Curlin and Pyro

[The Indomitable DrugS]

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]

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]

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?