In real time, during the running of the race, the two gentlemen seated beside me were collectively losing their minds do to the ride given to WOW. They’d both had him everyway from Sunday and the ranting started going into the far turn. Interestingly, atleast in light of the outcome, neither were up in arms with MS or Saez, during, after, and after the decision they were of the thought that TG’s ride was what cost #1.

You know how often times you watch who you have money on or your key or whatever, then you go back and watch the race again to expand the horizons. I don’t know which one I view with more bias (unintentional bias of course) the first, real time where my $ is on the line, or second after my head has been inundated with countless opinions from all over the place? I was thinking about this to, after making up my mind initially, what amount or is it called preponderance of evidence (not sure ?) is needed to actually change that opinion? For myself if I’m being honest, it doesn’t happen often. Though you’d think it’d be opposite, the opinion would be more swayed by money than not?

But for the record, I agree with you...