Final Verdict ... Fog Is A Fraud

Originally Posted by TheSpyder

BB,

Have to agree with a lot of other posters. What is a fraud and more importantly who are the "goo goo's" you're trying to defend against?

LITF is a very good horse, maybe not a super great horse. How many horses each year achieve the results that he did? I guess less that 1%.

I expect from the number of posts you make that you are a very good handicaper and maybe not a super great handicapper....

...now does that make you a fraud? Maybe the goo goo's can answer that, but why should they?

I just posted a response on the "LITF" thread which is also appropriate here. I'll reprint it now ...

"I've posted many times that I am not a 'handicapper' ... I haven't placed a serious bet on a horse since 1967. I don't have the time that's required to follow day-to-day racing to the extent that's needed in order to be a successful bettor ... and I know it ... that's why I don't bet.

But I do have the time to watch and analyze G1 dirt racing ... which is what I've been doing since 1958 ... and I'm knowledgable enough to recognize when a horse doesn't finish his races with conviction against weak fields ... and is thus very vulnerable against strong fields.

Lost In The Fog is not himself a fraud ... he's just a horse ... it's the over-the-top over-evaluation he was given by naïve goo-goos that was ... and is ... fraudulent."

I think that should address your concerns.

[TheSpyder]

BB,

Good answer and makes me ask, with your years of watching. In your opinion, who were the best of the best. Serious question, not trying to pick with you. Who was the best sprinter you've seen, distance horse, turf horse...

Sounds like the making of another thread.

Spyder from SC

Originally Posted by TheSpyder

BB,

Good answer and makes me ask, with your years of watching. In your opinion, who were the best of the best. Serious question, not trying to pick with you. Who was the best sprinter you've seen, distance horse, turf horse...

Sounds like the making of another thread.

Spyder from SC

Yes ... create another thread ... it could get interesting.

[Phalaris1913]

LITF has a serious weakness as a sprinter. He's not terribly fast out of the gate and while he does not technically require that his nose be in front every step of the way, he has not proven that he can run his race if he is very far from the front. He looks tough when he gets 22-second opening quarters, but struggles when faced with 21-and-change against better horses. He's good enough to look like the second coming when he could ship around and run against 3YOs of no particular account, but he's had a little trouble running with the big dogs.

Obviously, the horse himself defrauded no one, but he wasn't, and thus far, isn't, as good as his fans would like to think. He most likely would not have as many fans - nor as glossy of a race record - had he been campaigned in a manner in which he was tested against decent company earlier in his career rather than carefully managed to maximize his race record. It's one of the inherent flaws of paying attention only to the record and not to what it was accomplished against. There were many better sprinters that ran in the US in 2005, but since none of them had the luxury of running against such modest competition for most of the year, their records don't look nearly as good on paper.

I fought this battle last fall and don't expect that anyone who still thinks LITF is all that is going to change their mind reading this now, but I am compelled to speak up.

Originally Posted by Phalaris1913

LITF has a serious weakness as a sprinter. He's not terribly fast out of the gate and while he does not technically require that his nose be in front every step of the way, he has not proven that he can run his race if he is very far from the front. He looks tough when he gets 22-second opening quarters, but struggles when faced with 21-and-change against better horses. He's good enough to look like the second coming when he could ship around and run against 3YOs of no particular account, but he's had a little trouble running with the big dogs.

Obviously, the horse himself defrauded no one, but he wasn't, and thus far, isn't, as good as his fans would like to think. He most likely would not have as many fans - nor as glossy of a race record - had he been campaigned in a manner in which he was tested against decent company earlier in his career rather than carefully managed to maximize his race record. It's one of the inherent flaws of paying attention only to the record and not to what it was accomplished against. There were many better sprinters that ran in the US in 2005, but since none of them had the luxury of running against such modest competition for most of the year, their records don't look nearly as good on paper.

I fought this battle last fall and don't expect that anyone who still thinks LITF is all that is going to change their mind reading this now, but I am compelled to speak up.

Your compulsion is duly noted ... and your insight is duly appreciated.

P.S. Are you the real Phalaris ... or is Pedigree Ann the real Phalaris?

[Phalaris1913]

I'm the real Phalaris - have been since the early 1990s. I am the Phalaris from the Derby list, the Phalaris from other racing forums, etc.

I've been distracted the last couple months because we recently moved out of state. I haven't had time to be active on any of the lists or forums lately.

[randallscott35]

Fraud is strong, but he's never beat older horses unless you want to include the crippled Kelly's Landing in the mix.

Originally Posted by Phalaris1913

I'm the real Phalaris - have been since the early 1990s. I am the Phalaris from the Derby list, the Phalaris from other racing forums, etc.

I've been distracted the last couple months because we recently moved out of state. I haven't had time to be active on any of the lists or forums lately.

Uh-huh ... uh-huh ... well ... if you're the "real" Phalaris ...

... please state your sex ... and provide the initials of the publication you once were associated with.

By these shall we know ye.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Phalaris1913

LITF has a serious weakness as a sprinter. He's not terribly fast out of the gate and while he does not technically require that his nose be in front every step of the way, he has not proven that he can run his race if he is very far from the front. He looks tough when he gets 22-second opening quarters, but struggles when faced with 21-and-change against better horses. He's good enough to look like the second coming when he could ship around and run against 3YOs of no particular account, but he's had a little trouble running with the big dogs.

Obviously, the horse himself defrauded no one, but he wasn't, and thus far, isn't, as good as his fans would like to think. He most likely would not have as many fans - nor as glossy of a race record - had he been campaigned in a manner in which he was tested against decent company earlier in his career rather than carefully managed to maximize his race record. It's one of the inherent flaws of paying attention only to the record and not to what it was accomplished against. There were many better sprinters that ran in the US in 2005, but since none of them had the luxury of running against such modest competition for most of the year, their records don't look nearly as good on paper.

I fought this battle last fall and don't expect that anyone who still thinks LITF is all that is going to change their mind reading this now, but I am compelled to speak up.

Why would LITF run from far off the pace? He has blazing speed. If a sprinter has blazing speed and always go to the lead or is just off the pace, why would he have to prove that he could run his race from well off the pace? There have been plenty of great sprinters that were always near or on the lead. If you look at LITF's past performanes, he is never further back than a length. He has blazing speed. He has gone :43 and change and still won. LITF is a very versatile horse. I think he could come from 4-5 lengths back if he wanted to, but there would never be a reason for him to be that far back.
The reason LITF was so far back yesterday was because he didn't have it yesterday. Even if you'e right and LITF is not that good of a horse, if he would have been right yesterday he would have at least showed some speed. Even if he was overmatched and was going to get soundly defeated yesterday, he still would have showed some speed before quitting. The horse had absolutely nothing yesterday. That's why he showed no speed. Even in the Breeder's Cup against the best sprinters, LITF was within a length and even took the lead at the quarter pole. I don't think LITF even ran his best in the BC Sprint. He simply had too many races. He was knocked out when he got to the BC Sprint.
It's hard to say exactly how good LITF is. There weren't any great sprinters around last year. I think he was certainly the best sprinter last year. I don't know how he would have done against some of the really good sprinters of the last few years. If LITF was at 100% and would have run in the 2004 BC Sprint, I doubt he would have beaten Speighstown that day.

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Why would LITF run from far off the pace? He has blazing speed. If a sprinter has blazing speed and always go to the lead or is just off the pace, why would he have to prove that he could run his race from well off the pace? There have been plenty of great sprinters that were always near or on the lead. If you look at LITF's past performanes, he is never further back than a length. He has blazing speed. He has gone :43 and change and still won. LITF is a very versatile horse. I think he could come from 4-5 lengths back if he wanted to, but there would never be a reason for him to be that far back.

Ummm, Rupe ... you kind of missed the point. Phalaris wasn't saying that Lost In The Fog should run from off the pace ... but that he can't stay with the pace when he's up against quality sprinters.

And because he can't stay with the pace ... he can't win ... because he has no ability to come from off the pace.

Do you see the distinction? Good ... I'm glad you do.

He is a different horse this year. I dont care what kind of fields the horse ran against last year, he had as good a motion as a sprinter as I have seen. Again, on this board, you are only as good as your last race. I cannot completely toss a horse as visually impressive as LITF till his connections clearly state he is done, he is not the same horse, and he never will be. He was just too damn good to toss.

I remember when everyone gave up on Congaree when his 4 year old year started out poorly. I believe a really bad race at 4 at lone star and calls for his retirement started. And he turned out to be a pleasure to watch. He gave us some fantastic efforts.

Not saying will happen the same way with LITF. I just have a habit of not giving up on horses I know have shown brilliance in the past after a bad race.
No excuses. Im just saying this horse was very very good. Im not done.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Bold Brooklynite

Ummm, Rupe ... you kind of missed the point. Phalaris wasn't saying that Lost In The Fog should run from off the pace ... but that he can't stay with the pace when he's up against quality sprinters.

And because he can't stay with the pace ... he can't win ... because he has no ability to come from off the pace.

Do you see the distinction? Good ... I'm glad you do.

That is nonsense that he can't stay with the pace with good sprinters. Even in the BC sprint, he was within a length of the lead and then he actually took the lead at the top of the the stretch. His problem is certainly not a lack of early speed.
In addition, he has won from off the pace. I can't belive the nonsense I read here. I remember a similar debate about Tiger Woods. Someone said that he can't win when he doesn't have the lead going into the final round. When evidence was presented that he's won tons of times when he didn't have the lead going into the final round, then the poster said that Tiger doesn't win majors when he doesn't have the lead. That is absurd and it is absurd with horses too. If a horse has shown he can rate, then he can rate. It's that simple. If you can rate against mediocre horses, you can rate against good horses. LITF has shown he can rate.
LITF obviously did not fire yesterday. He was even behind Kelly's Landing in the early going yesterday. What does that tell you? LITF normally has much more early speed than Kelly's Landing. KL is not even a speed horse. LITF was 4 lengths ahead of KL in the early part of their last race.
I can't guarantee you that LITF would have won yesterday if he would have fired. However, I can certainly guarantee you that he would have at least showed some speed and been well ahead of KL in the early going. If anyone of you honestly think that LITF ran his best yesterday, then I give up.

[Phalaris1913]

Why would LITF run from far off the pace? He has blazing speed.

The problem with LITF is that he isn't all that blazing fast. He has encountered 21-and-change opening quarters against open company twice and lost both times. If you're a sprinter who can't handle 21-and-change opening quarters in against horses who can, you'd best be able to make up some ground. Thus far, LITF's losses coincide with occasions in which he has gotten outrun from the gate; he has yet to win a race when he had more than one horse in front of him early.

I don't understand the big disconnect with this horse. He never even saw anything resembling high-caliber sprinters until BC day. That he was able to waltz - usually in 22/44-45 - against patsies all year was somehow assumed to be fully transferable to real sprinting and it simply wasn't. He is 1 for 4 against half-decent open-company sprinters - the 1 coming on the occasion when he was able to get a 45-second half - and that looks to me like the true bill.

[Downthestretch55]

He reposted an EXCUSE!
LOSER!
Winners don't need to make excuses for why they lost, cause they won!
This loser knows nothing about horse racing, handicapping, breeding....
on and on.
Spends far too much time looking at rightwing propaganda sites like townhall.com...
and you think he can give you good info about horses??????

LMFAO!!!!!!
AGAIN!

Probably wets his bed if he forgets to put on his "depends".
Listen to this loser and he'll make you one also.
Anyone like Mayan King for their broodmare?

LOL!