Nice reply, btw. I thought it looked impressive at first, especially with the lack of motion blur but noticed the short depth of field which got me thinking a bit, but it stilled looked impressive. Your link is less sharp/more grainy so maybe the OP’s image could be digitally enhanced? which would explain some of the quality.
I cannot understate how insulted he’d be to hear that! Not least because he’s infinitely more intelligent than 2000 of those two!