Hes better than "modestly talented". Not as great as Kona Gold, Orientate, or Artax, but still very good.

OK ... how about "modestly great"?

This thread wasn't prompted by people saying that Lost In The Fog was "impressive" ... it was prompted by people saying that he was "great."

I haven't seen anyone say that Lost In The Fog's winning streak wasn't impressive ... just some folks ... myself included ... saying that such a winning streak against mediocre opponents doesn't equate to greatness.

I stand by my brilliant analogy.

Nevermind...not getting involved with such a closed minded poster

Oh, sweetie ... all I was going to say was to go back to the original post on this thread ...

... it tells you who said it ... and when ... and where.

Come on, hon ... don't get in a snit ... everyone here has been nice to you.

Thank you for restating all of my points.

I'm glad you understand what I've been saying.

First, please dont call me hon and sweetie. Second, we've got KG, S_s_n, and Dixie. Dont know who the first two are (my bad I guess) and I dont know what they said. I really dont care. I just find it utterly amazing that you dont consider "did not fire" as a valid excuse --- then again you dont handicap races, so whatever. I personally cant believe this thread is going strong after 200+ posts and perhaps the nicest thing is that both sides have presented their arguments in a relatively civil manner. Doesnt it reach a point, though, where both sides realize that no minds are going to be changed no matter what is said (think we're about there now) and the thread is put to rest?

I haven't changed your mind yet ... but I think I'm getting real close.

A few dozen more posts should do it.

P.S. The only other person I mentioned was Fupeg ... who posts here as Assttodixie ... and who happened to be on the correct side of the argument.

You're not going to change my mind. I dont think Fog is a "great" horse but I think he is good and can still win some good money if placed properly. Thats it. Nothing special - no high pedastol - just an average graded stakes horse and I think that even you could agree with that.

I'm not double-talking at all. I still stick to my statement that you can't always rely on the grading of a race to decide how good the field is. A grade III race can sometimes play tougher than a grade I. If the only information you knew about a horse was that he once won a graded race, it wouldn't tell you a whole lot about how good he is. It could have been a weak graded race. If the only thing you knew about a horse was that he was a grade I winner, that wouldn't really tell you that much. It could have been a weak grade I. However, if you know that a horse has won six graded stakes races, that tells you something. One or two graded wins could be a fluke. A horse could have caught one or two weak fields. When a horse does it six times, it means something.
You guys think that the LITF supporters are making excuses for him. You think the excuses we are making to explain his bad performances are weak excuses. You guys are making way more excuses than we are. I'm making excuses for 3 sub-par races. You guys are making excuses for 11 wins, including 10 stakes races and 6 graded stakes races. When he ran a really fast time, it was only because the track was really fast. When he ran all of these huge speed figures, the figures must be wrong. When he won all of these graded stakes races at major tracks, every one of those races must have been weak. When he beat older horses, the older horses weren't that good. You guys have a million more excuses than I do. All I have to do is explain 3 sub-par races. You guys have to explain away an incredible record that includes 11 wins from 14 starts including 6 graded stakes wins.
How many other horses won 10 out of 11 races in a year including 5 graded races? If it's not that hard to do and a trainer simply needs to pick easy spots, then name me some mediocre horses that have done it.
It's not that the LITF supporters are desperate for a hero, it's that the LITF knockers are desperate to knock down a champ. That's the way message boards are. People knock Tiger Woods on message boards. They say, "Aha, he lost this week. You see, he's not that good. He's a choker." The nonsense you read on these board is comical.
All that being said, I don't think LITF is in the league of some of the great horses I've seen like Ghostzapper.

See ... I convinced you ...

... and it only took one more post ...

... we're now in complete agreement ... except fot the fact that he's never going to race again.

And i ask yet again- NAME ONE DECENT FIELD THAT THIS HORSE HAS BEATEN. Just One

I will answer again. It's not who you beat, it's how you do it. Who did Afleet Alex beat?
The question is irrelevant. A horse does not need to beat a great field for me to figure out that he's a really good horse.

the thread that wouldn't die.....can't believe the life span of this thing.

Rup..Class = the Company you keep. I guess two legs of the TC gets AA a little more credit. LITF did everything he was suppose to do in restricted company..it was when he stepped up that he lost his glitter. I don't knock the horse, just don't feel he is as good as many thought he was.

Ez

so basically you are saying that competition and race set up have no impact on performance?