Re: RC: x-factor/heart scores

[Tivers@aol.com]

In a message dated 3/5/00 9:15:55 AM Pacific Standard Time, CMKSAGEHIL writes:

<< Even your own writings attribute 40% to "natural ability"--and that didn't 
come from Mars, it came from his genetic makeup.
 
 To a degree you have a point about not knowing the breeding as a trainer--at 
least if you don't have the self-discipline to be honest about the horse and 
not have preconceived notions.  But--good raw material is still part of the 
package.>

Genetic makeup is other than "pedigree". 
 
 >You can screw up a good horse plenty by not providing the nutrition, the 
training, the competition savvy, etc.  But when you get to the top, most of 
the others are going to have the variables done as well as possible, too--and 
even if you come up with a new gimmick or discover some earthshattering new 
revelation about how to manipulate metabolism, your competition can learn to 
do it, too, so you don't have an "edge" for long.>

I share all this kind of knowledge--but only about 5% ever catch on--leave 
pleanty of room for the losers to play with druid philosophies. 

  >At the bottom, it's certainly possible to spiff up something with very 
little ability and whip the pants off the folks with a better horse who 
haven't done their homework. But at the top, where a great many of them do 
everything as "right" as they can, you can't afford to not start with good 
material.  You can only do so much with magic potions...>

Well, at the top, the magic potions seem to be working very well. 
 
 Heidi >>

ti