I believe the only three

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by prudery

Well then perhaps a corneal transplant is recommended ..

For me, or for you? I suggest you need two corneal transplants. One so that you can read what I actually said, and the other to help you learn to watch a race. If you think that's a top 5 or 10 race run in the 50 years you've been watching races, then frankly, you are beyond clueless.

Have you signed up with AARP yet?

Originally Posted by prudery

Please ----why haven't you described all the races that trump this one--big lengths, fast, Rachel, Mine That Bird--the tenth at Canterbury ???!!!

I'm not sure how to react to that. Maybe "Huh?" or "Where did you learn reading comprehension? Perhaps you should have gone to school instead of learning how to read by being taught how to order off the McDonald's menu"

If you are asking me to name a race that was more impressive than this Classic, how about the Preakness from earlier this year? Oh yeah, I can't use that one since you already mocked that possibility above. How about Arazi, or Inside Information? Or heck, even Phone Chatter winning the BC on busted up knees?

Listen man, I never said her race wasn't at all impressive. What I did say was that the track announcer grossly overreacted.

Originally Posted by prudery

A fascinating race that some refuse to see ...

Watching races for 50 years, and it is way up there ...

" not a bad one"--don't make me laugh ...

Never have I seen such a good horse continually not believed in ..

She runs virtually the same race regardless of pace or opposition seemingly by design ... And does it easily ....

She is an original that must do numbers on you numbers guys, and less popular with bettors than horse people--wonder why ???

So far you haven't beat her, but won't join either...

And no I am not president of the pretty pony club--made my first bet--winning--at age 10 ...

Ugh.

[prudery]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

For me, or for you? I suggest you need two corneal transplants. One so that you can read what I actually said, and the other to help you learn to watch a race. If you think that's a top 5 or 10 race run in the 50 years you've been watching races, then frankly, you are beyond clueless.

Have you signed up with AARP yet?




I'm not sure how to react to that. Maybe "Huh?" or "Where did you learn reading comprehension? Perhaps you should have gone to school instead of learning how to read by being taught how to order off the McDonald's menu"

If you are asking me to name a race that was more impressive than this Classic, how about the Preakness from earlier this year? Oh yeah, I can't use that one since you already mocked that possibility above. How about Arazi, or Inside Information? Or heck, even Phone Chatter winning the BC on busted up knees?

Listen man, I never said her race wasn't at all impressive. What I did say was that the track announcer grossly overreacted.




Ugh.

No you said the " race was not bad " and the track announcer over reacted ...I was commenting SPECIFICALLY on that quote--NOT BAD ..

No need for granny glasses, gingko biloba or AARP ..

Not bad is sort of an under reaction as you continue to qualify your being less than impressed with the race by saying you have seen many better this year--that is without naming them originally ... Now you have ...

Speaking of sight, vision and reading comprehension--where did I quantify my remark " right up there " as to the the top five or twenty or any number qualifying exactly what NUMBER I WOULD ASSIGN TO ' RIGHT UP THERE ' ????in reference to the good races I have seen in 50 years ???

NOWHERE except in your head ... Exactly--reading comprehension ..

The whole enchilada --point missed, entirely ...

Do you get it now ???

Uber ugh ...

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by prudery

Speaking of sight, vision and reading comprehension--where did I quantify my remark " right up there " as to the the top five or twenty or any number qualifying exactly what NUMBER I WOULD ASSIGN TO ' RIGHT UP THERE ' ????in reference to the good races I have seen in 50 years ???

NOWHERE except in your head ... Exactly--reading comprehension ..

So, when you said this in your first post:

Originally Posted by prudery

Watching races for 50 years, and it is way up there ...

Way up there meant in the top 500 races you've seen? To me, Denman's reaction was for an all time great race performance, and by you saying it's way up there, you are agreeing.

Why else say it's way up there in great races of the last 50 years? Would you really be saying that if it was the 175th best race you've ever seen?

Or are you going to try to worm your way out of what you said?

[prudery]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

So, when you said this in your first post:



Way up there meant in the top 500 races you've seen? To me, Denman's reaction was for an all time great race performance, and by you saying it's way up there, you are agreeing.

Why else say it's way up there in great races of the last 50 years? Would you really be saying that if it was the 175th best race you've ever seen?

Or are you going to try to worm your way out of what you said?

I don't try to worm out of anything ...

I said I did not quantify my remark--so now you ask me to ??? Oh my ..

I will be very patient here--I found that race a great one that I described as " way up there " ..

When I used that term, I was not thinking in pop chart form--still there ???

Since I have ostensibly seen many good races over 50 years, revamping a list in order of subjective response I do not do, hence no numbers...

I am not easily impressed--so many races others think great I do not--like the Preakness this year--a great accomplishment, not a great race, IMO , and probablyt exactly the way you feel about this race. Maybe ..

This Classic was a great race to me, as multiple accomplishments were achieved in one fell swoop and answers answered at least to me ...

A great race because this mare sauntered by the boys exactly how she sauntered by all the girls--no regard for pace or opposition, same result ... FAB .. EASY..

Do I think it was a great field ??? No--but the field was significant enough, and the best that could be mustered that day ..

That is my opinion--is there a number for it ??? Maybe ..

But a favorite to me as a Classic it will be, and the best one I have seen in a while ...

Better than the JCGC with Slew. Affirmed and Exceller--no ..

More dramatic than Arazi??? Subjective, but not as flashy visually ..

Get it now---dinner awaits ...

[Indian Charlie]

Funny thing Prudery. I'm neither a numbers guy or a bettor.

Sorta like you not having a clue I guess.

[prudery]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Funny thing Prudery. I'm neither a numbers guy or a bettor.

Sorta like you not having a clue I guess.

No resemblance whatsoever ....

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

How about Arazi, or Inside Information? Or heck, even Phone Chatter winning the BC on busted up knees?

Phone Chatter!!!!!

YAY!!!!

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Phone Chatter!!!!!

YAY!!!!

I threw that one in for you!

Come to think of it though, Sardula and Heavenly Prize were better horses than what was in this Classic.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Go to the eso forum.

Sightseek just dissed your favorite movie.