3-year-old Recap - Updated Derby Chances

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Most of the things I say about Indian Charlie are tongue in cheek, but I'm starting to get the feeling that you have the mentality of a Johnny Pinwheel or TFF, minus the abrasiveness. Your ability to discern any sort of subtlety from what you see or read is non existent.

As for DrugS. Are you serious? I rip on that mofo probably more than anyone on here.

I do respect his ability with the horses, and he is one of the truly more interesting posters on here because of his ability to think outside the same, narrow, self imposed lines that people draw for themselves.

You are, however, way off base if you think I'm stroking his ego. He's a freaking ****** in real life.

I'll tell you what. From now on, if you like, I'll preface any posts pertaining to IC or DrugS with an explanation of whether I'm serious, half serious, mostly not serious, or completely joking. That way you can keep your brain on auto pilot.

If it's tongue in cheek, then you really need a new gimmick. You're the one who misunderstood what I was saying and concluded that my brain was "marshmallow" (rather hilarious). . . I can assure you - if I ever miss the masterful subtlety of one of your posts, it's because I can't be bothered to wade through all the bullshit.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

If it's tongue in cheek, then you really need a new gimmick. You're the one who misunderstood what I was saying and concluded that my brain was "marshmallow" (rather hilarious). . . I can assure you - if I ever miss the masterful subtlety of one of your posts, it's because I can't be bothered to wade through all the bullshit.

You've been on DT longer than I have.

It was not until maybe the last year or so that I started doing my IC shtick. Prior to that, I barely mentioned my namesake.

I thought it would be pretty obvious that after several years of being restrained and fairly objective about my favorite horse, that I was teasing PG1985 and Betsy, and their rather over the top enthusiasm over their favorite stallions.

Those would be Giants Causeway for PG1985 and anything AP Indy for Betsy, in case you didn't figure it out.

Perhaps you never really paid any attention to my posts, which is fine, but you sure seem to be lately, so I doubt that is it.

This leads to the most likely conclusion that you are humorless.

And yeah, you know what, people who are so single minded, to me, they have brains of marshmallow.

As for misunderstanding your post about RHL, I did not misunderstand it at all. It was nonsensical, and I treated it as such.

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

You've been on DT longer than I have.
It was not until maybe the last year or so that I started doing my IC shtick. Prior to that, I barely mentioned my namesake.
I thought it would be pretty obvious that after several years of being restrained and fairly objective about my favorite horse, that I was teasing PG1985 and Betsy, and their rather over the top enthusiasm over their favorite stallions.
Those would be Giants Causeway for PG1985 and anything AP Indy for Betsy, in case you didn't figure it out.
Perhaps you never really paid any attention to my posts, which is fine, but you sure seem to be lately, so I doubt that is it.
This leads to the most likely conclusion that you are humorless.
And yeah, you know what, people who are so single minded, to me, they have brains of marshmallow.
As for misunderstanding your post about RHL, I did not misunderstand it at all. It was nonsensical, and I treated it as such.

You're still way off, but that's ok. I'm certainly not humorless or single-minded. . . I guess I just don't find you funny and don't care to seek out my daily source of levity here.

I can tell when you're joking (or trying to), but it's clear at times that when the conversation is about Uncle Mo, you're just as incapable of being objective as the two posters you've so brilliantly fashioned your (supposed) elaborate parody after.

I don't find anything objectionable in your posts, but I also don't really see anything of particular merit or worth. When have you ever given a real opinion and supported it with anything persuasive? That's why I find your relationship with Doug so interesting - he's a brilliant handicapper, and you're just the guy commenting in his threads with sock jokes, but for some reason he gives you the time of day. The difference between you and him is that he can offer both worthwhile information and actual humor, all you've got is the latter. . . or your best attempt. Or is the whole "I'm joking all the time" act just to insulate yourself from your mediocre opinion?

Your vague comments about Uncle Mo's performance Saturday certainly weren't aimed at comedy, but they didn't offer anything of substance either. Thanks for pointing out that a horse who was lumbering home for third didn't seem to be running his best, though. Or was there some joke that I wasn't in on? Man, you're so good at making me feel stupid (insert sarcasm emoticon).

You took great offense--and offended in turn--to me pointing out that your discussion about R Heat Lightning vs. Joe Vann/Brethren was ridiculous because two of the three runners weren't even going to compete and the third was an exposed bum (he only has a 0.50% chance of winning according to "Savantore"). How am I the nonsensical one in that scenario? Maybe your point was "R Heat Lightning is so hopeless that I would take two other hopeless horses who also have no shot before her." If so, could you spell that out better for us slow folk next time? Mine was a passing comment - there was no room for any logic to even get twisted around.

You're pretty easy to figure out. . . You're the guy who likes to create the illusion of intelligence by pegging others as "retards," "Zentards," or any other group you can oh so cleverly add "tard" to. In going back to read your posts - I got through one page, and it's disturbing how many of them involve some vain attempt to assert your perceived intelligence. No reasonably intelligent person would devote so much energy to that pursuit.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

You're still way off, but that's ok. I'm certainly not humorless or single-minded. . . I guess I just don't find you funny and don't care to seek out my daily source of levity here.

I can tell when you're joking (or trying to), but it's clear at times that when the conversation is about Uncle Mo, you're just as incapable of being objective as the two posters you've so brilliantly fashioned your (supposed) elaborate parody after.

I don't find anything objectionable in your posts, but I also don't really see anything of particular merit or worth. When have you ever given a real opinion and supported it with anything persuasive? That's why I find your relationship with Doug so interesting - he's a brilliant handicapper, and you're just the guy commenting in his threads with sock jokes, but for some reason he gives you the time of day. The difference between you and him is that he can offer both worthwhile information and actual humor, all you've got is the latter. . . or your best attempt. Or is the whole "I'm joking all the time" act just to insulate yourself from your mediocre opinion?

Your vague comments about Uncle Mo's performance Saturday certainly weren't aimed at comedy, but they didn't offer anything of substance either. Thanks for pointing out that a horse who was lumbering home for third didn't seem to be running his best, though. Or was there some joke that I wasn't in on? Man, you're so good at making me feel stupid (insert sarcasm emoticon).

You took great offense--and offended in turn--to me pointing out that your discussion about R Heat Lightning vs. Joe Vann/Brethren was ridiculous because two of the three runners weren't even going to compete and the third was an exposed bum (he only has a 0.50% chance of winning according to "Savantore"). How am I the nonsensical one in that scenario? Maybe your point was "R Heat Lightning is so hopeless that I would take two other hopeless horses who also have no shot before her." If so, could you spell that out better for us slow folk next time? Mine was a passing comment - there was no room for any logic to even get twisted around.

You're pretty easy to figure out. . . You're the guy who likes to create the illusion of intelligence by pegging others as "retards," "Zentards," or any other group you can oh so cleverly add "tard" to. In going back to read your posts - I got through one page, and it's disturbing how many of them involve some vain attempt to assert your perceived intelligence. No reasonably intelligent person would devote so much energy to that pursuit.

Dude, you have me pegged perfectly. I think you might have missed your calling by not getting into the mental health field.

To address a couple of points beyond your brilliant insight into my illusion of intelligence:

When I have a fairly strong opinion on something, I post it. I'm not one to throw out a zillion ideas or opinions just because I can. If something is really obvious, why state it? If my belief in something is minimal, again, why post it?

True, I don't go through a card and post my picks for the day, if that's what you are talking about. That is simply not my interest. However, many times I've gone against the grain, or popular opinion on a well known horse, and I've almost always been right.

I'd also be curious as to where I've posted anything resembling mindless adoration for Uncle Mo. When not in jest anyways, which you claim to be able to tell from a more serious toned post.

Finally, as for taking great offense to R Heat Lighting winning the Derby. I did no such thing. It's a preposterous idea, and I let you know it. Just because I posted an opinion (a true rarity!) that was sharply different than yours, doesn't mean I took offense.

In fact, I think the only time I took offense at anything on here was when Smooth Operatard (oops, there I go again) cut me down hard with his Loser1 crack.

Oh yeah, the Dougie thing. He gives me the time of day because he knows that I, in his own words, 'think outside the box' and that I often see things a lot of people miss. Which is why I give him the time of day as well.

That, and I'm not a tard!

As for you, maybe you are not humorless and single minded in real life, but you do seem to be here, which is all I can go on. Lighten up a little bit and try to realize not everyone here has the same objectives, or viewpoints as you.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

mumble, mumble, mumble - babble babble babble - blah, blah

FTFY.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

FTFY.

Sharp post!

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Finally, as for taking great offense to R Heat Lighting winning the Derby. I did no such thing. It's a preposterous idea, and I let you know it. Just because I posted an opinion (a true rarity!) that was sharply different than yours, doesn't mean I took offense.

I'm done with this. . . but you're still confused. I NEVER said R Heat Lightning could win the Derby. I said the opposite. You do realize I wasn't the one who originally had that discussion with you, right?

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

I'm done with this. . . but you're still confused. I NEVER said R Heat Lightning could win the Derby. I said the opposite. You do realize I wasn't the one who originally had that discussion with you, right?

Yes, I do realize that.

Yet, you keep bothering me about my saying that R Heat Lightning can't possibly win the Derby.

Maybe your confusion has confused me.

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Yes, I do realize that.

Yet, you keep bothering me about my saying that R Heat Lightning can't possibly win the Derby.

Maybe your confusion has confused me.

I'm bothering you because of your insulting and laughably inaccurate conclusions about me. . . I could not care less about your opinion on an actual horse race.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by hockey2315

You do realize I wasn't the one who originally had that discussion with you, right?

The irony in this is I never said that R Heat Lightning could win. I do think you have to consider running though, at least if you own her, given how lame every other prep has looked so far.

[hockey2315]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The irony in this is I never said that R Heat Lightning could win. I do think you have to consider running though, at least if you own her, given how lame every other prep has looked so far.

I see what you're saying with her. . . and I don't think it'd be a completely crazy idea to run her because, on paper, she looks extremely logical. It's the whole "would you rather be 2-1 for $1M or 12-1 for $2M?" debate. I assume Mrs. Robsham would keep her for breeding, which makes the decision easier.

One passing comment I made while not really paying attention and focusing on covering the sale has become much more of a focal point than it was intended to be. . .

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The irony in this is I never said that R Heat Lightning could win. I do think you have to consider running though, at least if you own her, given how lame every other prep has looked so far.

No. The irony is that all I said was that she would get slaughtered in the Derby.

Then, I said she would be a worse fit than either Brethren or that Illinois Derby winner. Apparently, that must mean that I was giving out the exacta, or something.