Rachel ran a good race, but...

Danzig · #1 05-19-2009, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nebrady

I believe that RA ran the better race. She ran a half in 46! I'm glad to see that MTB ran a great race too. Who knows who wins if he has a better trip. Now fat man as for being stupid too bet on FF in derby and saying a person shouldn't be playing if they did is ridiculous! FF never had a chance to run in the derby so who knows how he would have done. Bet you would have thought someone was stupid if they had bet on MTB on derby day!

Now blackthroat you saying that PTN didn't run on derby day is ridiculous too. He ran second in the derby! If not for a great performance by MTB he wins the derby in a close finish. Yes he didn'rt run great in the preakness, but hes never raced after having only 2 weeks off! Give the horse some love. As for the owner please just keep quiet and let the horses do the talking!

It amazes me that people on this site love to bash a horse if it runs bad in a big race. Give the horses some credit they made it into the triple crown races. Not many can say that! I'm looking forward to the rest of they year with horses like MTB, RA and even PTN and QR and IWR just to name a few. So enjoy and quit being so negative!

in most years, that almost seven length gap from mine that bird to pioneer would have had the latter finishing in about 7th-9th place. when you consider the time of the winner, vs those so far back, it's not exactly flattering to the 2nd-4th horses. POTN did run second, but he didn't run well.

ELA · #2 05-19-2009, 07:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

in most years, that almost seven length gap from mine that bird to pioneer would have had the latter finishing in about 7th-9th place. when you consider the time of the winner, vs those so far back, it's not exactly flattering to the 2nd-4th horses. POTN did run second, but he didn't run well.

I would not accuse Andy of being vauge or ambiguous, but the above says it all -- clear, concise and to the point.

Eric

Danzig · #3 05-19-2009, 07:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ELA

I would not accuse Andy of being vauge or ambiguous, but the above says it all -- clear, concise and to the point.

Eric

i wouldn't either. i'm surprised that fairly often people don't get what he's trying to say...or maybe they do, but don't agree.
but thanks!