Derby Trail Forums
Page 11 of 15 « First < 910 11 1213 > Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Borel off Bird for Rachel in Preakness (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29541)

gales0678 05-07-2009 09:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig
why does he get credit for 18 who didn't fire? he got lucky. getting lucky doesn't mean he was good.
was it a great race by mtb - yes or no?

surely the jockey helped but did the rail / slop really make him win by 7

if that race was another 1/4 he wins by DD ! he was pulling away it , he was much the best, and if he repeats next sat then what will you say?

Danzig 05-07-2009 09:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdjcom
Well they sell the horse out from under him, he has a shot to win triple crown(yes i said a shot not sure thing). MTB people trusted in him and he got another Derby under his belt, A triple Crown Bid and he sells out the Bird people, i'm disappointed he didn't stick by his guns and stay on Bird. The filly is great but it's a matter of principle. Has any jockey in history come off a horse by choice who was alive for TC? Borel will live to regret this no matter how many he wins with RA. Cheap shot by him, but i know it's a business, but TC try means more to me than riding a Super Filly. He may never get another shot @ TC and besides, those two derby rides he won i think he's no better than many other jockeys. Calvin Borel no class and a sell-out imo.

lol
he sells out the bird people? he got them a derby win. gimme a break. why should he stay on a horse because he lucked out and won, knowing the chances of him repeating that performance while the rest of fields tanks again are incredibly slim?
live for the tc....:zz:

Linny 05-07-2009 09:29 PM
A first?
 
Has a jock ever gotten off a Derby winner to ride a different horse in the Preakness?

I can't imagine it happening in the "modern era."

Sightseek 05-07-2009 09:30 PM
Wow, like no one has asked this exact same question today!

HaloWishingwell 05-07-2009 09:33 PM
your answer is midway down
http://drf.com/news/article/103602.html

Danzig 05-07-2009 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gales0678
was it a great race by mtb - yes or no?

surely the jockey helped but did the rail / slop really make him win by 7

if that race was another 1/4 he wins by DD ! he was pulling away it , he was much the best, and if he repeats next sat then what will you say?

that i hope there's a burlington coat factory in hell.

Linny 05-07-2009 09:34 PM
Sorry, I was working for a living, not reading every post on DT... Thank you Halo...

Danzig 05-07-2009 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linny
Sorry, I was working for a living, not reading every post on DT...

:rolleyes:

King Glorious 05-07-2009 09:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sightseek
Wow, like no one has asked this exact same question today!
And like it hasn't been answered a couple of times. I know because I answered it one of those times.

1945. Hoop Jr.

blackthroatedwind 05-07-2009 11:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by gales0678
he still would have been a tremendous underlay

Broken clock theory proven.

sumitas 05-08-2009 12:37 AM
Just ignore any distractions or questions about Rachel running in the Preakness . Jackson knows best .

TitanSooner 05-08-2009 01:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linny
Sorry, I was working for a living, not reading every post on DT... Thank you Halo...
:tro: :tro: :tro:

MisterB 05-08-2009 02:21 AM
Forgive me but, wasn't the 10 million a long term investment? No need to be a Rags, and never race again. Goes to show you, some people have more money than brains

jpops757 05-08-2009 07:27 AM
why???
 
According to Privman in yesterdays drf, noone knows if Rachel can get into the Preakness field if more than 14 enter even with the supliment. Noone can understand the vague requirements.

Danzig 05-08-2009 07:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpops757
According to Privman in yesterdays drf, noone knows if Rachel can get into the Preakness field if more than 14 enter even with the supliment. Noone can understand the vague requirements.

so, it'd come down to how the officials read the requirements, right? i'd think they'll get rachel in the race.

tector 05-08-2009 08:03 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig
so, it'd come down to how the officials read the requirements, right? i'd think they'll get rachel in the race.
:tro: :tro: :tro: :tro:

This is one bet you can take to the bank. Only a court order could stop them (which, I think, would be unlikely).

Bobby Fischer 05-08-2009 08:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tector
:tro: :tro: :tro: :tro:

This is one bet you can take to the bank. Only a court order could stop them (which, I think, would be unlikely).
true that

SniperSB23 05-08-2009 10:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin
I'm the most conservative person in the world when it comes to giving horses time between races. I hate running horses back quickly. But in this case, I would definitely run Rachel in the Preakness. She was under a strangle-hold in the Oaks. She wasn't even close to being all out. She could have won by another 5-10 lengths if she was asked. As others have said, that race was like a workout for her.

In addition, the Preakness should be an easy race for her. I don't think there will be a horse in there that can come within 8 lengths of her. I think she will be able to win under a strangle-hold again. I would have no concerns about bringing her back in 15 days in this case.
How can you possibly conclude that? Just cause she wasn't whipped? Have you looked at the fractions? She ran her last furlong in 12.16. To go 5 lengths faster she would have had to have gone in 11.36. To go 10 lengths faster she would have had to go in 10.56. Are we really to believe that is physically possible? If asked she may have moved up 2-3 lengths. This is like Bernardini all over. Everyone said he could have gone so much faster if asked even though the finishing fractions suggested that wasn't possible. Sure enough when finally asked he went no faster than he'd gone in his previous races.

Also, I love the idea of a 3yo filly doing the Whitney/Travers double. That would be awesome.

sumitas 05-08-2009 10:55 AM
Her mile time was 1.36 so that was being asked . Her unexpectedley coming in off 2 weeks rest just seems like Jackson needs a publicity fix .

Danzig 05-08-2009 11:13 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by sumitas
Her mile time was 1.36 so that was being asked . Her unexpectedley coming in off 2 weeks rest just seems like Jackson needs a publicity fix .

is that why every derby starter that goes in the preakness is running? this seems to fall into the 'she's a filly, shouldn't face the colts' type of mindset. she's actually getting a day more in between than those colts-another advantage to go with a weight break.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:15 PM.
Page 11 of 15 « First < 910 11 1213 > Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.