Point #1: Exaggerator may not be better then Nyquist; one win does not completely turn the tables, and Nyquist will most likely be in the Classic as well.
Point #2: If Exaggerator stays on his current path and goes to the Classic, then he'll have to face both Beholder and Chrome on their favorite track. At the moment, he simply isn't good enough to beat either of them.
I can't believe I had to spell this out for you. You're grasping at straws, and it's pathetic.
Why? He's not up to par with Chrome and the rest, and he's been running some nice races in sprints.
I'm surprised nobody's brought that up before now. Then again, such speculation is pointless until Lady Eli makes it back to the races, assuming she ever does.
This is for the best. Nyquist has earned a break.
I'm almost glad he lost the Preakness now. It takes the pressure of going on to the Belmont and throws it out the window.
Who cares what Doug would have done had Nyquist won the Preakness? We'll never know, so speculating about it is pointless and serves no practical purpose; doing so would just be a waste of time.
I wasn't talking about the three-year-old championship, Einstein. I was referring to your proclamation that Exaggerator will win the Breeders' Cup Classic.
Way to make yourself look like an idiot.
Stop condescending me. My points are valid.
You're acting like Nyquist is the only competition Exaggerator will face the entire year. Even assuming Exaggerator is truly better than Nyquist (which I don't believe), he still has to face the likes of Beholder and California Chrome, and that's no easy task. Frankly, I just don't think he's at their level; at least, not yet.
You're...welcome? I think.
Hardly. If that happens, then Exaggerator will be in the lead, but the season will only be half over.
Copyright © 2010 -
other passionate horse racing fans!