Curlin and Pyro

King Glorious · #1 01-30-2008, 03:53 PM

For the record, I wasn't even saying DaHoss has a bad record. I don't know his record at all. We all pick some good ones and we all pick some bad ones. Constructing a winning ticket though is far different, IMO, than analyzing talent. There have been plenty of times where I have not liked a horse to win a race but have played him on my ticket because I didn't want that logical horse to be the one that kept me from cashing. I would collect on the winning bet even though I had totally analyzed the race wrong. That just made me a better bettor, not a better analyzer of talent.

hoovesupsideyourhead · #2 01-30-2008, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

For the record, I wasn't even saying DaHoss has a bad record. I don't know his record at all. We all pick some good ones and we all pick some bad ones. Constructing a winning ticket though is far different, IMO, than analyzing talent. There have been plenty of times where I have not liked a horse to win a race but have played him on my ticket because I didn't want that logical horse to be the one that kept me from cashing. I would collect on the winning bet even though I had totally analyzed the race wrong. That just made me a better bettor, not a better analyzer of talent.

huh........you siad ..mine king.. is no worse than hosses

King Glorious · #3 01-30-2008, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

huh........you siad ..mine king.. is no worse than hosses

And also no better. Here is what I said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

My record? Tell me what this record is and then tell me how it compares to your record? I'd bet that we are pretty much close to the same when it comes to analyzing talent. I'd bet that pretty much everyone on here is close to the same.

I said that pretty much everyone on here is close to the same. Nowhere did I put him down or offend him. There's no need for that. I don't know his record at all nor do I remember anyone's record but I know that over time, things pretty much even out and we all fall pretty much in the same area.

blackthroatedwind · #4 01-30-2008, 04:03 PM

I may not agree with King Glorious's opinions but he's a far cry for a cheap shot artist. He's nuts....but he's very kind and thoughtful.

miraja2 · #5 01-30-2008, 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I said that pretty much everyone on here is close to the same.

I don't mean to pile on here KG, but I was shocked that nobody replied to this comment. What exactly do you mean here? Do you mean everyone on here is "close to the same" in terms of their ability to analyze talent and/or handicap? If I am reading you right, and that is in fact what you are saying, I completely disagree. There are a number of people on this board that know at least fifty times what I do, and have probably had fifty times the success too.
That is what I like about this kind of board. It gives people like me and you a chance to argue horses, not just with each other, but with people that are actually good at this business. To say everyone on here is "close to the same" seems like an insult to those people on here that are actually really good.

King Glorious · #6 01-30-2008, 07:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miraja2

I don't mean to pile on here KG, but I was shocked that nobody replied to this comment. What exactly do you mean here? Do you mean everyone on here is "close to the same" in terms of their ability to analyze talent and/or handicap? If I am reading you right, and that is in fact what you are saying, I completely disagree. There are a number of people on this board that know at least fifty times what I do, and have probably had fifty times the success too.
That is what I like about this kind of board. It gives people like me and you a chance to argue horses, not just with each other, but with people that are actually good at this business. To say everyone on here is "close to the same" seems like an insult to those people on here that are actually really good.

There are some that are better at certain aspects of the game. I understand that. And I didn't literally mean every single person. I'm saying that in general, I believe that if u took most of the people from this forum, we'd come out pretty close to the same. I might catch a Smarty Jones and call him a Derby winner in January. I might catch a Curlin in March and say that he'll prove to be the best 3yo by the end of the year. I might also catch a Galloping Grocer and think he's going to be a superstar or pick Cause to Believe to win the Derby. I think that over time, most of us pretty much even out. That's all I was saying. I have some good ones on my record. Perhaps I was just lucky every time. The reason I like this board is because I know that I don't know it all and that there are people that see things from different perspectives and can point out things that can help me. But that doesn't mean that they are never wrong just as it doesn't mean that I can't ever be right.

miraja2 · #7 01-30-2008, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

There are some that are better at certain aspects of the game. I understand that. And I didn't literally mean every single person. I'm saying that in general, I believe that if u took most of the people from this forum, we'd come out pretty close to the same. I might catch a Smarty Jones and call him a Derby winner in January. I might catch a Curlin in March and say that he'll prove to be the best 3yo by the end of the year. I might also catch a Galloping Grocer and think he's going to be a superstar or pick Cause to Believe to win the Derby. I think that over time, most of us pretty much even out. That's all I was saying. I have some good ones on my record. Perhaps I was just lucky every time. The reason I like this board is because I know that I don't know it all and that there are people that see things from different perspectives and can point out things that can help me. But that doesn't mean that they are never wrong just as it doesn't mean that I can't ever be right.

I agree with the second thing I have highlighted here, but I disagree with the first. If everyone on this board participated in some sort of lengthy contest with a lot of races involved, I think the top handicappers would come out ahead. Does that mean that on a given day an average or below-average handicapper like me can't beat a pro? Of course not. Does it mean the average cappers shouldn't voice their opinions too? Nope.
But in the long run, none of that changes the fact that they'll beat me....and you. Sure we might catch the big winner every once in a blue moon that they miss, but I don't think that changes the fact that there is a fairly vast difference between the great handicappers and the average handicappers, and also between the average handicappers and the clueless morons.

King Glorious · #8 01-30-2008, 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by miraja2

I agree with the second thing I have highlighted here, but I disagree with the first. If everyone on this board participated in some sort of lengthy contest with a lot of races involved, I think the top handicappers would come out ahead. Does that mean that on a given day an average or below-average handicapper like me can't beat a pro? Of course not. Does it mean the average cappers shouldn't voice their opinions too? Nope.
But in the long run, none of that changes the fact that they'll beat me....and you. Sure we might catch the big winner every once in a blue moon that they miss, but I don't think that changes the fact that there is a fairly vast difference between the great handicappers and the average handicappers, and also between the average handicappers and the clueless morons.

I'm not speaking of handicapping though. In that area, I do believe that there is a big difference among us on here. When it comes to handicapping and wagering, I'm arguably the biggest idiot on here because I'm too stubborn. But look at the example I gave earlier. I didn't believe that Midnight Lute would win the Sprint. Nine times out of 10, I wouldn't have included him on my ticket because I have a hard time justifying to myself playing a horse that I think can't win. And I would have lost. But this time, I did play him and I cashed a ticket. I cashed even though when I handicapped and analyzed the race, I didn't figure him as a winner. So while I admit that when it comes to handicapping and figuring out how to construct tickets and bet, there can be big differences, I think that when it comes to just flat out picking out who's a good horse and who's a bad horse, we are pretty much even.

The Indomitable DrugS · #9 01-30-2008, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

For the record, I wasn't even saying DaHoss has a bad record.

No, but you started this thread into a downword spiral by calling Pyro "a rat."

While Pyro is FAR from a true superstar - he is the current future book favorite for the Kentucky Derby - and every race of his career so far has been fairly solid.

DaHoss simply called you on your silly attention grabbing comment.

#10 01-30-2008, 04:03 PM

I can tell you this, it's always a good idea to claim off of Asmussen because his barn is based on talent and not magic.

pmayjr · #11 01-30-2008, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

I can tell you this, it's always a good idea to claim off of Asmussen because his barn is based on talent and not magic.

Hey, just because when horses run for Asmussen, Durtrow, Lake, or Jane Vayders, they all grow wings. And then when they claimed away from said trainers, the Wings retract, doesn't mean anything... IT'S ALL TALENT BABY... and maybe a little cobra venom.

#12 01-30-2008, 04:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pmayjr

Hey, just because when horses run for Asmussen, Durtrow, Lake, or Jane Vayders, they all grow wings. And then when they claimed away from said trainers, the Wings retract, doesn't mean anything... IT'S ALL TALENT BABY... and maybe a little cobra venom.

Well it's important that these great personalities continue without the worry of being suspended. The sport needs guys like Asmussen and Dutrow to shine on national television in order to attract new fans (rapists, murderers, tax cheats, O.J.) to the game.

pmayjr · #13 01-30-2008, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pillow Pants

Well it's important that these great personalities continue without the worry of being suspended. The sport needs guys like Asmussen and Dutrow to shine on national television in order to attract new fans (rapists, murderers, tax cheats, O.J.) to the game.

Now those 4 personalities are a lil more harsh than girlfriends, wives, cops, and cross-examining lawyers as mentioned earlier I hope Blackthroat?

Antitrust32 · #14 01-30-2008, 04:17 PM

so, um, hossy, um, do ya have a girlfriend?

blackthroatedwind · #15 01-30-2008, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

so, um, hossy, um, do ya have a girlfriend?

OOOOOOOOOO!

( He already blew the money on hookers and crack.....too late. )

Indian Charlie · #16 01-30-2008, 04:19 PM

how about a boyfriend?

King Glorious · #17 01-30-2008, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

No, but you started this thread into a downword spiral by calling Pyro "a rat."

While Pyro is FAR from a true superstar - he is the current future book favorite for the Kentucky Derby - and every race of his career so far has been fairly solid.

DaHoss simply called you on your silly attention grabbing comment.

I called the horse a rat. That's what I think of him. So what? If that's something that DaHoss took personal, then I'm sorry it offended him. If that was his invitation to take shots at me, so be it. Even so, I still never suggested that he has a bad record or that mine is better than his.

The Indomitable DrugS · #18 01-30-2008, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I called the horse a rat. That's what I think of him.

Based on what?

What performance of his was so bad or so wildly overrated - for him to earn the rat label?

King Glorious · #19 01-30-2008, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Based on what?

What performance of his was so bad or so wildly overrated - for him to earn the rat label?

I don't think they were bad. I do think they were overrated. Rat for me is a relative term. I just mean below the top level. Pyro has a chance to be a very good horse. He's obviously talented and has the ability to be in the upper ranks of this year's 3yo class. With so many races out there, he should win his share of them and could make a good career for himself. But I feel like he's overrated. I see it every year. Horses that look like the longer they go, the better they'll be. The ones that look like when they get a little bit more distance, they'll run past those same rivals that kept finishing in front of them. But it never seems to happen. I look at the lead-up to the BC Juvenile. In the DRF selections section, more people had Pyro picked over War Pass than the other way around, despite the fact that War Pass had already beaten Pyro twice. They added distance and another turn and War Pass beats him by more. Toss it because of the sloppy track if you want to but the fact remains that on three different tracks (Sar, Bel, Mon), on three different surfaces (good, fast, sloppy), at three different distances (6f, 8f, 8.5f), at one-turn and at two....War Pass has been better than Pyro at each step. Yet if you look at most rankings, you would swear that War Pass is the one that has to catch up to Pyro because of what most people THINK will happen in the future.

Indian Charlie · #20 01-30-2008, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

I don't think they were bad. I do think they were overrated. Rat for me is a relative term. I just mean below the top level. Pyro has a chance to be a very good horse. He's obviously talented and has the ability to be in the upper ranks of this year's 3yo class.

Perhaps you should add to your signature your definition of terms that vary wildly from what is generally accepted as a definition by most everyone else?

Or, at least qualify it when you use such a term in a way that is inconsistent with how everyone else would use it?