Anybody who does not have the courage to use their own judgment when betting horses -- i.e. ignoring what Friedman and Brown think deserves whatever happens to them. I have taken Friedman to task on a number of occasions for the way he positions his picks and have never constructed a betting strategy based on his opinions -- at least not since the '98 BC when I learned my lesson good.

When I did my morning line for this year's Derby, the horses lined up like this:

Funny Cide: 4:1
Empire Maker: 9:2
Atswhatimtalkin: 7:1
Peace Rules: 8:1
Ten Most Wanted: 9:1
Offlee Wild: 12:1
Supah Blitz: 13:1
Brancusi: 18:1
Buddy Gil: 21:1
Indian Express: 30:1

Everyone else -- no shot

Supah Blitz was an interesting horse to throw some money on, but he was only about 40:1, not the 80 or 100:1 that many figured he would go off at. At the prices the horses actually went off at, FC was the biggest overlay and deserved to be the key. In fact, the only horses overlaid were FC, Offlee, and Supah, but given Offlee's and Supah's relatively small shot of winning (7-8% on my ML), FC deserved the bulk of the money. Since I had FC in the future book, I backed off a bit and did not hammer him in the Derby itself.

If you want to pick a fight, have at it, but if you look at the sheets, FC was a very strong contender on Ragozin.