Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ELA
Please. Let's try and do a real reality check here. Go back and check all of the threads that said this horse had no shot, was a bet against, and so on. The prevalent and most overwhelming reasons was everything else -- except on a rare occasion -- other than a weak, pathetic crop.
Did the majority people here say he was a lock? I guess I completely misread the the entire pre-Derby discussions here.
Eric
|
Not many said he was a lock but that doesn't mean that they felt he had no shot either.
I did look and didn't find any threads that said he had no shot. I did see that many considered him a bet against which is not the same thing. I took a stand against, it sounds like you did as well. Both of us knew that it was possible that he would decimate the field, but wanted to make him earn it and if he couldn't do it we would be there to clean up.
I'm quite sure that most of the people that post here are sharp enough to know that the race went through Big Brown, that if he ran like he did in Florida it would be no contest.
As far as him beating a pathethic crop, I think its a fair statement. Not to diminish Big Brown any, he might have been good enough to beat a solid crop, but it is what it is, and the group he beat, excepting for the filly was awful.