DP

Once again you use a lawyer's weasely way with words. You deny you said you 'just' posted Jerry's analysis. True - you said you 'simply' posted his analysis. So let's get this straight - 'simply' posting implies more than 'just' posting does it? If you 'simply' post then it is obvious you are adding comments of your own but if you 'just' post then you wouldn't be. Beats me. But then if you get paid to lie, sorry, represent your client's best interests, then recognising the truth must get awfully difficult. Be honest. You put the worst possible spin on Jerry's analysis and the best possible on Robespierre's 'thoughts.' Why not get Robes to give actual plays then we can all compare like with like?

Of course, given your previous head-to-head with HP - OK I lost the contest but I won at the windows - I would have thought you would have been on JB's side. Is what he did - revised his picks when he saw the actual odds - anything different to what you did?

Surely if the odds change, so should your opinion? You make your own morning line. What's the point of doing that if you are not going to revise your opinion based on the actual pre-race odds? If you make one horse 9-5 and the other 7-2 and the track morning line says 7-5 and 4-1 does that decide your betting strategy? Or do you take more notice of the fact that 5mins before post the first horse is 5-2 and the second 3-1?

Please, Ragozin's not your client so look at the situation honestly and without bias.