Remember This Statement By Crist

Because Yankee Bravo is a monster, scuds. He's not from hee haw land.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I'm just curious, in the wild and unlikely chance that Yankee Bravo has no impact on this Derby, I know....it's improbable, will you be resurrecting this thread and saying " Oh geez, Mr. Crist was on target ( again ) and I was wrong " or will it be yet another preposterous stab that floats away in the carnage after the Derby?

You play the horses SCUDS, so I would assume that just like me you make many statements at the windows on a daily basis that one could label as " stupid " after the races have been run. Steve Crist is a horseplayer just like you and me. So, suddenly you have decided that he is somehow accountable for giving an opinion in a way that we aren't?

Hogwash.

Hell yes.He is getting paid to write opinions.I have been censored twice already for stuff I wrote in this thread.So,I can tell I am hitting Eastern Nerve here,but I think he was sloppy to say this horse isn't a legit derby contender.I give it 50% chance the horse goes off the trail with injury.40% chance the horse fires strong in the derby,and 10% chance the horse does nothing while running in the derby.That's the way I think it is.So,yea if he gets his shot and runs poorly,then I will come say I was wrong.I fully expect it will be the other 90%,but we will see.You and him have 10% chance to come in here and say "see,he had no shot." I feel the horse will be in the exotics.Be tough for him to actually win with the winemaker up.With somebody else? Lookout,Andy,he comin'.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

whats an eastern nerve?..oh thats the one that connects your balls to your wallet..

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Hell yes.He is getting paid to write opinions.I have been censored twice already for stuff I wrote in this thread.So,I can tell I am hitting Eastern Nerve here,but I think he was sloppy to say this horse isn't a legit derby contender.I give it 50% chance the horse goes off the trail with injury.40% chance the horse fires strong in the derby,and 10% chance the horse does nothing while running in the derby.That's the way I think it is.So,yea if he gets his shot and runs poorly,then I will come say I was wrong.I fully expect it will be the other 90%,but we will see.You and him have 10% chance to come in here and say "see,he had no shot." I feel the horse will be in the exotics.Be tough for him to actually win with the winemaker up.With somebody else? Lookout,Andy,he comin'.

The question isn't whether you will come on and call yourself wrong, in the event YB runs poorly in the derby. The question is will you call yourself stupid and sloppy. That is what you have called others who dont' share your opinion on YB. It's not so much you have hit eastern nerve, its more to do with your comments being boorish.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Hell yes.He is getting paid to write opinions.I have been censored twice already for stuff I wrote in this thread.So,I can tell I am hitting Eastern Nerve here,but I think he was sloppy to say this horse isn't a legit derby contender.I give it 50% chance the horse goes off the trail with injury.40% chance the horse fires strong in the derby,and 10% chance the horse does nothing while running in the derby.That's the way I think it is.So,yea if he gets his shot and runs poorly,then I will come say I was wrong.I fully expect it will be the other 90%,but we will see.You and him have 10% chance to come in here and say "see,he had no shot." I feel the horse will be in the exotics.Be tough for him to actually win with the winemaker up.With somebody else? Lookout,Andy,he comin'.

Oh, the old West Coast paranoia. Love that.

You think he was " sloppy " for giving his honest opinion? Thankfully, there are still a few journalists left that think giving their actual opinions is important. What would actually be " sloppy " is if he didn't analyze the race as he saw it. You disagree with his opinion, for whatever reasons, which is certainly your right. Insulting the guy just makes you look....well, I think ArlJim said it best, boorish.

I disagree with Steve on races on many occasions, not on the internet but when talking to him, but I have nothing but the greatest respect for his opinions.....as well as his right to have them. His work is never " sloppy. "

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

The question isn't whether you will come on and call yourself wrong, in the event YB runs poorly in the derby. The question is will you call yourself stupid and sloppy. That is what you have called others who dont' share your opinion on YB. It's not so much you have hit eastern nerve, its more to do with your comments being boorish.

No,I did not say some horse wasn't a legit derby contender.He took that extreme road.He was sloppy to make a statement that is a stupid statement.I am not calling him stupid.The boorish statement was made by THE DRUGS GUY.HE SAID THE HORSE STINKS.Hey,if I was being paid to write,then, obviously, I would write more politically correct.I would be picking Pyro like the rest of these guys playing it safe.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Oh, the old West Coast paranoia. Love that.

You think he was " sloppy " for giving his honest opinion? Thankfully, there are still a few journalists left that think giving their actual opinions is important. What would actually be " sloppy " is if he didn't analyze the race as he saw it. You disagree with his opinion, for whatever reasons, which is certainly your right. Insulting the guy just makes you look....well, I think ArlJim said it best, boorish.

I disagree with Steve on races on many occasions, not on the internet but when talking to him, but I have nothing but the greatest respect for his opinions.....as well as his right to have them. His work is never " sloppy. "

Well,this time,Crist was sloppy.He was trying to make a case against Pyro,and got sloppy doing it.That's my opinion.What is this guy, the freakin' Dalai Lama? I don't care who said he is not a legit derby contender.That person is wrong,and it will be shown.Just let it play out,and now that you drank the same cocktail,you best hope Solis retains the mount,because it's a definite handicap the horse must be able to overcome.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Well,this time,Crist was sloppy.He was trying to make a case against Pyro,and got sloppy doing it.That's my opinion.What is this guy, the freakin' Dalai Lama? I don't care who said he is not a legit derby contender.That person is wrong,and it will be shown.Just let it play out,and now that you drank the same cocktail,you best hope Solis retains the mount,because it's a definite handicap the horse must be able to overcome.

He's wrong and sloppy because you disagree with him?

That's a new one. At least, however, you've already given yourself a built in excuse. Blaming the jockey before a race really bolsters your case.

I guess I'm wrong as well.....Yankee Bravo is about as ridiculous a supposed contender as I have heard meantioned on this Derby Trail. And that's saying something.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

10% chance the horse has no impact? Is there some alternative number scheme I am unaware of?

I miss things too. Maybe this one is in the chapter that reviews first time starters on the Big A inner?

[Linny]

I'd rather read Crist hand down a real opinion, good or bad than read Haskin who clearly thinks that any 3yo TB is a legit contender for the KY Derby.

I read both commentators for different reasons. Haskin often has quotes and post race info, as well as anticipated next starts for the Derby candidates. his content however reads like a glowing review of each and every colt. They can't all be that good, can they? Crist OTOH, will give me his honest opinion about a colt's efforts and chances next out. I have every right to disagree and every right to say so. That doesn't make his work sloppy. In fact few writers are as organized and careful in their preparation as Crist. I may disagree with every point he makes but I would never call him sloppy.

As to disagreement in general, the betting here is legal and encouraged. Put up or shut up. You like something? I don't so bet me! Either a prop bet or through the mutuel windows. The disagreement need not turn personal. If Crist doesn't like a horse you like it doesn't make him sloppy. He sees it differently from you. Take advantage and get your price.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

I think that Yankee Bravo will most likely be in the field of 20 unless he gets hurt. I think that the horse would improve if they got him to focus a bit more. Maybe blinkers. I don't think he is near the top tier right now, but Pyro certainly is in the top 3. I don't think Yankee Bravo is a bad horse by any means either. Most likely, he would have won the El Camino.

I don't think Yankee Bravo is close to Cali's best after what I saw in the LA Derby.

Cali will get dismissed this year, and several of those horses can really run.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

I think that Yankee Bravo will most likely be in the field of 20 unless he gets hurt. I think that the horse would improve if they got him to focus a bit more. Maybe blinkers. I don't think he is near the top tier right now, but Pyro certainly is in the top 3. I don't think Yankee Bravo is a bad horse by any means either. Most likely, he would have won the El Camino.

I don't think Yankee Bravo is close to Cali's best after what I saw in the LA Derby.

Cali will get dismissed this year, and several of those horses can really run.

Now I am doomed. I need to buy back my Yankee Bravo futures.

[ELA]

I think in today's day and age of the BS the media puts forth, it's still great to see a journalist, reporter, media personality, etc. step up and give his/her definitive, blunt, and tell it like it is opinion. If someone disagrees, that's great. That's what makes the world go around. But to insult someone and belittle them or their opinion because one disagrees with it is foolish in my opinion.

Now, I am not saying that's what happened here, but in this industry we see that, and it's common.

Personally, I think sloppy journalism and opinions don't just come from someone else disagreeing with the opinion and author. The building in excuses is another aspect which also can become foolish.

Not on this horse, or this situation, but personally I think it would be foolish to completely throw out a horse because of a jock of Solis' stature. If you think a horse is the best horse in the race, and you are exclusively throwing him out because of Alex Solis, that's a fool play in my eyes.

Eric

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by ELA

I think in today's day and age of the BS the media puts forth, it's still great to see a journalist, reporter, media personality, etc. step up and give his/her definitive, blunt, and tell it like it is opinion. If someone disagrees, that's great. That's what makes the world go around. But to insult someone and belittle them or their opinion because one disagrees with it is foolish in my opinion.
Now, I am not saying that's what happened here, but in this industry we see that, and it's common.

Personally, I think sloppy journalism and opinions don't just come from someone else disagreeing with the opinion and author. The building in excuses is another aspect which also can become foolish.

Not on this horse, or this situation, but personally I think it would be foolish to completely throw out a horse because of a jock of Solis' stature. If you think a horse is the best horse in the race, and you are exclusively throwing him out because of Alex Solis, that's a fool play in my eyes.

Eric

I do too. Nice post.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

Oh, the old West Coast paranoia. Love that.

"

Paranoia? I've been censored twice in this thread that started with a statement from an Eastern-based writer.He just happens to be the guy who wrote the original statement.I don't think I'd of been censored if I didn't hit the Eastern Nerve.This is East Coast Cappin' Royalty.I didn't go looking for a statement to attack.I just noticed it as a sloppy statement,and I can't show you it's sloppy until the Derby is run.The horse has run well in 3 stakes in a row(on 3 different surfaces.)He has fired in all 4 lifetime races.He is a deep rater in a race that is probably gunna have War Zito smoking along for 9 furlongs.I think PYRO and Bravo go by,and run top 4.This horse has had 4 races,and this guy rules him out as a legit derby contender? If it's his opinion,then I think it's made mainly with an East Coast bias against horses who have raced over synthetic race tracks.See,this is the same guy who said we rushed to put in synthetic surfaces out here.Well,we had to fill cards,and we couldn't do it if we continued to race on dirt.We don't have the sheer number of horses that other parts of the country do.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by ELA

I think in today's day and age of the BS the media puts forth, it's still great to see a journalist, reporter, media personality, etc. step up and give his/her definitive, blunt, and tell it like it is opinion. If someone disagrees, that's great. That's what makes the world go around. But to insult someone and belittle them or their opinion because one disagrees with it is foolish in my opinion.

Now, I am not saying that's what happened here, but in this industry we see that, and it's common.

Personally, I think sloppy journalism and opinions don't just come from someone else disagreeing with the opinion and author. The building in excuses is another aspect which also can become foolish.

Not on this horse, or this situation, but personally I think it would be foolish to completely throw out a horse because of a jock of Solis' stature. If you think a horse is the best horse in the race, and you are exclusively throwing him out because of Alex Solis, that's a fool play in my eyes.

Eric

No,but you better go one slot wider than you think you need to.If you think he can run top 2 or 3 in the derby ,then you better use him 4th.This has not been a good derby rider,and the horse is at a handicap with him up.That's why I am not taking 40 or 50-1 on the horse right now.It's not because I don't think the horse is good enough to contend for the win.Now if I am writing where people can get me fired? Of course, I have to say the jock doesn't matter much.

[KY_Sasquash]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

And I never thought I'd see the day when a son of Yankee Gentleman would be talked about as type of horse capable of grinding from 19th to 3rd in the Derby.

He, like Friends Lake, stands at Airdrie coincidentaly.

I personally dont think he'll hit the board. In a perfect world where the stars lined up for him i think that type of running style gives him his best shot of hitting the board the Derby. Doesn't matter because it's a moot point.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

He's wrong and sloppy because you disagree with him?

That's a new one. At least, however, you've already given yourself a built in excuse. Blaming the jockey before a race really bolsters your case.

I guess I'm wrong as well.....Yankee Bravo is about as ridiculous a supposed contender as I have heard meantioned on this Derby Trail. And that's saying something.

Yes,you're wrong(as well.)You both have a bias against horses who have raced over synthetics.He has had 4 races(fired in all of them.)Ran well in 3 stakes on 3 different surfaces.Shows a lot of competitive fire.Solis says the horse is a baby still,and gunna get better.He says he is very special.He is one bad ride away from running 2nd to the horse that is the favorite (right now) to win the derby.Somehow he is not a legit derby contender? I am not the one saying something negative about a horse.You're the 2 ruling out a horse as a legit derby contender.Do you see me doing that to a horse? No.You 2 have the closed minds.It's your opinion.It's a negative opinion that I think is not based on anything sound.He has 3 wins and a 3rd.Even if you think he isn't good enough right now,how in the world can you say a horse with 4 races can't improve enough to contend.It is just sloppy.I repeat.It's a negative opinion about a horse.I have not stated a negative opinion about a horse here.I simply stood up for a horse who I think is being ruled out waaay to early by what is mainly an anti-synthetic bias.The horse simply hasn't done anything wrong yet.Even if you think he hasn't done enough right yet,what would make you think he can't improve enough in his 5th and 6th races to be a legit contender.Until he does something wrong,he is a LEGIT DERBY CONTENDER.I have the positive horse opinion.You've stated a negative horse opinion.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Yes,you're wrong(as well.)You both have a bias against horses who have raced over synthetics.He has had 4 races(fired in all of them.)Ran well in 3 stakes on 3 different surfaces.Shows a lot of competitive fire.Solis says the horse is a baby still,and gunna get better.He says he is very special.He is one bad ride away from running 2nd to the horse that is the favorite (right now) to win the derby.Somehow he is not a legit derby contender? I am not the one saying something negative about a horse.You're the 2 ruling out a horse as a legit derby contender.Do you see me doing that to a horse? No.You 2 have the closed minds.It's your opinion.It's a negative opinion that I think is not based on anything sound.He has 3 wins and a 3rd.Even if you think he isn't good enough right now,how in the world can you say a horse with 4 races can't improve enough to contend.It is just sloppy.I repeat.It's a negative opinion about a horse.I have not stated a negative opinion about a horse here.I simply stood up for a horse who I think is being ruled out waaay to early by what is mainly an anti-synthetic bias.The horse simply hasn't done anything wrong yet.Even if you think he hasn't done enough right yet,what would make you think he can't improve enough in his 5th and 6th races to be a legit contender.Until he does something wrong,he is a LEGIT DERBY CONTENDER.I have the positive horse opinion.You've stated a negative horse opinion.

yankee bravo voted for bush..

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

Yes,you're wrong(as well.)You both have a bias against horses who have raced over synthetics.He has had 4 races(fired in all of them.)Ran well in 3 stakes on 3 different surfaces.Shows a lot of competitive fire.Solis says the horse is a baby still,and gunna get better.He says he is very special.He is one bad ride away from running 2nd to the horse that is the favorite (right now) to win the derby.Somehow he is not a legit derby contender? I am not the one saying something negative about a horse.You're the 2 ruling out a horse as a legit derby contender.Do you see me doing that to a horse? No.You 2 have the closed minds.It's your opinion.It's a negative opinion that I think is not based on anything sound.He has 3 wins and a 3rd.Even if you think he isn't good enough right now,how in the world can you say a horse with 4 races can't improve enough to contend.It is just sloppy.I repeat.It's a negative opinion about a horse.I have not stated a negative opinion about a horse here.I simply stood up for a horse who I think is being ruled out waaay to early by what is mainly an anti-synthetic bias.The horse simply hasn't done anything wrong yet.Even if you think he hasn't done enough right yet,what would make you think he can't improve enough in his 5th and 6th races to be a legit contender.Until he does something wrong,he is a LEGIT DERBY CONTENDER.I have the positive horse opinion.You've stated a negative horse opinion.

You are hilarious. I am going to assume that you have some perverse new racing related comedy routine that you are testing for laughs on this site. I gotta say....two thumbs up....way up.

First you pulled the " censorship " card. Because you came on here ranting in the way middle of the night, and your posts were trimmed ( if you were truly censorsed this thread would have been removed....or worse ) does not mean you were censored. Get over it.

You call the most respected racing journalist in the country " sloppy " because you don't agree with him. But, we're wrong and you're right. I get it....I'm laughing. It's good stuff.

Then, I don't like the horse because I am biased against horses that have raced on synthetic surfaces. Why don't you throw in that I think women should be barefoot and pregnant while you're at it ( or any other racial slurs you feel compelled to use ). Hey, maybe some gay bashing would liven up your routine as well.

If this isn't your idea of some kind of joke then, frankly, I am worried about you.