a couple questions

[Alydar in California]

One should be no more ambitious than is absolutely necessary. I\'m going to drink some more gatorade and go back to bed. You are now REQUIRED to find a way to elaborate on that Swiss-German comment. Remember the horse Swiss Courts Cheat?

[HP]

I will find a way to get back to you on the Swiss thing in another venue. HP

[Alydar in California]

HP: Thank you.

TG: Was my reply to Chuckles/Tabitha deleted? This new board still confuses me.

[TGJB]

You should be barred from using caps.

[TGJB]

I agree on all 3 counts.

[TGJB]

You and everyone else. Evidently it is still there, but not listed(?). I did think about taking it down- we all get it about Chuckles, and I don\'t need another war.

[Alydar in California]

JB: HP will stop using CAPS if you stop with all those damn dashes and learn how to put space before and after parentheses.

[bdhsheets@hotmail.com]

The neutral freakin\' back stabbing, pond scum Swiss!?!?

Yup, the neutral Swiss. Back both sides of a war, that way you\'re \"neutral\". Instruemental in supporting the Reich\'s war machine early on. Guess who processed the silver and gold from the mouth\'s of Holocaust victims? Heaven\'s no! Not the Swiss! Who sucked up the bank accounts of war and Holocaust victims, estimated in billions, yes billions of dollars. Not the beloved Swiss!!!!! Oh no.

In the next big war, nuke them bastards first!

[Alydar in California]

bdhsheets: The question is whether the Swiss were \"FAR WORSE\" than the Nazis. It is possible to be utterly horrible and still not get there. (I think HP was kidding.)

You wrote something on the Paceadvantage board that I found perplexing: \"Sheet theory says 0 (top) followed by an effort within 2 pts of the new top will lead to an X, an effort 4 pts + from the new top.\" Isn\'t this too categorical? I would have asked you over there, but I don\'t want to be in the same room as Boxcar, who is one of the most despicable morons I have ever come across, and I have come across a lot. (Please tell him I said that, and that the list of his factual errors on his contemptible Middle East string is up to 123.)

[bdhsheets@hotmail.com]

Alydar wrote:

\"You wrote something on the Paceadvantage board that I found perplexing: \"Sheet theory says 0 (top) followed by an effort within 2 pts of the new top will lead to an X, an effort 4 pts + from the new top.\" Isn\'t this too categorical?\" Perhaps.

The nature of the top is by far the most important aspect of any analysis.

The post was aimed at those that really don\'t follow these speed figs. But at some point one has to draw lines somewhere. The comments were directed to Harlan and I thought long and hard about it, especially when HH had run several of the \"2\'s\" so to speak which were tops.

Generally, those on an \"0-2-X\" are short prices. In my minds eye, dissmissing them is the way to bet. So you miss a short priced tri/exa when they run, no loss in the long run. Of course if a repeat of the \"2\" is competitive and a big price, then you play for a repeat. Price dictates most plays.

I really don\'t post or drop in that often on the PA board, it runs in streaks.

I\'m starting a study on \"0-2-X\" and other patterns. I\'ve downloaded thousands of races from all over so it should be fairly representative. Buuut something tells me to keep a separate record of the big circuits vs the small. 3yo\'s will be by themselves. I\'ll see how it goes. LOL If you have a request, let me know.

[Alydar in California]

bdhsheets: I figured there was an innocent explanation. I\'m sorry for the PA ambush. I have no one but myself to blame for reading the \"off topic\" section of their message board. Also, I was testy because my Colorado Avalanche were facing elimination on the road. Thank God for Peter Forsberg. Good luck with your research. The drudgery will prove worthwhile. Let\'s keep arguing about Switzerland and Germany until HP \"unretires\" like all those boxers.