binman

You're probably right on big Danny Hughes but he did make All Australian in 1988 and won the bluey in 1985

Some good points PD. Agree on the importance of an elite defender and Lever is not far away from being a true A grader. He has huge upside because i suspect he will push himself to improve throughout his career. A great get. I have been a huge dees fan since the mid seventies and agree that this is the best in my time. In addition to an elite defender to have chance of winning a flag in the modern era teams need 10-12 decent players capable of playing in he middle and at least 2 of them have to legitimate A graders. We have never had that in the time i have supported the dees. Wes till don't quite yet but Oliver and trac will get there and Viney gives so much of himself he almost gets in that group by dint of effort. Add gawn and we have the makings of a premiership midfield. The other piece of the puzzle is Hogan. I find it amazing that he seems to have dropped a little in the collective imagination. he is a star, pure and simple and the best forward we have had since Ox fist few years. Interesting comment that we have not had an elite defender since the 70s. I disagree, though acknowledge it is debatable. I think Gary Hardeman was elite. Steven Icke was probably not in that top class by the time he came to the dees (as a forward) but he was terrific at the dees. And Sean Wight and Danny Hughes, if not elite were not too far off it.

I had a huge day. Six straight out winners, a good trifecta (the 8th iin melb), a good quinella (in Adelaide) and the early quaddie in melb. Top day.

Well my confidence in the first half of the day has been well placed - at least at Flemington. No winners at randwick as of yet but backed the first four winners at Flemington and nailed the early quaddie. Twice. I love days when you are up early because the stress of losing is taken away. Top wins by Aloft and Hear the Chant, which were both great odds.

I backed Spin. Thought he'd get there

Are you Dermot Brererton?

G'day punters. Had to get a train from Bairnsdale today so had plenty of time to do my form very thoroughly. I'm reasonably confident for the first half of the day but things get harder as the day goes on, particularity at Flemington. That said not as hard as the last 3 weeks. I thinks there are some good bets, some horses that are too short and because of that some value. I'm going to add another category - lay of the day. Best bet: Aloft Best value: Frolic Bets long shot (each way): Flemington Race 5 no 14 La Belle Jude Lay of the day: can't split Santos and Alizee Good punting

fair point

He is also good by hand. Makes smart decisions and has a knack with his kicks and handballs of not only finding players in space but also putting it to their advantage so they can run onto the ball rather than have to stop and wait. So important and a skill surprisingly few seem to have. Also a critical skill in our game plan that involves chains of handballs and sweeping the ball forward.

Whoah that's better. I saw this pic on the phone and thought you were in bondage leather and chains with old wrinkly skin. Not that there;s anythging wrong with that. But now i see it is i assume the artist's chain and arm. By the by i thought our firts year was 1859. Also by the by love the tat

Very tricky day. here's my tips: best bet: gailo chop (good vale too, i think he is an energing stating satr and hrtnell won't catch him) Best value: snitty kitty Long shot/each way: Lord of the SKy Good luck all

All true enough. but those things, in my world view don't disqualify America from being considered a great country. But as i pointed out clearly we were never going to agree on whether America is a great country. I maintain it is. But that is obviously based on my own criteria. A criteria that means that i believe Russia, China, Japan and Germany are all great counties despite their human rights record and that fact all have been guilty of genocide against their own people and those of other countries. But lets stop now. Demonland's dark web makes me dizzy.

Yep, agree

If you were to disqualify a country from being considered great by things such as war record, history of treatment of its indigenous people or how it went about colonising and treating other countries not a single country could be considered great. Not one. When i say America is a great country i mean in a historical sense. I have said on DL before that the movie Life Of Brian provides some great analogies for life and once again it delivers in this context. I'm thinking of the 'What did the roman's ever do for us scene' here. To paraphrase: Apart from helping establish the principles of democracy, advances in medicine, advances in science, helping defeat Hitler and fascism, brilliant artists, brilliant thinkers, great writers, driving all manner of technological advances (eg flight, the telephone, space travel, computers etc etc) and promoting a culture of human rights through the last 100 years what has America ever done for us. in this context I found this article from the Atlantic Magazine from March 1959 fascinating

To be honest with an opening statement such as being 'over getting into unwinnable bun fights on this site' i don't see the point in bothering to give my definition of greatness, given you have made it clear that you will counter any points i make. So i won't bother. Just accept that i think America is a great country and i'll accept you don't think it is. Done.

For undeniably great country the number of gun related deaths is an extraordinary state of affairs that is some ways unparalleled in history . And not only do their elected representatives, from both sides, do nothing, they ate enablers. .

Wrecker, i'm not sure if it was intentional but this statement implies the two issues are comparable. Which of course is completely not the case. It is impossible to compare the two. A quick google threw up hundreds of articles that make this point, but this one sums up how absurd the comparison is: The reality is that an American is at least twice as likely to be shot dead by a toddler than killed by a terrorist. America's gun control 'problem' is full scale out of control. The numbers are staggering. Staggering. On the other hand it is hard to mount an argument they actually have a Islamic terrorism 'problem' at all let alone a 'massive problem'. This article, in the wake of the obscene Las Vegas massacre sums up things well, when it says; The Las Vegas massacre is a symptom of a problem more serious than terrorism: the lack of effective gun controls in the U.S. As I have reported previously, between 1970 and 2007, a total of 3,292 people in the U.S. were killed by terrorists. Almost all those deaths occurred on a single day, 9/11/01. That averages out to fewer than 100 deaths from terrorism a year. In contrast, more than 32,000 Americans are shot to death every year, according to the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. Of those, more than 11,000 people are murdered and almost 20,000 kill themselves. The U.S., which has more firearms per capita than any other nation, has rates of gun-related killings much higher than any other developed nation. The irony is that at the heart of the gun control issue is the notion of freedom and not having the government control its citizens. And the completely out of of balance response in the USA (and here too for that matter) to terrorism has stripped US citizens of their rights, impacts on their freedom in any number of ways (eg intra country air travel) and most ironically of all has enabled the government to control its citizens in ways that 20 years ago would have been unthinkable (eg monitoring private conversations and email use, surveillance, right to detain etc etc). Go figure.

Yep. My mate puts our bets on. Hopefully we got best fluc as it came in from 14s

I like him too. I backed him and Royal rapture who is alos good value. Super tricky day, particularly at Flemington and on days like this you can back a couple of horse in some races and still make a good profit (assuming one of them wins!). Have done this a few times today

I was tempted to make my bets bet Mark Zahra in the jockey challenge. Was terrific odds at 2.80. Good start from him with an early double and will be al but impossible to beat from here given the second fav Williams is yet to score point. I backed Clark for the JC in Sydney so whilst i didn;t back Santos 9forgot yout tip 77 - foolish) i was happy he got up as Clark was riding it.

Best bet Randwick Race 4 no 2 Deploy Bets value Randwick Race 8 no 1 Frolic Best longshot (or each way if you prefer) Flemington Race 6 no 5 Rimraam

Indeed. I dont mind the odd exotic much to my mates chagrin as the take out by tge bookies is so high and the long terms return well in their favour

My mate who i bet with is a huge Don Scott fan. Framing the market properly is critical no doubt and perhaps equally important is staking (which of course is related).

An edit/change to the above. Best bets are never going to just the best chance of winning, regardless of odds as sometime a horse that meets that criteria is going to be way to short to bother with, Winx for example. Last week the horse most likely to win anywhere in the country was She Will reign given the class edge and field size. But way too short to bother at $1.20 (unless you want to risk 10k). So my best bet definition would be: Best bet (the horse with the best chance of wining at backable odds - usually something like 1.70 and up in a field of say 8 horses, $2 for fields of 8-12 and $2.50 in fields over 12) Perhaps the bets idea is for each of us to define our best bet according to our own criterion, but we probably should know what that criteria is.