Originally Posted by Mawhip (Post 770094)

Can we get back to the original topic that Drugs is a serial redboarder. This grammer stuff is so confusing.

Originally Posted by Rare Bog (Post 770107)

You fell for that? Fish on.......

Originally Posted by Rare Bog (Post 770107)

You fell for that? Fish on.......

Originally Posted by DaTruth (Post 770112)

I hate to interrupt the grammar cotillion, but DrugS has requested placement on the 180 day disabled list. I hope all of you are happy. I was looking forward to his upcoming presentation on the effect that Reconstruction had on the Phoenix Handicap.

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS (Post 769627)

A repeat of his race in November - over the CD tracks - will easily win the KY Derby - and his two performances this year are about as good as the last two performances of any horse in this crop pointing for the KY Derby.

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel (Post 770295)

you are kidding me right? then you post that i'm analytically incompetent...even though i pretty much make my living doing this. its also part of the reason i get mad at your drival. people actually buy this crap as knowledge. his last two performances have been dreadful for a horse thats supposed to be the best.....oh yeah, he ran as good as tobys corner, archarcharch, nehro....ect.....the other guy was more accurate than your crappy 19.5%...that horse is probably 19.5% chance of even running. of course i'm hoping he does. every trainer dreams of having his 1-10 shot throwing out the anchor after a dawdling pace compared to the ark derby...maybe you should increase it to 33.3%????? thats how i make my money betting horses that will pay the same to show as they do to win...when they are 1-10.....lol...gee, i better bet him to win i'll get 2.20 instead of 2.10 to show.........people are billliant and i'm always there to cash on their brilliance. at least you finally gave up on to honor and serve...oh yeah, you didn't, he got hurt and spared the embarrassment. i heard it on good authority that uncle mo ran faster than blame and zenyatta at churchill too.....lol....

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie (Post 770298)

I've really tried to be tolerant of your blinkers induced narrow field of vision, but man, you are a dolt.

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie (Post 770298)

I've really tried to be tolerant of your blinkers induced narrow field of vision, but man, you are a dolt.

Originally Posted by paulo537 (Post 770306)

What does the fact that you and others basically call Uncle Mo the horse to beat solely off his 2 yo form make you?

Hopefully, nothing more serious than just being a Mo-tard.

Originally Posted by miraja2 (Post 770303)

Perhaps, but his writing style is so aesthetically pleasing!

Originally Posted by miraja2 (Post 770308)

Are people really saying that?
I guess everybody has their own definition of what "horse to beat" means but I don't see anybody in this thread saying he's the "horse to beat." You might think DrugS gave him too high of a chance to win on his list, and you might be right, but based on his percentages he is still saying he thinks there's over an 80% chance that Uncle Mo will NOT win the Derby. To me, that isn't exactly a huge endorsement of Mo or constitute "basically" calling him the horse to beat.

Originally Posted by paulo537 (Post 770326)

"Most likely winner."

"Fair Value favorite."

"Highest percentage likelihood to win."

"Horse to beat."

Is there really any difference? If there is, I don't know it. Perhaps upon his return DrugS will toss me a clue.

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel (Post 770295)

you are kidding me right? then you post that i'm analytically incompetent...even though i pretty much make my living doing this. its also part of the reason i get mad at your drival. people actually buy this crap as knowledge. his last two performances have been dreadful for a horse thats supposed to be the best.....oh yeah, he ran as good as tobys corner, archarcharch, nehro....ect.....the other guy was more accurate than your crappy 19.5%...that horse is probably 19.5% chance of even running. of course i'm hoping he does. every trainer dreams of having his 1-10 shot throwing out the anchor after a dawdling pace compared to the ark derby...maybe you should increase it to 33.3%????? thats how i make my money betting horses that will pay the same to show as they do to win...when they are 1-10.....lol...gee, i better bet him to win i'll get 2.20 instead of 2.10 to show.........people are billliant and i'm always there to cash on their brilliance. i heard it on good authority that uncle mo ran faster than blame and zenyatta at churchill too.....lol....

Originally Posted by paulo537 (Post 770326)

And really, it's nothing other than internet talk about one race. Not incredibly important but when you still think U Mo is the likeliest winner 3 weeks out with what is known AND when you categorize people who disagree with you with various cognomens, you can't be totally shocked when you are offered a small taste of what your own cooking.

Originally Posted by Dahoss (Post 770332)

What does pretty much make my living doing this mean? The few opinions you have given before races have been dreadful. I think if you actually took a few seconds and tried to understand what DrugS is saying, it might make more sense. Or maybe someone could read it to you and explain it. He's not saying he is betting Uncle Mo, or would want to right now. He's just talking about odds.

Also, does ignoring all questions or responses that make you look foolish mean they don't exist? You're not the only one that does this, but you're one of the best.

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie (Post 770353)

I caught that too, but thought it better to not ask such foolish questions.

Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 770419)

I thought johnny pinwheel was the guy who said just a few months back that he hardly ever bets, though I could be confusing him with someone who was darted. And they probably deserved it.

Originally Posted by slotdirt (Post 774388)

Way to go out on a limb there with those selections.

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel (Post 774387)

yup, i'm a moron and this drugs guy is great,,,,,he sucks.....19.5% to win.....anyone with half a brain saw this coming.......oh, he ran so "great" last two starts......it was like 10% this horse would even run .....but i'm an idiot......lol..hey, drugs.....you should really try doing something else. how much do you make at the track? the mo rons are crying in their beer today...i only wish they ran him ...they would of bet him anyway. archarcharch, dialed in, nehro and shackleford....theres my before the race handle morons...have a nice day at work monday morning.....lol. i never say before...theres at least 3 threads where i say this horse probably will scracth

Originally Posted by bare it all (Post 774433)

http://www.lookatmyhorsemyhorseisamazing.com/

Good luck everyone!

Originally Posted by bare it all (Post 774433)

http://www.lookatmyhorsemyhorseisamazing.com/

Good luck everyone!

Originally Posted by herkhorse (Post 769567)

I'll take that bet.

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS (Post 769582)

He's talking out of his ass.

Originally Posted by Dunbar (Post 769723)

Really? I'd make a humongous bet at even money that Dialed In will run. Your statement is ridiculous unless you have some inside knowledge about Dialed In's condition, which I doubt.


--Dunbar

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS (Post 769558)

Updated Chances of winning:


Uncle Mo (19.25%)
Dialed In (16.25%)
Archarcharch (8.25%)
Nehro (8%)
Midnight Interlude (8%)
The Factor (6.50%)
Mucho Macho Man (6.25%)
Toby's Corner (4.50%)
Silver Medallion (4%)
Soldat (3.5%)
Sheckleford (3.25%)
Jaycito (2.25%)
Pants on Fire (1.80%)
Brilliant Speed (1.25%)
Santiva (1%)
Decisive Moment (1%)
Animal Kingdom (1%)
Stay Thirsty (0.50%)
Twice the Appeal (0.25%)
Sway Away (0.25%)
Joe Vann (0.25%)
Bretheren (0.25%)
Watch Me Go (0.05%)


The Rest: 2.45%

Originally Posted by paulo537 (Post 774465)

Right.

Originally Posted by miraja2 (Post 774540)

So....in this thread DrugS gave Uncle Mo around a 20% chance to win the race.
And you said there was a 50% chance that Dialed In wouldn't even run in the race.

And now you are being smug and talking shit?

Unless something changes with Dialed In in the next 24 hours, I don't see where your statements in this thread justify the smug attitude you've assumed here.

Originally Posted by DaTruth (Post 774549)

I think Dunbar was the one who said Dialed In wasn't running.