[King Glorious]

Amen. I don't get the negative either. It's like everyone on here is holier than thou and decide that they can't like a horse or don't want to see certain things happen because they don't like an owner because he's not the best person. It's horse racing. I couldn't care less about the owner or his personal life. He's giving us what we all want to see. No matter if we thought it was the right decision to run her in the Preakness or not, no matter if we'd have waited til the Belmont or the Travers or never run her against the boys........everyone will be watching the Preakness to see what she does and if she does something even halfway as special as what she did in the Oaks, we'll all be happy that he ran her there. This is what's good for the sport and I'm glad that there are some that do things that are good for the sport and not just for themselves. It's a risky sport and a risky business. It's funny how, in a sport that's based on gambling, people think it's so stupid for owners to take gambles. I wonder how the sport got so far away from the concept of having the best take on the best to see who is the best? That's what he's doing now. Right now, he's got the opportunity. Next month or three months from now, he may not.