Lionheart, again......

[jimbo66]

Jerry,

Lionheart retired.  I know you know that.  If you are going to insult me or question my handicapping, move to a different horse or example.

But to be honest, Lionheart is a perfect example of WHY I bother to post threads on this board about some of your picks.  I don\'t send emails to Andy Beyers or the Washington Post when he invariabley blows the Derby every year.  I don\'t email the DRF when Crist and Pochman and Watchmaker make bad picks.  Who knows if they are better or worse handicappers than you, I honestly don\'t.  But I do know one difference, I have seen 3 of those 4 (don\'t know Pochman) be self deprecating and humble when one of their horses runs horribly.  I have heard them say \"I was wrong\".  I have heard them entertain other opinions besides their own.  Your level of arrogance and superiority drives me nuts(I admit we all have different levels of tolerance of this).  There are times, when you and your figures will be \"right on\" and there are times when they will be wrong.  WHen was the last time you said \"I was wrong\".  Ever?

Just look at Lionheart.  You write in your post ridiculing me that I could even entertain the thought that Lionheart was not a true 1 1/4 mile horse.  You use that as a symbol of my inability to understand your figures and thinking.  As if I thought the world was flat.  

Before the Travers when he broke down, if you got the 100 sharpest and shrewdest handicappers together and asked them if they thought Lionheart was a 1 1/4 horse, what do you think they would have said?  Best case for you is a mixed result.  My guess is about 2/3 would say no chance against good competition at that distance.  But that is not even the point.  It is a VALID question and a VALID opinion.  Not something that you as the all-knowing superior intellect can dismiss as a stupid question or opinion.

>My guess is about 2/3 would say no chance against good competition at that distance.<

3/4!

Seriously, it\'s a shame he got hurt because one of my reasons for betting against him was the distance. I couldn\'t see him withstanding the eventual pressure from Purge and get that distance. He wasn\'t running that well at Monmouth to begin with.  

I would rather have seen him finish just like Purge (who I also said was suspect at the distance). That way I would know my judgment was correct. If an injury did compromise his peformance, there\'s not much to be learned by the result.

Notice I said \"IF he got hurt\".

Ever notice how every valuable horse that ever ran poorly was hurt, bled, flipped something, came back coughing etc... No one that is valuable ever actually gets beaten badly. :-)

[TGJB]

Jim, the only point I made after the race was that there was nothing in the RESULT of the Travers which would indicate LH couldn\'t get the distance, given that a) he spit it out before going a mile, and b) broke a leg. My point is that the results are NOT indicative, not that they prove anyone\'s opinion right. And that\'s the larger point as well-- the results of a race or a card are not indicative, especially in terms of the analysis, especially since unlike the public handicappers you mention we are not trying to pick winners, but find overlays-- we often will bet (and put up in the analysis) the second or third most likely winner of the race. This is a game of percentages-- you won\'t see a whole lot of definitive statements coming from me along the lines of \"this horse will win\", either in ROTW or here.

It is my site, and I\'m selling a product and the thinking that goes with it, but I am open to others expressing opposing views here. You want to see opinionated, there are a couple of guys on 11th st. you should  meet.