Never won on the dirt theory is dead

[kgar311]

this thread is so ****ing stupid I feel like kicking you in the face, no way in hell the race turns out like this if we have a fast track. The track was set up for poly horses all day with all the rain. So much in fact I boxed the 5 horses in the ex that came from keenland 4-5-7-8-9

[sdjcom]

Originally Posted by kgar311

this thread is so ****ing stupid I feel like kicking you in the face, no way in hell the race turns out like this if we have a fast track. The track was set up for poly horses all day with all the rain. So much in fact I boxed the 5 horses in the ex that came from keenland 4-5-7-8-9

then you lost $60 on the tri and $120 on the super

[Pedigree Ann]

Originally Posted by kgar311

The track was set up for poly horses all day with all the rain. So much in fact I boxed the 5 horses in the ex that came from keenland 4-5-7-8-9

First AW tracks are equivalent to turf, now they are equivalent to mud?

1st - winner shipped in from Oaklawn, never ran on AW
2nd - winner had serious class advantage, won his debut at Belmont
3rd - winner had run second to Summer Bird in an Oaklawn maiden 2 back
4th - winner had just broken his maiden by 8 at the Fair Grounds
5th - turf
6th - winner was 4/4 in mud, a winner 2 back on the Aqueduct inner track
7th - winner had won an An1x at CD last fall, cutting back from a trouncing by Rachel Alexandra in the FG mud
8th - turf
9th - winner broke her maiden at GP, won a stakes at Belmont. Hey, she can run on Poly at Kee, too! And mud!
10th- turf

So tell me again how the track was playing to "poly horses"? Or don't you bother to read PPs anymore?