Triple Crown?

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

I hope not man, cause this horse is on his way to putting all the lazy/uniformed handicapper cliches to rest.

1) can't win from the 12 at GP
DONE

2) inexperienced horses can't win the derby ---look at CURLIN
DONE

3) can't win from the 20 hole at CD

DONE

4) inexperienced horses can't win the Preakness on short rest
??

5) ditto; and progeny index says he can't get the distance ---BELMONT
??

I can see all the BIGTIMERS next year (and on) not being able to rely on cliches when they can't get a gauge on a horse. Gonna be brutal, whether BB wins the TC or not. Imagine all that extra work.

Were there really a lot of people saying that he "can't win" before the race? Maybe so, but I sure didn't encounter much of it here.
I mean, the horse was both the ML and Post-Time favorite as well, so it wasn't exactly like a lot of people were completely dismissing his chances because of post-position or inexperience.

I just want to make sure that you don't think you were the only person in the country that thought this horse could win. Based on your post, it sure seems like you think that way.

[magic_idol]

Because we dont get times etc down here for american races i could only go on replays on utube etc of past runs & to me Big Browns win was the best run by a long shot & considering he hasnt had anything in his favor on both his races i think he is a contender

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Were there really a lot of people saying that he "can't win" before the race? Maybe so, but I sure didn't encounter much of it here.
I mean, the horse was both the ML and Post-Time favorite as well, so it wasn't exactly like a lot of people were completely dismissing his chances because of post-position or inexperience.

I just want to make sure that you don't think you were the only person in the country that thought this horse could win. Based on your post, it sure seems like you think that way.

You really need to take a step back and think about the content of my post, as it seems I struck a nerve.

The horse might've been the chalk and alot of EXPERTS went as far as saying he had the most ability BUT they stopped short of a full endorsement because of the points mentioned. I'm just tired of hearing these same old tired cliches used when someone doesn't have an opinion. Either you like a horse or you don't. Either you like the odds or you don't. Either you have an opinion or you don't. If you can't analyze the race, sit down. Oh, and the other cliche I forgot to mention: this year's race is not exciting because the horses aren't fast enough. WTF does that mean? 150,000 showed up.

But, for EXPERTS to come out strongly for Colonel John, or Visionaire, or Tale of Ekati, is a ****in joke.



Get my drift?

[ArlJim78]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

You really need to take a step back and think about the content of my post, as it seems I struck a nerve.

The horse might've been the chalk and alot of EXPERTS went as far as saying he had the most ability BUT they stopped short of a full endorsement because of the points mentioned. I'm just tired of hearing these same old tired cliches used when someone doesn't have an opinion. Either you like a horse or you don't. Either you like the odds or you don't. Either you have an opinion or you don't. If you can't analyze the race, sit down. Oh, and the other cliche I forgot to mention: this year's race is not exciting because the horses aren't fast enough. WTF does that mean? 150,000 showed up.

But, for EXPERTS to come out strongly for Colonel John, or Visionaire, or Tale of Ekati, is a ****in joke.



Get my drift?

sorry, but you are really a huge blowhard.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by TheSpyder

Well, do we have one? Sure looks much the best.

Spyder

they all do at this point. what derby winner isn't the next tc winner?

[Slewstoo]

If he wins the Preakness it's going to be funny when everyone starts saying that he can't get the distance in the Belmont. Who of this crop can exactly? He broke from the 20 hold today and still won by 5, hell he probably ran close to the distance of the Belmont!

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

sorry, but you are really a huge blowhard.

Why is it that the truth always hits hardest?

Do we need to dig up the archives for some of these tired cliches?

Come on, Jim, agree with me.

Vote for more decisiveness by our experts.

[Pedigree Ann]

Go ahead and gloat, Big Brown backers (try saying that 3 times fast). You earned it, or rather your horse did.

Did Hank jump aboard Colonel John at the top of the stretch? CJ looked like he was making a good move, then he veered out wide coming off the turn and lost his momentum. Wasn't catching the winner, not with a :47 half, but might have beaten Recapturetheglory.

[SentToStud]

Originally Posted by ArlJim78

sorry, but you are really a huge blowhard.

Well there is sime good news to come out of all this.

I've been working very hard and I am pleased to advise the endowment of the SAVE THE FAT MAN Foundation.

For a mere $0.59 a day, you can sponsor THE FAT MAN to receive a subscritpion to RaceReplays.com. By sponsoring THE FAT MAN, you will save more than $0.59 a day in your own time not having to read the daily THE FAT MAN replay rant.

I am also excited that work has begun on the next THE FAT MAN sponsorship opportunity which will be a subscription to Daily Racing Form.

It is also a pleasure to report Sally Struthers will be assuming spokesperson responsibilities for all future SAVE THE FAT MAN Foundation efforts.

[Pointg5]

DoC will be toast, he won't run in anymore TC races, light framed horse that needs spacing. Forget about him for awhile.

[sdjcom]

Dosen't Seem Like A Candidate For The Belmont? You Are Just A Natural Pessimist. If After His Last Two Races At So Disadvantage
Post Positions, And The Ease He Beat The Best 3 Yr Olds , I Know You Are A Amateur And Don't Have The Eye For It. Sorry But I Just Had To Say That. Everyone On This Forum Took Shots At Him After What He Did In Fla Out Of Pp 12. What Does He Have To Do Fly In The Sky?????????????????

[magic_idol]

Originally Posted by Pedigree Ann

Go ahead and gloat, Big Brown backers (try saying that 3 times fast). You earned it, or rather your horse did.

Did Hank jump aboard Colonel John at the top of the stretch? CJ looked like he was making a good move, then he veered out wide coming off the turn and lost his momentum. Wasn't catching the winner, not with a :47 half, but might have beaten Recapturetheglory.

Try Drinkin Mint Tulips at 5am in the Morning

[sdjcom]

Hello Handicappers,
Iv'e Heard For Weeks From All The Writers And Pundits How Big Brown Had No Bottom, Beyer Said This , He Hasn't Had A Derby Pick In 20 Yrs. How To Inexperience He Was. I'll Take
Talent Over That Anytime. They All Saw The Same Race I Did In Florida Out Of The 12 Hole And How He Did It. No Horse This Year Has Come Close To This Performance. I Touted Him From The Get-go,
That's Right I'll Blow My Own Horn. Steve Davidowitz Blogs, Chat Rooms And Forums Are For The Fans , Not Professional Writers As You Suggest, Hell You What All The Attention.

[Danzig]

oh, shut the hell up

[slotdirt]

To answer the original question:

Please God, no.

I've never rooted so hard against a Triple Crown winner as I will be this horse. Between the super light foundation, the crooked trainer, and the obnoxious owners, I just can't do it.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

You really need to take a step back and think about the content of my post, as it seems I struck a nerve.

The horse might've been the chalk and alot of EXPERTS went as far as saying he had the most ability BUT they stopped short of a full endorsement because of the points mentioned. I'm just tired of hearing these same old tired cliches used when someone doesn't have an opinion. Either you like a horse or you don't. Either you like the odds or you don't. Either you have an opinion or you don't. If you can't analyze the race, sit down. Oh, and the other cliche I forgot to mention: this year's race is not exciting because the horses aren't fast enough. WTF does that mean? 150,000 showed up.

But, for EXPERTS to come out strongly for Colonel John, or Visionaire, or Tale of Ekati, is a ****in joke.
Get my drift?

If you just mean that people should handicap the race instead of using peculiar and useless "Derby angles," I agree with you.
However, I don't think picking somebody like Colonel John to win this race qualified as a "****ing joke."

I guess I am just confused by why you come on here with a big "I-told-everybody-so" type of post after a big favorite wins a race. You did the same thing after the Florida Derby. I have no problem with people being excited when they pick a winner. They should be.
But the "all the experts are crazy and need to change their ways" attitude just seems a little misplaced and rather strange in this particular situation.

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by slotdirt

To answer the original question:

Please God, no.

I've never rooted so hard against a Triple Crown winner as I will be this horse. Between the super light foundation, the crooked trainer, and the obnoxious owners, I just can't do it.

I'm with you.

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by miraja2

If you just mean that people should handicap the race instead of using peculiar and useless "Derby angles," I agree with you.
However, I don't think picking somebody like Colonel John to win this race qualified as a "****ing joke."

I guess I am just confused by why you come on here with a big "I-told-everybody-so" type of post after a big favorite wins a race. You did the same thing after the Florida Derby. I have no problem with people being excited when they pick a winner. They should be.
But the "all the experts are crazy and need to change their ways" attitude just seems a little misplaced and rather strange in this particular situation.

1) Let's get the facts straight. I didn't come on with an "I-told...." type of post. I'm just pushing for more exact analysis. The races are more interesting than having some expert offer that a horse needs more seasoning because that's the way it's normally done. DUH, if you're a recognized figure in the game, you're supposed to be able to step BEYOND the banal and pick out the standouts that aren't subject to normal methods. THAT's my point.

2) I never offered an opinion on the race, except for a tongue-in-cheek post criticizing that exact same thing happening last year with Curlin.

3) It's not about the odds of the horse, as those making the post 12 cliche argument (and those similar to it) can always revert to the low odds as being some kind of victory. Which equates to saying, 'yeah, I'm banking on banal statistics to make a case, cause I lack the ability to gauge the performance level of a given horse. However, should that horse win at low odds, all bets are off." What exactly does that mean?

I'm sorry but I expect a higher level of analysis here.

[jballscalls]

Originally Posted by Danzig

they all do at this point. what derby winner isn't the next tc winner?

the only one i can think of is Giacomo. seems when he won everyone i talked to said "well we got to wait another year." one of the telling things will be how many and who run against BB in the Preakness.

[fpsoxfan]

If this horse comes out OK then he is the next Triple Crown Winner and I'll be rooting for him. Go Big Brown!!