we are seeing here from you and others on the internet about Charlatan is silly. He won a 7 furlong race and you (and others) have him being robbed of the triple crown because he wasn’t healthy.

He’s a really nice and exciting horse. A really nice and exciting horse that has made 4 starts in his career and he’ll be 4 next week.

Maybe Charlatan will be dominant going 9 furlongs and farther next year. Based on his final 3/16ths yesterday I think the jury is still out. Let’s not forget that many people thought Gamine would have no problem with 9 furlongs, especially since she beat the eventual Ashland winner going two turns at Oaklawn. How did that work out?

The only thing more ridiculous than Charlatan would’ve won the triple crown is the notion that Baffert didn’t have him 100% yesterday.

[King Glorious]

The thing is, I can understand anyone saying I'm being premature about Gamine and Charlatan. Not only understand it but even agree with it. It has to be proven on the track. The only thing I'm saying is be consistent. Whatever you think about one, you almost have to think the same about the other. You're consistent in your position that you want to see it first. I'm consistent in mine that I think both can do it. He says he thinks Gamine can but anyone that says Charlatan can is being silly.