Whoa there. My \"crap\" was only about your comment that our data doesn\'t apply to the Belmont. As I said earlier, a lot of your analysis (and certainly mine) is straight up sheet (pattern) analysis.
I found it a lot easier to handicap this race when a) I blocked out the extraneous static and just handicapped, and b) put aside that it was a Triple Crown race. A lot of us-- especially those with our backsides exposed for kicking in public-- are too conscious of wanting to be right on big races, instead of looking for value, being willing to lose to possibly more likely but underlaid horses, and moving on to the next race if we do lose.
Re the other string, I\'ve fallen in love with several horses. Like many who got involved in the game in the 70\'s the first was Ruffian, especially since I bet her first time out (because she was a half to Icecapade, another horse I was a fan of). She\'s partly responsible for me stopping smoking pot, but that\'s a story for another day.
I will hold against Lauffer for the rest of my life that I was not able to feel that way about Rachel, or enjoy that spectacular campaign. The court\'s decision is due to come down tomorrow or a Friday soon thereafter. Whatever it is, it won\'t make up for that. That\'s what I\'m in this game for, and that campaign was a once-in-a-lifetime thing.
