![Old](images/statusicon/post_old.gif)
04-13-2009, 12:28 PM
|
![philcski's Avatar](image.php?s=7c94d7b79c8bde111cb65fb894973e58&u=247&dateline=1275066531) |
Goodwood
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mission Viejo, CA
Posts: 8,872
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_fat_man
This is the problem in conventional handicapping. The pacesetter in any other type of race is at a distinct disadvantage. In dirt horse racing, with all the biased tracks and other factors, the speed has the advantage. Handicappers come up with creative ways to justify this as it's the 'norm' for them. When fair racing comes along, like what's happening in CALI, KEE, and elsewhere, they don't know how to deal with it. DIRT reigns supreme and what's actually fair racing, POLY (all artificial surfaces) is DEBASED.
Go figure.
As for me, CALI racing, and all other artificial track racing, MAKES SENSE.
|
Not true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSC
Acoma is one that comes to mind, she's won on dirt/synth/turf and she is by Empire Maker.
|
Name the only filly to win a G2 on dirt, G1 on turf, and G1 on synthetic in the same year.
__________________
please use generalizations and non-truths when arguing your side, thank you
|