Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Go Back   Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board


Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board

Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com - Horse Racing Message Board (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/index.php)
-   General Racing Discussion (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Keeneland Handle Off 19.2% (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=56972)

Cangamble 04-26-2009 03:25 PM

Keeneland Handle Off 19.2%
 
http://www.courier-journal.com/artic...y+at+Keeneland

That is a huge drop off. Live attendance was up. But the signal was available everywhere.
This is discouraging to me, as a HANA member because of course, Keeneland is our number one rated track. Bettors didn't stay clear because of their takeout, that is for sure.
Is it the economy? Was last year just a real good year? Has ADW betting peaked? Is it the poly? I know we are talking about only a 15 day meet, and to be honest, I always found Keeneland to be a tough track to play, even before the poly, because you have horses coming from everywhere. Way too unpredictable.

My guess is the second quarter is going to be an ugly one for the industry which does next to nothing when it comes to growing its customer base.

andymays 04-26-2009 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cangamble
http://www.courier-journal.com/artic...y+at+Keeneland

That is a huge drop off. Live attendance was up. But the signal was available everywhere.
This is discouraging to me, as a HANA member because of course, Keeneland is our number one rated track. Bettors didn't stay clear because of their takeout, that is for sure.
Is it the economy? Was last year just a real good year? Has ADW betting peaked? Is it the poly? I know we are talking about only a 15 day meet, and to be honest, I always found Keeneland to be a tough track to play, even before the poly, because you have horses coming from everywhere. Way too unpredictable.

My guess is the second quarter is going to be an ugly one for the industry which does next to nothing when it comes to growing its customer base.

It's the surface!

samyn on the green 04-26-2009 03:53 PM

The Big-A wraps up today. Their numbers should be published in the next few days and should be a good comparison to the numbers produced by the synthetic tracks.

toussaud 04-26-2009 03:57 PM

IT'S THE SURFACE STUPID

(not calling anyone stupid, just using the old political catch phrase)

hibiscus 04-26-2009 08:03 PM

Agreed. The surface. I used to play Keeneland but have not wagered a cent there since the switch to the Poly-crap.

Hajck Hillstrom 04-26-2009 09:02 PM

I only bet one race this meeting....
 
...for $50.

Last spring I sent $3,272 through the Keeneland windows.

Maybe there are more like me than I thought....

DeanT 04-26-2009 09:17 PM

It is not the surface, because the same surface was used last spring when handle was 20% higher. Was field size down this spring as compared to last? Smaller fields have been plagueing KY tracks of late. TPX handle was off 25% or so this spring.

DJofSD 04-26-2009 09:19 PM

I'll follow the crowd on this one: it's the surface.

I'd hope some one will do a statistical analysis of the winning odds of SAX, KEE and any other AWS track and compare those numbers to AQU, GPX and any other real dirt surface.

InsideThePylons-MW 04-26-2009 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeanT
It is not the surface, because the same surface was used last spring when handle was 20% higher. Was field size down this spring as compared to last? Smaller fields have been plagueing KY tracks of late. TPX handle was off 25% or so this spring.

Huh???????

Keeneland Race Course on Monday released a full business report that revealed average all-sources handle at its 16-day spring meet was down 11 percent over the corresponding 2007 meet, while average ontrack handle was down nearly 6 percent despite an increase in average attendance of 6 percent.

Although the estimated gross all-sources handle of $150.45 million was the second highest in track history, behind only the $158.4 million handled last year, there was an additional day of racing this year at a meet that ran April 4-25 at the Lexington, Ky., track. Average all-sources handle was $9.4 million, down substantially from the nearly $10.6 million bet daily in 2007.

http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do...0&subs=0&arc=1

DeanT 04-26-2009 09:31 PM

Field size has shown the major correlation. An increase in 1.0 horses translates to a 10% change in handle. OPX field size was up by 0.5 horses and their handle was up 4%. GPX field size was up 0.5 horses and they increased handle by 5%. Conversely, Hawthorne lost field size appreciably this year and they will see a major reduction in handle, as Turfway saw this year. Hawthorne dirt, TPX poly: Same metrics when it comes to field size.

DeanT 04-26-2009 09:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by InsideThePylons-MW
Huh???????

Keeneland Race Course on Monday released a full business report that revealed average all-sources handle at its 16-day spring meet was down 11 percent over the corresponding 2007 meet, while average ontrack handle was down nearly 6 percent despite an increase in average attendance of 6 percent.

Although the estimated gross all-sources handle of $150.45 million was the second highest in track history, behind only the $158.4 million handled last year, there was an additional day of racing this year at a meet that ran April 4-25 at the Lexington, Ky., track. Average all-sources handle was $9.4 million, down substantially from the nearly $10.6 million bet daily in 2007.

http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do...0&subs=0&arc=1

That is why I am asking what the field size was. If it was down by 1-1.5 a 15-20% reduction is right in line with historical metrics.

toussaud 04-26-2009 09:34 PM

okay,


it's not ONE thing. it's not JUST the surfact, it's the Surfact + the economy being crap and the horse players out there that are still putting real cake through the window are going for what they know with the money they are spending.

The first thing you do when you cut back on your wagering is you stay with the bets that you know work at the tracks you know. When I am really in a slump the first thing I do is cut out exotics and go back to the tracks I feel the most comfortable with (Oaklawn, churchill and mountineer). I'm pretty sure this is what it is.

InsideThePylons-MW 04-26-2009 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeanT
That is why I am asking what the field size was. If it was down by 1-1.5 a 15-20% reduction is right in line with historical metrics.

Sorry, I got confused by your wording.

I thought you said spring 2008 was up 20%

Imriledup 04-26-2009 09:43 PM

Its the surface. Ask any big bettor who has stopped playing Keeneland and 9 out of 10 will tell you they can't bet big money on polycrap.


I've stopped Keeneland cold turkey, i don't even look at the PPs anymore, Keeneland is persona non grata to me.

Imriledup 04-26-2009 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeanT
It is not the surface, because the same surface was used last spring when handle was 20% higher. Was field size down this spring as compared to last? Smaller fields have been plagueing KY tracks of late. TPX handle was off 25% or so this spring.

It is the surface. Big bettors gave that track a shot, that's why handle was at normal levels. But, most players just got tired of the random factor and just stopped betting this place. I gave poly a shot at Del mar and keene and other places and it was no use, i left those meets feeling like i was a rank amateur. Those places made me feel like i didn't know the first thing about this game, that's a bad feeling when you've spend many years getting really GOOD at this game.

JustRalph 04-26-2009 10:01 PM

I stopped playing it too.......... up until a year ago.........I tried.....Lord Knows I tried....... :bang:

toussaud 04-26-2009 10:24 PM

I admit to watching the live feed becuase important horses often run there, but I haven't thought about making a bet there in 2 years.

Cangamble 04-27-2009 11:49 AM

I've got a poll up on my newest blog post. So far "polytrack" isn't the number one answer. But it is early still:
http://cangamble.blogspot.com/2009/0...denot-yet.html

horses721 04-27-2009 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hibiscus
Agreed. The surface. I used to play Keeneland but have not wagered a cent there since the switch to the Poly-crap.

Same here. Get rid of the surface.

The Hawk 04-27-2009 01:04 PM

I'm another who virtually stopped playing there when they installed the Polytrack.

Seems like a consensus here.

point given 04-27-2009 01:27 PM

50 % economy

30 % poly

10 % field size

10 % other

toussaud 04-27-2009 01:28 PM

i think it's a combo of 1 and 2. there are no field size problems at keeneland

DJofSD 04-27-2009 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by toussaud
i think it's a combo of 1 and 2. there are no field size problems at keeneland

Right. Which makes having the AWS so frustrating. While some prefer the smaller field sizes of SAX and HOL, I believe I get more value for my wagering dollar when I have large/full fields. KEE seemed to be doing better as far as field sizes go but with the AWS, I have to pass.

andymays 04-27-2009 01:44 PM

A few hours ago I had an exchange from an email I sent to Keenland. After the exchange Headlines on the Paulick report were:

WAS POLYTRACK MAJOR FACTOR IN DROP IN KEENELAND WAGERING?
By Ray Paulick

http://www.paulickreport.com/blog/wa...land-wagering/

Could be a coincedence but Jim Williams moved pretty fast. Here is my email pasted below! My words are my opinion of course. The article I pasted and sent to him was part of the email. I did delete my personal email info and his!

You have to read from the bottom up!

Thanks again for your additional comments. I will watch for the Aqueduct figures as suggested.

Jim Williams

________________________________________
From: Andy [mailto:onlyandy@]
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 10:32 AM
To: Jim Williams
Subject: RE: Comments

Mr. Williams thanks for responding. I obviously can’t stand synthetic surfaces and you should know that in a recent poll 65% of regular Horseplayers agree with me. This accounts for the handle trend on synthetic surfaces being down sharply compared to tracks like Oaklawn, Gulfstream, Fairgrounds, Monmouth, Hawthorne, and on and on. The only Tracks with dirt surfaces that I know are down sharply are in Maryland where Laurel was down 26% mainly because of increased takeout and quality of Racing. Aqueduct will come out today with their numbers and I am eager to see what they are. If you can provide me with numbers from popular Tracks that have shown the declines you are talking about I will take notice.

I like everything about Keenland except the synthetic surface and as in California the people who decided to install them are entrenched in the “synthetic ideology”. Horse Racing is about gambling and if not for gambling Horse Racing would be an equestrian event. Like the leadership in California it seems you will play this out till the bitter end and that’s a shame for Horse Racing.

Thanks,

Andy


Handle off sharply at Keeneland
Betting declines 19.3% despite large crowds
BY GREGORY A. HALL • GHALL@COURIER-JOURNAL.COM • APRIL 25, 2009

Keeneland Race Course in Lexington drew some of the largest crowds in its history this spring and also benefitted from its races being available on all major account-wagering platforms.
But those pluses weren't enough to offset sharp declines in betting during the thoroughbred track's 15-day meet.
Preliminary results showed a 19.3 percent drop in all sources handle to $117 million, with a 9.8 percent decline to $19.2 million in on-track handle for Keeneland's races.
Average daily on-track handle was $1,282,928, a 3.8 percent drop from last year's $1,333,106, when the track was open 16 days.
The total attendance of 240,755 was the third-highest in track history, down 1.1 percent from 243,606 last year. The 16,050 average daily crowd was up 5.4 percent from last year and was the second-highest in Keeneland history.
The meet saw two crowds of 30,000-plus, including the 33,680 on April 18 that was the second-largest in track history.
"We are very gratified by the great turnout from our fans," Nick Nicholson, Keeneland president and chief executive, said in a statement. "Three of the past four spring meets have been the best in Keeneland history, so this is a trend and not an aberration."
The meet was the first for Keeneland to be available on all four major national account-wagering platforms -- Churchill Downs' TwinSpires.com, TVG, XpressBet.com and Youbet.com.
Reporter Gregory A. Hall can be reached at (502) 582-4087.


From: Jim Williams [mailto:jwilliams]
Sent: Monday, April 27, 2009 6:16 AM
To: Onlyandy@
Cc: Betsy Baxter
Subject: Comments


Thank you for taking time to write, expressing dissatisfaction with synthetic surfaces. Actually, average daily mutuel handle at Keeneland this spring was off 9.6 percent, which is less than the 13 percent that wagering was down nationally in March. Average daily mutuel handle on track was up one percent. Keeneland raced one day less—15 compared to 16 days last year—which is 6.3 percent less racing. And, thankfully, no horses suffered catastrophic injuries during the meeting. Again, thank you for your comments.

Regards,
Jim Williams

JeremyJet 04-27-2009 02:17 PM

Re: WAS POLYTRACK MAJOR FACTOR IN DROP IN KEENELAND WAGERING?
 
My head is spinning reading about all these "reasons" for the declines at tracks with synthetic surfaces.

As it's been stated here recently ....

It's the surface, Stupid!

JeremyJet

andymays 04-27-2009 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeremyJet
My head is spinning reading about all these "reasons" for the declines at tracks with synthetic surfaces.

As it's been stated here recently ....

It's the surface, Stupid!

JeremyJet

"It's the surface" is right on the money in my book too!

If you have a point and send these guys an email they read it and respond as long as you present your case in a clear manner and aren't too rude.

JeremyJet 04-27-2009 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andymays
"It's the surface" is right on the money in my book too!

If you have a point and send these guys an email they read it and respond as long as you present your case in a clear manner and aren't too rude.

I hear ya, Andy.

It's just too bad HANA didn't raise these issues. I could be wrong, but I don't think synthetic surfaces were even on HANA's radar when they began "handicapping" these tracks. It blows my mind how the surface issue wasn't one of their major sticking points.

Regards,

JeremyJet

andymays 04-27-2009 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeremyJet
I hear ya, Andy.

It's just too bad HANA didn't raise these issues. I could be wrong, but I don't think synthetic surfaces were even on HANA's radar when they began "handicapping" these tracks. It blows my mind how the surface issue wasn't one of their major sticking points.

Regards,

JeremyJet


I agree with you but HANA can't please us all. I agree with 90% of everthing so that's still OK by me. I have a feeling that next year the ratings might be figured differently. Horseplayers are definitely voting with their dollars.

JeremyJet 04-27-2009 02:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andymays
I agree with you but HANA can't please us all. I agree with 90% of everthing so that's still OK by me. I have a feeling that next year the ratings might be figured differently. Horseplayers are definitely voting with their dollars.

Once again we agree, Andy. But the surfaces issue is a major topic. The surfaces some of these tracks employ is the only reason the players are turning away. So what does it matter if they're doing everthing else right if the players go bye-bye because of the surface?

Regards,

JeremyJet

1st time lasix 04-27-2009 02:51 PM

Personnally I have evolved and adjusted my handicapping. I take very little from those here who merely refuse to learn and just throw up their hands. Tey use any opportunity to bash the use of it. All evidence suggests the poly type surface is safer to the animal particpants--- period. That is clear and rather indisputable unless you are just plane pig headed. Of course OJ was aquitted of a double murder.....so i no longer say anything is absolute. Choose to play or don't play. Never understood the angry venom like disgust at the product. I have also never found a great handicapper yet who can't view races from several different angles. I am also not necessarily convinced that poly creates more "random chaos" than various grass conditions or low level claiming races. Some of the forum make it difficult to see how on earth players ever adjust their handicapping from dirt to grass? To each his own i guess. I will always play Keeneland and support their product precisely because they are much more fan friendly with lower takeouts. On the other hand....I wouldn't make an 3 entry exotic play horizontally or vertically at say- calder or philly where i am surely considered a sucker by their onerous rakes. Game is tough enough without the track scooping 5-12% more out of the pools. Just my 2 cents. Four more of those denominations and I could play a super! Ha! ;)

andymays 04-27-2009 03:04 PM

My home tracks are in California so I still play them. The problem is the pace of the races. Particularly the Pro Ride at Santa Anita. Most of the Jocks have the brakes on early and are running up on heals in the first part of two turn races. The synthetic surface at Santa Anita produced close to 50% carryovers which is unheard of.

On dirt surface when I play pick 3's and 4's I would rarely spread much and would always play $5 to $30 and then go 1 by 2 by 2 by 2. On a synthetic surface it's $1 or $2 and I play 2 by 2 by 4 by 4 and sometimes more.

It's all going to come down to Horseplayers voting with their dollars and the market will dictate who survives!

Charli125 04-27-2009 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JeremyJet
Once again we agree, Andy. But the surfaces issue is a major topic. The surfaces some of these tracks employ is the only reason the players are turning away. So what does it matter if they're doing everthing else right if the players go bye-bye because of the surface?

Regards,

JeremyJet

Dean already said this, but it bears repeating.

The thing is, the dropoff in hanle is based of of last year's numbers. Keeneland already had the new surface last year, so it shouldn't have had that much of an effect on handle.

Everyone can complain about the surface all they want(and I won't disagree), but the dropoff is post surface change.

Bobzilla 04-27-2009 04:25 PM

Of particular interest to me while reading Mr. Williams's response to Andy was the second to last sentence. It seemed to me that Mr. Williams wanted to take the opportunity to remind Andy as to why these AWSs were supposedly installed in the first place and appeal to Andy's conscience. The fact is we can all be thankful, for reasons that are self-evident, that there were no catastrophic injuries sustained by any horse competing over the course of the three week meet at Keeneland. Along those same lines many of us were equally thankful last summer when there were no catastrophic breakdowns on the Saratoga main track during the course of its six week meet, a fact that seemed to draw very little attention at the time. Saratoga, of course, is a traditional dirt surface.

Personally, I'll handicap a race on any surface as long as I think I might be able to find value. My own concerns about the proliferation of synthetic surfaces has nothing to do with their complexities as much as it has to do with preserving our dirt track heritage. I do think it's unfortunate that when those with concerns, such as Andy, take the time to communicate these concerns with industry officials that they can expect what amounts to a condescending admonition. Maybe I was reading too much between the lines but that's how it came across to me. This discussion can never seem to get anywhere when one side continues to piously perch themselves on a higher moral plane while devaluing the other side as nothing more than a collection of degenerate goons insensitive to the well-being of the horse and lacking the mental capacity and initiative required to learn something new.

point given 04-27-2009 04:44 PM

Let's not forget that keeneland has a vested interest in poly as well. So the safety issue is not as high a moral ground as they profess.

andymays 04-27-2009 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bobzilla
Of particular interest to me while reading Mr. Williams's response to Andy was the second to last sentence. It seemed to me that Mr. Williams wanted to take the opportunity to remind Andy as to why these AWSs were supposedly installed in the first place and appeal to Andy's conscience. The fact is we can all be thankful, for reasons that are self-evident, that there were no catastrophic injuries sustained by any horse competing over the course of the three week meet at Keeneland. Along those same lines many of us were equally thankful last summer when there were no catastrophic breakdowns on the Saratoga main track during the course of its six week meet, a fact that seemed to draw very little attention at the time. Saratoga, of course, is a traditional dirt surface.

Personally, I'll handicap a race on any surface as long as I think I might be able to find value. My own concerns about the proliferation of synthetic surfaces has nothing to do with their complexities as much as it has to do with preserving our dirt track heritage. I do think it's unfortunate that when those with concerns, such as Andy, take the time to communicate these concerns with industry officials that they can expect what amounts to a condescending admonition. Maybe I was reading too much between the lines but that's how it came across to me. This discussion can never seem to get anywhere when one side continues to piously perch themselves on a higher moral plane while devaluing the other side as nothing more than a collection of degenerate goons insensitive to the well-being of the horse and lacking the mental capacity and initiative required to learn something new.


I think your instincts are dead on when reading into Mr. Williams comments. When Del Mar installed their synthetic surface and anyone spoke out against it they were labeled "Horse Haters" and told that they didn't care if children were traumatized if they saw a breakdown at the Races on a dirt surface. Bob Baffert was villified to no end when he spoke out against synthetic surfaces and he was almost run out of town.

The trend in our society seems to be that it's not enough to disagree you have to destroy the people you disagree with through personal attacks and inuendo. That's part of the reason I am so against synthetic surfaces for racing (not training). There are still injuries and breakdowns on sythetic surfaces (maybe a little less), but the Horseplayer is not served well by these surfaces. When faced with the fact that synthetic surfaces were not what we were sold in the infomercial they just won't concede an inch in the debate. In my opinion they produce a more inconsistent past performance because they can change drastically from day to day and hour to hour. Heck they even change when a cloud passes over and the temperature changes 7 degrees!

That brings me back to Del Mar and last year they decided to water after the second race. In the third race after they watered more horses went wire to wire than in the other races especially the first race. Joe Harper was interviewed and said they keep a thermometer in the surface and constantly monitor the temperature. Oh that makes me feel confident in the surface!

Anyway I have to give Mr. Williams credit for answering and he was very polite and probably a very nice man. My criticism of his surface had to piss him off so hats off to him for responding.

lamboguy 04-27-2009 06:21 PM

do you think odds changes have anything to do with this problem?

do you think people like to bet horses that leave the gate @ 4-1 and pay $6.40 when you greet the cashier?

or maybe you even like it better when an exacta drops from $900 in the winners circle to just under a tax ticket when the cashier greets you?

of course we all know why this happens, its the SIMULCAST MONEY every single time. those guys down at the simulcast outlets are alot smarted than those kentucky guys!

Cangamble 04-27-2009 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lamboguy
do you think odds changes have anything to do with this problem?

do you think people like to bet horses that leave the gate @ 4-1 and pay $6.40 when you greet the cashier?

or maybe you even like it better when an exacta drops from $900 in the winners circle to just under a tax ticket when the cashier greets you?

of course we all know why this happens, its the SIMULCAST MONEY every single time. those guys down at the simulcast outlets are alot smarted than those kentucky guys!

Computer programs set to bet with a half a minute to post by big bettors are probably a very big reason, as they have to wait until the last possible moment to see if they are getting a overlay.
Too many on the same horse can cause an underlay by the time all bets are in.

DJofSD 04-27-2009 06:47 PM

Quote:

The thing is, the dropoff in hanle is based of of last year's numbers. Keeneland already had the new surface last year, so it shouldn't have had that much of an effect on handle.
Yes, and, if I played KEE last year then decided to not play it this year, my lack of participation would be a part of the drop. So don't jump to a partially invalid conclusion.

Imriledup 04-27-2009 09:29 PM

Keeneland will never admit that the decline in handle has to do with Polytrack.

What a bunch of jokers. They spent millions of dollars to install a surface that horseplayers didn't want.

The players who said they don't care are not winning either. I know you all like to play devils advocate, but you are not winning more money with polytrack. You are either staying the same, or getting worse.

If you can show me a player who was a winning long run player on dirt who is now winning MORE on polytrack, i'll show you 10 who are not.

The only way you can win in the long run as a horseplayer is to be able to really predict the pace of the races with a strong degree of accuracy. You can't just blindly bet on horses who are going to be pace compromised and be a long run winner.

The margin of profit is so thin, that you can't have a few more races Per 100 that you are totally confused about the pace scenario. Most of these races at keeneland and Del Mar are so competitive, so evenly matched, that if you have no idea how fast the pace is going to be, you have to idea whether you should bet a speed horse or a closer. If you see 3 speeds on paper on a dirt track, you know they are going to be going gangbusters. You can actually handicap the race. On polytrack, 2 of those jocks grab hard and one of them gets loose and the entire complexion of the race changes, and not for the 'bettor'. First of all, you don't know which 2 jocks are going to 'grab' and you don't even know IF they'll grab. So, you are left having absolutely no idea how the race is going to shape up. Once in a while you will be right, but you are going to be wrong too often to turn a long run profit.

The inability to predict rider intent on Polytrack is the difference between winning and losing. (not to mention how tricky the surface is anyway even excluding jockey strategy).

Losing tons of money on closers is the fastest way to the poorhouse when you predict speed duels that never develop.

Bruddah 04-27-2009 09:58 PM

[QUOTE=Bobzilla]Of particular interest to me while reading Mr. Williams's response to Andy was the second to last sentence. It seemed to me that Mr. Williams wanted to take the opportunity to remind Andy as to why these AWSs were supposedly installed in the first place and appeal to Andy's conscience. The fact is we can all be thankful, for reasons that are self-evident, that there were no catastrophic injuries sustained by any horse competing over the course of the three week meet at Keeneland. Along those same lines many of us were equally thankful last summer when there were no catastrophic breakdowns on the Saratoga main track during the course of its six week meet, a fact that seemed to draw very little attention at the time. Saratoga, of course, is a traditional dirt surface.

Personally, I'll handicap a race on any surface as long as I think I might be able to find value. My own concerns about the proliferation of synthetic surfaces has nothing to do with their complexities as much as it has to do with preserving our dirt track heritage. I do think it's unfortunate that when those with concerns, such as Andy, take the time to communicate these concerns with industry officials that they can expect what amounts to a condescending admonition. Maybe I was reading too much between the lines but that's how it came across to me. This discussion can never seem to get anywhere when one side continues to piously perch themselves on a higher moral plane while devaluing the other side as nothing more than a collection of degenerate goons insensitive to the well-being of the horse and lacking the mental capacity and initiative required to learn something new.[/QUOTE]

Bob, your piece was well said, written and gets a Big Amen BRUDDAH! Be careful, their are some who will say you are a Bigot. Biggoted against what, you ask? I don't know. But, you will have an opposite opinion of what their little minds hold as truths. Therefore, you are the Bigot.

Thanks for expressing (better than I) my Bigotry. :D


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved

» Advertisement
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1999 - 2023 -- PaceAdvantage.Com -- All Rights Reserved
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program
designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.