Quote:
|
Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind
Then why was your previous smart ass response necessary? Perhaps you would do better to give your actual point and not snide remarks that don't reflect well on you.
In response to this last post, I would say if the odds are accurate over time, then any random snapshot rates to be accurate. Obviously, as horsepleyers, we attempt to exploit inaccuracies in just this. On the other hand, do you honestly believe that in any random race we are always going to be correct in OUR assumptions of relative chances of winning?
Personally, by the way, if you lined Commentator up against the four horses you mentioned, assuming all were in their primes, at 6F, I believe Commentator should be 4:5. I suppose should Henny Hughes demonstrate his debut this year was legit he could be a threat, but based on all of their career races, Commentator is a superior animal...at least on his best day versus their best days.
|
You may not realize it, but you have a habit of talking down to people on here, and it gets pretty irritating. And I have a habit of being a smartass. I think we'll get along just fine.
We're gonna have to agree to disagree on Commentator, but I still say the point you made about his odds is still completely irrelevant and I think most would agree.