Re: Just Win Baby (553 Views)
Posted by:
Chuckles_the_Clown2 (IP Logged)
Date: August 05, 2007 05:11PM
The half I assumed is given and the knowledgeable understand it. Winning can be cheating when the facts indicate that the wins are out of the course of context.
Lawyer Ron and Pletch's photos are there under that definition.
It doesn't boil down to two half's anyway. Winning can never indicate a horse ran clean, but a win can sure prove a horse ran substance aided. Once again, refer to Lawyer Ron and Pletch.
miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Chuck, as usual you got it half right.
>
> "Regardless of R.O.I. cheating is still cheating
> and winning is not evidence that there is no
> cheating"
>
>
>
> .......nor is winning alone evidence that there is
> cheating.If I posted a roster of all the horses in
> the present care of TAP and told he would average
> winning one out of four, you would conclude he is
> an ordinary trainer/horseman.
>
> Mike