![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I think it's funny that nobody complained to him, the stewards, or anyone during the day -- you'd think that would be the prime time to say something about an unfair track, wouldn't you? It was meant to just be informational, because I wasn't sure if everyone would read it otherwise. I'm as disinterested in the bias debate as anyone is, but found this interesting and informative. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
"I think it's funny that nobody complained to him, the stewards, or anyone during the day -- you'd think that would be the prime time to say something about an unfair track, wouldn't you?"
Why f'n bother? Look how you've attacked people on here for writing about that track condition.Now you wonder why people didn't complain? He would just accuse peoplel(like he did in the article,) of using the track as an excuse for losing.There is no upside to it.Trainers talked to the media about the track,but didn't bother going to talk to him about it.After seeing the way people on here have acted about it,I wouldn't bother talking to him either.ONEIL told the interviewers that it was very quick down on the rail.BUTCH says he had the T.V. on,but he must have missed that. |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
What about the connections of the horses who won? Aren't they happy? There will only be 8 winners and a lot of losers regardless of track condition.
Well,I don't think it is too much to want the best horse on the day to win(not just the one who gets a lucky bias in their favor.)These are supposed to be important races(not just races at some country fair.) I think people who bet huge money to win on horses should take note of what you wrote,because this is a prime reason to not bet heavy to win. |
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Thor Laughing All the Way to the Bank
![]() |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
This is completely out of left field with no backing -- disagreeing with you does not equal attacking you. Either you are drunk (and therefore unable to make sense of anything I say) or just plain old unable to make sense of anything I say -- as those two options are the only possible ways one could construe anything I've said as an "attack". I'll assume the former so that in the future I can try to take you seriously again. Sorry, in retrospect, my sarcasm will likely be construed as an attack and I am going to go down in history as the board's biggest "attacker!" |