Again, for the third (fourth?) time.....

Sinister Minister is an example of one of the 2 possibilities for horses that are visually impressive in prep wins. It's an extremely simple concept, I'm dividing visually impressive prep winners into 2 buckets. Bucket A are your Barbaros and Big Browns, Bucket B are your Goldencents and Sinister Ministers.

Once again, as with the PDub discussion, anyone saying they know for certain which of these 2 buckets CC fits into is not being honest with themselves. I'm openly saying (and have been saying) I'm not sure, which means I'm not directly equating him to Sinister Minister (yet).

My money will likely be on a guess that he falls into the latter bucket, but I'm not stating that it is a certainty that will happen, just as all his fanboys should be realistic about the fact that it is far from certain he will fit into the first category. I consider it to be an educated guess on many different factors already discussed, but it is in fact a guess.

I have never once stated, or even remotely implied, that all horses that do X end up always doing Y in either one of these discussions, and am getting tired of defending completely wrong interpretations of words ppl want to keep putting in my mouth that I never said. If you want to set up your own straw men and argue with yourself about it, have at it, but no need to associate me with it.

Lost in all this discussion was the fact that VIT was a visually impressive winner in his last prep as well, but for some reason everyone wants to discount the competition he ran against due to the IH cross-fire issue and the fact that he hasn't won 3 in a row like CC has (though if he had been facing the competition CC had, he would be on 3 straight visually impressive wins as well).