OGTEleven

It has two Bills questions in it but move it if you have to move it. Sorry. WRONG!!!!!!

1. I think if we were taking bets he'd be the favorite. Never bet the favorite. WRONG!!!!!!! 2. Do I say you are getting warm or your are wrong? Let me think. WRONG!!!!!!!! 3. I have no idea what you mean by the Ted Cruz part. The other part seems like a hint toward a fantastic but WRONG!!!!!! soundtrack. Please elaborate. I looked up "Ted Cruz Inconceivable" and learned something. Cruz likes good movies (at least one) with great soundtracks. In fact, this soundtrack is the reason I put the term all instrumental in the question. Does the video below sound instrumental to you? WRONG!!!!! 4. I think there will be many choices that could be good in this spot. I would settle for any of them or even anything else )please before I die). Your choice is WRONG!!!!!! 5. When it comes to Martina the W word can never be invoked because if Martina McBride is wrong I don't want to be right. I'll just say I was looking for something else. Also you know you've been around here if you remember that Martina played a big role in these. She isn't the answer to any of these questions today (Well maybe 1, 3, 4 and 5 in some way, but certainly not 2).

Posted on the main board (2 Bills questions)

I haven't done much more than lurk (and a few music threads) for quite a while but some of the old timers may remember the McLaughlin threads. I haven't done one in forever but I saw that John McLaughlin passed away and it reminded me so I thought I'd do a tribute thread to say RIP. Basically, I ask 5 questions and you try to answer them. I'll then let you know if you're right or WRONG!!!!!! McLaughlin SNL style. I try to be as mean as possible so don't be offended. Whoever answers any question correctly first gets the point for that question. Questions 1. If you excluded Sammy Watkins, Tyrod Taylor and Gilmore, who would be the Bills 2016 MVP based on what McLaughlin thinks will happen this season? 2. What is the worst symbol of American cultural decay in decades (so many to choose from lately)? Be specific or you'll be WRONG!!!!!! 3. What is the greatest all instrumental movie soundtrack in the last 40 years? The winner of this question will get one chance at a bonus point. 4. You can pick a play from Bills history to be the winning play in the Bills first Super Bowl victory. What play do you choose? (Note that it does not have to happen against the same team and that it could even be a play that the Bills lost on but they would win this time). Do NOT pick the Home Run Throwforward or you will be suspended from this game. 5. What should not die just because McLaughlin did?

I lurk from time to time. I've posted in a few music threads. When I saw McLaughlin died it reminded me. (RIP John) I think I'll do a McLaughlin thread as a tribute. It takes some time to think up good questions. I'll try for something tomorrow afternoon (tied up all morning). I don't know whether to do Off the Wall or the main board but if any of the questions are Bills related I'll go to the main board so be on the lookout. I'd love to start posting again but don't feel like I have much to offer about the Bills and have pretty much given all I have to offer on PPP (although this year sure is crazy).

It took me a while to find this (although it shouldn't have) because I was looking for a thread with Dallas in the name. I don't really know where to start. I can't bring myself to watch video from La., Mn., or Dallas. There is a lot to this that I find very disturbing. Maybe the most disturbing to me is the loss of the individual. At the end of it, the deceased are (were) people. Whether they were shot by police, or they were police, they will have people missing them. These people will remember them long after we have forgotten "those victims" or "those police". You don't have to take a side to realize that. Dehumanizing these people is dangerous and it is natural for it to happen when we feel a need to take a side or simplify things by thinking of others as part of a group. When it does happen, facts go ignored (like if the victims were totally innocent, about to shoot the cops or anywhere in between, or if the shooters in Dallas turn out to be part of some larger organization or just a few terrible people or something else). I think it is fair to say that some believe police have categorized black people and are more prone to harass them (by harass I mean everything from speeding tickets a white guy wouldn't get all the way to shooting them and everywhere in between). If true, or true in certain categories or locations, this needs to be stopped. The question is how. A bad way to go about stopping it is to categorize police (the mirror image of the same problem). This is a simplification that won't lead to a viable solution. As Tom points out, the problem hasn't even been properly defined (another disturbing point). If the individual black guy getting a speeding ticket was going 95 in a 40, he deserves it. The black guy going 42 is the one that has been victimized. The reverse is no better. A cop who is corrupt needs to be brought to account, but a cop shot while guarding a protest march in a city far from the event under protest, is plainly and simply a victim. Because he is an individual. It is not right to treat him as a cog in some gigantic machine with which you are at war. I could probably go on and on here and I'm trying to figure out a way of wrapping up. I guess the top thing for me is what I see in our country as a loss of respect for any individual except one (me me me). It seems to me that people in 2016 have an incredible ability to discern the impact events have on them as an individual, but when it comes to other individuals they are far far removed from reality. Everyone else falls into a group of good guys or bad guys. Nobody else is an individual. The initial suspect was carrying a rifle at an event where cops were targeted and shot by people with rifles. His outrage at even being questioned (although he was very quickly released) focuses completely on himself and how he feels he was treated unfairly. Police lied to him as part of the interrogation? Maybe they were trying to trip him up into admitting something? Shocking. The 30 minute detention period tells me that they pretty quickly realized he had nothing to do with it and they let him go. He said he feels the system is out to get him. If so, he is using the wrong example. His brother, an event organizer, laments being a suspect and a villain. Well, a suspect is just that, and the dismissal indicates that time is over. Nobody that I have seen was calling him or his brother a villain. Our country was founded on the worth of an individual and I think our solution had better come from that mindset. If people are lumped into categories as blacks, whites, cops, criminals, and whatever else, it won't work. I have my opinions about what our political leaders are doing, but I'll keep them out of this particular post.

Nothing else from anyone here? I'll try another.

I was searching for an old thread and it went to the archive, So Im starting a new one.

Your general point is correct but I think these two races are the wrong example to make that point. Secretariat's race was simply the best horse race ever run (I'd argue it is the greatest performance in a single event in the history of sports). AP's time was very strong precisely because he wasn't pushed early. Materiality (who was supposed to do the pushing) was not up to the task. Is it possible that AP could have run a 109-4 in the opening 6 furlongs and continued to keep that pace? The best I can do is say it's not impossible. And the only reason I can say that is because Secretariat did it. Without the 1973 Belmont as a reference (and no race before it or since it), every racing fan would say it was simply impossible. It is far more likely that he'd falter after running 109-4 than he would having run 113-2. What AP did Saturday was great. It was great for the sport and I hope it brings interest back (I also hope to see him at Saratoga this year or next). Ending a 37 year drought is MORE than what Secretariat did. AP's accomplishment should be lauded. Can we say he's not the next Secretariat? I suppose not. He could go on to even greater things. AP did something no horse has done in 37 years but there are still a lot of things he has not done. He has not gotten into a speed duel and sustained a late challenge. He may have to do that some day this fall. He may rise to that challenge. He may falter. Heck, even Secretariat's record wasn't perfect. He has proven he can sit off the pace and make a move to the lead. This is a big plus. In addition to winning the Triple Crown, being horse of the year and champion 3YO (both of which AP will probably be), do you know what else Secretariat was in 1973? Champion grass horse. He had two losses after the Belmont and won four races, including a course record on Belmont's grass and winning in the Canadian International. I'll go out on a limb and guess that AP won't be the champion grass horse this year. Secretariat jumped right into the fire against older horses. Odds are that AP's next race or two will be against 3YOs and that he'll enter the Breeder's Cup as his first race against older horses or possibly his second. That's fine and he may prove to be an all time great beyond just the Triple Crown. I hope he does. But the two Belmont's are not comparable. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNHJkz5K6uk

These guys are so snubbed that they aren't even on the snubbed list.

Martina McBride has a great voice. Check out her "God Bless America" on Youtube from the Rose Parade. Emmylou Harris in another. For someone lesser known I'll go with Ruth Moody.

All of mine are from Mark Knopfler. "Too poor to be wasteful with pity or time." "You can fall for chains of silver, you can fall for chains of gold, you can fall for pretty strangers and the promises they hold." "Criss-crossed On his back Scars from his daddy Like slavery tracks The second-last child Was the second-last king Never again was it the same In the ring"

I will throw in two from songs that are not too well known. And I will waste my heart on fear no more I will find a secret bell and make it ring And let the rest be washed up on the shore They can't be tamed, these wilder things No they can't be tamed, these wilder things You’re a light in the dark, a beacon of hope and strong as a sea boat, strong as a rope And the vagabond wind, whispers over the bay and the songs and the laughter, are carried away in the sky

Not that famous a song but in honor of 9/11 I will submit "If This is Goodbye" by Mark Knopfler and Emmylou Harris. "My famous last words are laying around in tatters, sounding absurd, whatever I try." the last line is also brilliant: "My famous last words could never tell the story, spinning unheard in the dark of the sky, but I love you and this is our glory, if this is goodbye, if this is goodbye."

It is so hard to believe it was that long ago. It had an such a lasting impact on America on all of us as individuals. The song in my link was written about the people making calls from the towers or plane(s) to say goodbye because they knew their fate. Those stories and recorded calls, while incredibly sad to hear, also helped me realize the almost universal desire of all of us to say things that too often remain unsaid.

I like Henricksen too. i also like a guy named Peter Stormare who I think is very underrated and Peter Sarsgaard who I have seen do some very good work along with having some bad roles. Neither of those guys fit any of the characters described.

http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/07/lou-gehrig-speech-75th-anniversary-mlb-new-york-yankees It's a baseball player with a terrible disease giving a speech, but it exemplifies so many things about America. The will and determination to carry on, the freedom to do what you love and the appreciation of what others have done to allow that freedom to you. The humility to realize that despite whatever obstacle is in front of you, there is still much you have. Although this was about one loved person, it says a lot about what the American system has afforded us all.

He is my all time favorite player. He took the hardest task in sports and made it look so easy. He was always looking for ways to improve, even after establishing himself as an all time great. He was so consistent and confident, and never seemed arrogant. I feel privileged just to have been able to watch his whole career. His lifetime average facing Greg Maddux was .415 and Maddux never struck him out. Link is to a cool audio. http://blogs.marketw...oogle_news_blog

I strongly suspect that Clement mapped out his strategy for getting Tonalist back to the races long before the Kentucky Derby was run. I'm equally convinced he developed this strategy in line with what he thought was best for the horse's health and provided the most likely set of positive outcomes (i.e.. Running well in the Peter Pan and winning the Belmont). It is silly to expect him to adjust his plans after watching the Kentucky Derby so he could be perceived to be more fair in the eyes of some crazy owner of a different horse. I don't dispute that but I fail to see how it relates to Secretariat, Seattle Slew and Affirmed. I think the Belmont actually serves as a tool to demonstrate the harm that has been done to the breed by the last few decades of breeding focused on speed. I don't think it is the Belmont that needs to change, but the breeding. If you carry your theory forward, the Breeder's Cup Dirt mile will be the most prestigious race in America in 25 years. I don't want to see that happen. The pendulum can swing back fairly easily by importing a prominent European sire or two (or 20) over here. I don't see it happening yet though. Losing Animal Kingdom as a sire to Australia was a big blow. I think Baffert could be right about SC and think Smarty Jones' jockey made an error in moving too soon as well. I'm confident there will be another TC winner. You spoke about Rachel's baby the other day. I just saw an article about Cozmic One (another stupid name) who is Zenyatta's baby. He just got sent to Shireffs at Belmont. If they race each other it should be fun but I don't see them a some sort of super horses on mom alone. There is always a lot to prove. As for this year's 3 year olds I see them as an ok crop. It will be interesting to see Honor Code, Top Billing and Shared Belief when they really get a race or two under their belts. I like Tonalist and Medal Count moving forward but the one I think could be the most interesting if and when he matures is Bobby's Kitten. He could be anything. No guarantees at all but his upside is really high.

He had not run since Feb 22. Is a prep race not reasonable before throwing a horse into a Triple Crown race? Do you really think this was an evil plan to thwart California Chrome who had only won the Derby at this point? A lot has changed over the years. If Espinoza had said Chrome would had faced a more difficult trail than Secretariat, I could buy that (maybe), but he said it would prove Chrome was the greatest horse of all time. Evidently he is not aware of Secretariat's accomplishments post Triple Crown, or hasn't heard of John Henry, Forego, Kelso, Count Fleet or many others? Even if he had won Saturday, I could probably think of 50 better horses than his record so far without having to think hard. If he is the greatest of all time I look forward to him easily dispatching Palace Malice and Wise Dan and others later this year. That should be awesome. I hope he goes off 1-9. There are races after the Belmont. You weren't but you were? Agreed on the overall quality of the horses in 1982 and even on the status of Cielo in the bigger picture, but the question is whether or not it was somehow unfair that he ran in the Belmont. It wasn't. In fact he ran against what was there in 1982, which included both the Derby and Preakness winners plus the supposed super horse Linkage. 1982 had what it had. There wasn't some big horse missing from that field was there? Runaway Groom? The race was weak only because 1982 was weak. It had all the 1982 players. Meaningless Belmont? I don't think overblown is the right word for the Triple Crown. I just recognize it for what it is and isn't. It would still be an important achievement and will be again when it is won again. It could have easily been won on several occasions since the last time. I am 95% convinced that if Easy Goer and Sunday Silence were born a year apart they would have both won. When it is won, I will enjoy all of the hoopla like everyone else, but also realize that the winner will likely be very challenged against older horses in the fall of his 3 year old year. The overblown part of the TC is that it is for 3 year olds. Whoever wins will be deemed the greatest ever by a media with the attention span of a small group of gnats and they will all ask what is wrong when the horse doesn't sweep everything that fall. I hope the next winner is the greatest of all time but I doubt he will be. I'd like to see a horse win the Triple Crown. I would have liked to see Chrome do it. But to win a watered down version by eliminating competitors would have stripped a huge portion of the accomplishment. The Derby is by far the most hyped race of the year and I enjoy that as much as the next guy, but all three races have great tradition and all have their important place in history. I would not go as far as you did in ranking the Derby so far ahead of the other two. It certainly gets some of that status, but all three are Grade 1's and very important. The Derby definitely benefits from being first on the calendar. As a grouping the Triple Crown obviously has its history. IMO, it is one that should not be watered down so that we can get some false thrill. I also think the lack of a TC winner demonstrates the poor judgement behind the industry in general with all the speed breeding. There is a place for speed breeding and always has been, but to me it got way out of hand. The trend has not rendered the Belmont moot, the Belmont helps measure generation versus generation and demonstrates how the pendulum swung too far. The pendulum needs to swing back and the Belmont is one of the strongest pieces of evidence. Like I said earlier, I think it is very possible we could see a European waltz over here and take the TC. I'm not sure how many would try because they care about their prestigious races more. We could see a horse that is turf bred do it; like someone by Kitten's Joy.

Can we still consider them great achievements?

Tonalist missed the opportunity to run in the Florida Derby (or perhaps another prep race) due to his sickness. Clearly he is a good enough horse to be running in TC races but under Coburn's ridiculous (just give it to 'em) idea, Clement would have either had to push a sick horse to a prep or forfeit running in a race for which he knew he could have Tonalist ready. And your belief about "a little sickness" is inaccurate. Horses are very often scratched from prominent races and have their training delayed for weeks due to coughs and slight fevers. Clement absolutely did the right thing for the horse. I am not a huge Andrew Beyer fan but here is his article, partially on the subject. I think the quote above pretty much sums things up. As for Espinoza's opinion of the situation you'll pardon me if I take it with a grain of salt. I can't find the article but I read one which quoted Espinoza as saying that if CC did win the Triple Crown he would have to be considered the greatest horse of all time. I'm guessing that is the same article you referenced and ran Wed or Thu or Belmont week. Don't you think that undermines his credibility just a bit? I partially agree but the part you leave out is that for about three decades now, North American breeding has been focused more on speed and less on stamina. I think Lucky Pulpit is an interesting mid-tier sire for a few reasons, but I think I am accurate in stating that he never won past 5-1/2 Furlongs. This trend is most certainly a determining factor in the lack of a TC winner. It is not everything, but it is a factor. Although primarily bred for grass I would not be at all surprised to see the next TC winner come from a European sire line. A turf sire occasionally gets a great dirt offspring and it is bound to happen at some point that a prominent European or Middle Eastern outfit sees the opportunity and grabs it. Insinuating Secretariat, Seattle Slew and Affirmed were juiced (if that is what you just did) is not well founded in my opinion. Well, Cielo had two races under his belt in May where his most prominent rivals Aloma's Ruler and Gato Del Sol each had only one, but that really isn't the point. You already made my point. Woody Stephens, who in fact did win 5 Belmonts in a row (you say that like it is a bad thing) did not push Cielo into the earlier races. Some may think this was cowardly because they don't get their Triple Crown winner sponsored by Hot Pockets, but to have run him would have been cruel. But let's go back to 1982 and slap Coburn's restrictions on the Belmont. Taking the horses that ran in the Derby and the Preakness and entered the Belmont would have given the 1982 Belmont Stake a whopping field size of ZERO. Great plan. If you assume that the runners in the first two would have stayed the course due to their advantage the field would have been Laser Light, Bold Style and Reinvested. I think we did a little better getting to see Cielo. Instituting Coburn's plan would make both the Preakness and the Belmont restricted stakes races. As I'm sure you're aware, that is a technical term in racing, not just a description. Restricted Stakes are not graded stakes by definition. With fields of zero or three good luck in keeping the ungraded Belmont a prominent American race.

No offense but this post and your others before it show that you know very little about horse racing, which probably means your ideas to improve it have little merit. The suggestion that Secretariat won because he had it easy is stupefying. I would categorize Sham as significantly better than Chrome and I think very few would argue. Still, that is pretty meaningless because Secretariat's Belmont crushed everything before or after it. Bob Beamon times 10. If there were a thread about cricket I would refrain from telling everyone how to improve the game.

I'm pretty sure the reason that hasn't been tried before is because it is a stupid idea. How could you ever force the losing horses from the first leg to compete in the second? The third? How does each race build its own status as a Grade 1 race?

I don't even understand what you wrote but keep in mind that there is no one governing body over horse racing. There is no "they" to do whatever it is that you are proposing. Other than that, I'm sure it is a great idea.