Remember This Statement By Crist

[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 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.

[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 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.

[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 hoovesupsideyourhead

yankee bravo voted for bush..

Shhhh....that was my ace in the hole.

[ArlJim78]

positive horse opinion vs. negative horse opinion? that's a new one.
with the positive horse opinion theory I guess no horses are ruled out yet.

[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.

[SCUDSBROTHER]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

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.

The way I see it,you get to say pretty much any fool thing you want on here.You're close friends with the owner of the site,and he can do as he pleases.Different rules for different folks around here.I told him to give me a list of the untouchable VIP like Crist,but he never gave it to me.Same was true when Cannon came on here telling me Street Sense wasn't aided by bias at the Churchill B.C. Well,did he ever look that way again? He won the derby,but not by 10 lengths.It wasn't like he hopped on a 10 speed n' everybody else was riding tricycles(that's about the way that Juvenile win looked..that was a biased track,but look at the war put up to deny it.) Even VIP are wrong sometimes.......or sloppy.

[blackthroatedwind]

I will assume that was more of the routine.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

The way I see it,you get to say pretty much any fool thing you want on here.You're close friends with the owner of the site,and he can do as he pleases.Different rules for different folks around here.I told him to give me a list of the untouchable VIP like Crist,but he never gave it to me.Same was true when Cannon came on here telling me Street Sense wasn't aided by bias at the Churchill B.C. Well,did he ever look that way again? He won the derby,but not by 10 lengths.It wasn't like he hopped on a 10 speed n' everybody else was riding tricycles(that's about the way that Juvenile win looked..that was a biased track,but look at the war put up to deny it.) Even VIP are wrong sometimes.......or sloppy.

This BC rail-bias argument is the greatest fallacy going. You're right, Street Sense didn't win the Derby by ten lengths, due to the presence of Hard Spun and Curlin. He did, however, trounce the same bunch of modest horses that he beat in the BC Juvenile (Circular Quay, Great Hunter, etc.) by the same margin in the Derby as he did in the BC Juvenile. So your point is ... ?

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Cardus

This is faulty logic, something that you might call "sloppy."

His efforts on a synthetic surface and on turf have no bearing on his Derby bona fides. This is self-evident.

It's also self-evident that his best race was his first start on dirt, he may well have been giving away a conditioning edge to the winner and, oh, yeah, he's likely to be a big number if he makes the race.

If that is faulty, sloppy logic, put me down.

Then again, looking for the right viable long priced horse to crash the ticket never works. I suppose the Super in last year's Derby paid $30k because Street Sense won and the two behind him were on the "short list." And I guess the Super paid $90k the year before because Barbaro won.

There is more than just one way to play the game. But believing that is probably an egregious hole in my game, as the wisest of wise men would say.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Cardus

My post could not have been any clearer.

I made no mention of anything else that you addressed above.

Thanks for clearing that up. I wouldn't want to categorize your post as sloppy and now I won't.

[ELA]

Of course the "rail bias" has been debated and debated over and over again. Personally, my question is -- what's the difference? Rail bias, he wins like whoever you want to call it, by 10. So, especially now, since the horse came back and did what he did -- what difference does it make?

If he came up the rail and then moved outside coming around/out of the turn -- does anyone think he still doesn't win that race? So, he doesn't win by 10. He still wins.

As far as Yankee Bravo -- I think he needs to move forward much more in order to get into the league of what we've seen so far between Pyro and War Pass (concerns about distance limitations of course must be part of the equation. Right now, he's not anywhere near those colts. That's not to say he might not turn the corner and and be ready to take some massive step forward and progress. It's possible, but most would say not probable.

What Solis says about the horse must be taken into consideration, but also must be taken with a grain of salt. Solis is a sharp jock. He's been around a very long time and sat on enough good horses to know what he's sitting on, when a colt has ability, is immature, could be turning the corner, getting better, etc. At the same time, he of course wants to keep the mount, especially if it's his best/only shot to be in the game.

Eric

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by Cardus

Do you believe that his synthetic and turf races matter when it comes to assessing his chances in the Derby?

Yes. And only because he ran well in his first dirt race. So his good dirt race validates, at least to some extent, his synth and turf form. Absolutely.

It's a fallacy that all synth horses are junk on dirt. Most are and will be but there are going to be some that run well on the junk in spite of it not being the horse's best surface. Is he one of these? Who knows but at this point he is one to watch in his next race.

Which is really all I've said. Again, to each his own on how to bet but I will never make a win bet on any of the top 5 or 6 "hyped" horses in the Derby. Sometimes the best or one of the best horses wins, but not often enough for my tastes.

I prefer to find a playably longshot and splash the horse around in the Tri and Super.

I'm not overly intelligent but I'm smart enough to understand the way I play the Derby is, in the end, no less of a gamble than playing a short-priced horse to win.

There's merit in betting what you think the best horse is to win. Most people do. But I'd never play the race that way.

So Yankee Bravo is on my list of possible horses to use.