[Rain Man]

Well, neither of these houses seems to have a pool, presumably to keep the horses from falling in.

This heat is more a battle of outbuildings than anything else. When I look at the part that I care about most - the houses - both houses are actually pretty nice and classy. I would award points to New Hampshire because the house is bigger and is a little more in my wheelhouse. But both are nice.

New Hampshire gives me access to Boston, which has a lot of amenities but is also close to tom brady fans. There are also some coastal things to do, I presume. I've never lived near a coast, but people seem to think that's' a good thing. On the other hand, Kentucky gives me access to both Cincinnati and Louisville, which ... well, okay. Culturally, I'm a closer fit to those cities than to anything in New England, but I'm not a good cultural fit in either place.

The New Hampshire house seems to be located near a swamp, which seems like it would be problematic. It's got 15 acres, along with several outbuildings that I don't need at all. Kentucky has 262 acres, but it appears to be a serious horse enterprise working farm, and I have zero interest in that.

It's a close one, but I like the look of that New Hampshire house and that's where I'll spend most of my time. Also, the magnitude of the Kentucky horse operation bothers me a bit. Even though I don't think it would be utopia for me, I'll go with New Hampshire.