Gomez To Announce His Mount

[justindew]

Originally Posted by stonegossard

Never rescinded it. When I made the comment I was referring to his last 2 races. I cleared it up. Big difference between that and rescinding something. Again, must I spell everything out for you?

If you didn't catch on to the Pletcher comment being sarcastic then you really are beyond stupid. Anyone on this board who has been following racing knows that his record in the derby sucks. Sorry if this was over your head.

Stay down for the count like you did last time Justin.

So I assume you aren't disagreeing that you mischaracterized the topic of this debate, since you failed to make even a feeble attempt to respond to that accusation.

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by justindew

So I assume you aren't disagreeing that you mischaracterized the topic of this debate, since you failed to make even a feeble attempt to respond to that accusation.

You are a trip man. Coming from the king of changing the topic/ducking questions.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the topic of the debate is which horse was chosen by Gomez. I claimed that I feel that Dunkirk is a much better choice because I believe he is a better horse. I explained my reasons in detail, which you couldn't follow. We then went into "value" which again I explained, but this time I think you caught on after I had to word things to you like a child.

This is a repeat of last years economy discussion. Everytime you were wrong you changed topics. I then answered them.

In all honesty you are really not a bright guy.

[stonegossard]

By the way Justin this was my original post : I dont believe I said they all were horrendous.

stonegossard
Monmouth Park Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 779



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gomez made a big mistake here. Pioneer of the Nile has too many question marks. Will he take to dirt ? Can he rate/get the 1 1/4 ? His last two races he sure as hell looked like he wanted to be up close early. Plus POTN has beaten some horrendous fields. Hopefully Pletcher gives the mount to anybody but Ramon D. Hopefully Orlando Mojica isn't taken yet.

[justindew]

Originally Posted by stonegossard

You are a trip man. Coming from the king of changing the topic/ducking questions.

Correct me if I am wrong, but the topic of the debate is which horse was chosen by Gomez. I claimed that I feel that Dunkirk is a much better choice because I believe he is a better horse. I explained my reasons in detail, which you couldn't follow. We then went into "value" which again I explained, but this time I think you caught on after I had to word things to you like a child.

This is a repeat of last years economy discussion. Everytime you were wrong you changed topics. I then answered them.

In all honesty you are really not a bright guy.

1. You're wrong. The only thing I was debating was your comment that Gomez should not have chosen POTN because POTN had beaten some horrendous fields. The clear implication being he has not faced good horses in his victories.

2. I followed them. They just had nothing to do with this discussion.

3. You may be right. But you have a difficult time with logic, and you have proven this in this thread.

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by justindew

1. You're wrong. The only thing I was debating was your comment that Gomez should not have chosen POTN because POTN had beaten some horrendous fields. The clear implication being he has not faced good horses in his victories.

2. I followed them. They just had nothing to do with this discussion.

3. You may be right. But you have a difficult time with logic, and you have proven this in this thread.

1- Not wrong. Please learn to read. Also please look at the last 2 fields he beat, then get back to me.

2- My points were replies to all of your comments.

3- I have a problem with logic? That's hysterical. I think you have problem with basic reading comprehension. Go back and read this thread. You come off beyond embarassing.


Anyways...back to the value thing. You claimed that Dunkirk and POTN will be similar odds. But then on your blog you say this:

. No word yet on where Garrett Gomez will land. As a supporter of Pioneerof The Nile, I guess I want him to ride my horse. But then again, if he were to choose Dunkirk, the odds on POTN would become a lot juicier.


So which is it? In this statement you clearly believe that the horse that Gomez doesn't take will be much higher odds.

This should be good.


By the way, your blog on your Derby dream was cute.

[justindew]

Originally Posted by stonegossard

1- Not wrong. Please learn to read. Also please look at the last 2 fields he beat, then get back to me.

2- My points were replies to all of your comments.

3- I have a problem with logic? That's hysterical. I think you have problem with basic reading comprehension. Go back and read this thread. You come off beyond embarassing.


Anyways...back to the value thing. You claimed that Dunkirk and POTN will be similar odds. But then on your blog you say this:

. No word yet on where Garrett Gomez will land. As a supporter of Pioneerof The Nile, I guess I want him to ride my horse. But then again, if he were to choose Dunkirk, the odds on POTN would become a lot juicier.


So which is it? In this statement you clearly believe that the horse that Gomez doesn't take will be much higher odds.

This should be good.


By the way, your blog on your Derby dream was cute.

I think I have pinpointed the problem. Here is your M.O.....

-You develop an opinion.
-You post that opinion, sometimes along with other thoughts, sometimes without other supporting thoughts that you failed to articulate in your post.
-Someone else responds to your post, and takes issue with one or more of your points.
-You then assume that the person is responding to and disagreeing with your entire argument, including the thoughts that you didn't even post.

This is why debates with you often dissolve into nonsensical back-and-forth lunacy. And it's the only possible explanation for why you have created this imaginary debate about value and the correctness of Gomez's decision.

I made one point this entire time: That the fields POTN has beaten have not been "horrendous". That is the only point I made. Period. Yet your small brain has somehow turned this into a debate as to not only whether or not Gomez made the right choice, but also which horses will offer better value.

And I'm not sure what point you think you were making with the quote from my blog. Yes, I think the horse that Gomez rides will be bet more heavily than if Gomez was not riding that horse. So what? Show me where I have said anything in this thread that contradicts this position. (Your implication that I "clearly believe that the horse that Gomez doesn't take will be much higher odds" is insane. I only said POTN's odds will be higher without Gomez.

In fact, show me anything I have stated in this thread other than that I believe your comment about POTN's horrendous opponents was ridicuolous, and that I believe their odds will be similar.

(Also, similar does not mean "identical.")

[justindew]

I think this is the point in the thread where your logic took a detour...


justindew
I think if you had been able to make this argument to Anderson and Gomez, they likely would have landed on Dunkirk. I doubt they considered any of the above.

stonegossard:
Ok genius. Where does Gomez plan on riding most of the year? If you can figure that out then the next question. Who has a bigger presence in that area ?

Ya think that had something to do with his decision ?

Prior to this point, I had never entered the debate regarding the intelligence of Gomez's choice or the reasons for it. All I had done was take issue with your comment that the fields he had beaten were horrendous.

Yes or no: Do you understand this fact?

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by justindew

I think this is the point in the thread where your logic took a detour...


justindew
I think if you had been able to make this argument to Anderson and Gomez, they likely would have landed on Dunkirk. I doubt they considered any of the above.

stonegossard:
Ok genius. Where does Gomez plan on riding most of the year? If you can figure that out then the next question. Who has a bigger presence in that area ?

Ya think that had something to do with his decision ?

Prior to this point, I had never entered the debate regarding the intelligence of Gomez's choice or the reasons for it. All I had done was take issue with your comment that the fields he had beaten were horrendous.

Yes or no: Do you understand this fact?

Yes. I undersand that you change the topic all the time , and then blame me once I give you valid answers.

What we are having on here is a debate. Although it is one sided and you are getting clobbered, it is still a debate. Debates do have times when new points are brought up (ie....value) and these points are addressed. It's funny how you start whining that "I didn't say this, I didn't debate about that", but go back, you hit me with all different points and I answered them.

[stonegossard]

Originally Posted by justindew

I think I have pinpointed the problem. Here is your M.O.....

-You develop an opinion.
-You post that opinion, sometimes along with other thoughts, sometimes without other supporting thoughts that you failed to articulate in your post.
-Someone else responds to your post, and takes issue with one or more of your points.
-You then assume that the person is responding to and disagreeing with your entire argument, including the thoughts that you didn't even post.

This is why debates with you often dissolve into nonsensical back-and-forth lunacy. And it's the only possible explanation for why you have created this imaginary debate about value and the correctness of Gomez's decision.

I made one point this entire time: That the fields POTN has beaten have not been "horrendous". That is the only point I made. Period. Yet your small brain has somehow turned this into a debate as to not only whether or not Gomez made the right choice, but also which horses will offer better value.

And I'm not sure what point you think you were making with the quote from my blog. Yes, I think the horse that Gomez rides will be bet more heavily than if Gomez was not riding that horse. So what? Show me where I have said anything in this thread that contradicts this position. (Your implication that I "clearly believe that the horse that Gomez doesn't take will be much higher odds" is insane. I only said POTN's odds will be higher without Gomez.

In fact, show me anything I have stated in this thread other than that I believe your comment about POTN's horrendous opponents was ridicuolous, and that I believe their odds will be similar.

(Also, similar does not mean "identical.")

Actually outside of some sarcastic/wise ass back and forths with others, you are the only person I really seem to have long winded arguments with. Probably because you have a tough time following along with what I say. Then when I reply you change topics/duck, I then respond to your new claims, then you claim I changed the topic. It's the same script from last time with you.

This is great. Classic Justin:

And I'm not sure what point you think you were making with the quote from my blog. Yes, I think the horse that Gomez rides will be bet more heavily than if Gomez was not riding that horse. So what? Show me where I have said anything in this thread that contradicts this position. (Your implication that I "clearly believe that the horse that Gomez doesn't take will be much higher odds" is insane. I only said POTN's odds will be higher without Gomez.


So let's do some basic math.

POTN will be much lower odds because of Gomez.

Dunkirk will be higher odds because of no gomez. (Juicier = much higher....your words)


So POTN and Dunkirk will be the same odds ?


I was gonna mention something about your SAT math score, but then saw where you attended college and held back.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by stonegossard

1- Not wrong. Please learn to read. Also please look at the last 2 fields he beat, then get back to me.

2- My points were replies to all of your comments.

3- I have a problem with logic? That's hysterical. I think you have problem with basic reading comprehension. Go back and read this thread. You come off beyond embarassing.


Anyways...back to the value thing. You claimed that Dunkirk and POTN will be similar odds. But then on your blog you say this:

. No word yet on where Garrett Gomez will land. As a supporter of Pioneerof The Nile, I guess I want him to ride my horse. But then again, if he were to choose Dunkirk, the odds on POTN would become a lot juicier.


So which is it? In this statement you clearly believe that the horse that Gomez doesn't take will be much higher odds.

This should be good.


By the way, your blog on your Derby dream was cute.

Actually, I think he's right here. Had Gomez chosen Dunkirk he figured to drop a few points to the 8-1 range and POTN would have drifted up, probably to 12-1 or so. Now they'll both be around 10-1. Believe it or not, there's a lot of people out there who handicap jockeys- especially in Kentucky.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by philcski

Actually, I think he's right here. Had Gomez chosen Dunkirk he figured to drop a few points to the 8-1 range and POTN would have drifted up, probably to 12-1 or so. Now they'll both be around 10-1. Believe it or not, there's a lot of people out there who handicap jockeys- especially in Kentucky.

Sorry, but I think you are WAY overestimating this. It's a very big pool.

[philcski]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Sorry, but I think you are WAY overestimating this. It's a very big pool.

The size of the pool may mute the effect of the jockey cappers, given it's by far the largest of the year. There's no question that on a daily basis, especially in Kentucky, jockeys get bet (and you hear it from people). Remember when Pat Day's mount would open as the favorite in virtually every race at CD?

I do think they will end up being very similar odds at post time, however.