Yep, she could run but then you wouldn't see her again until maybe October. A little rest now will save her for an exciting campaign. The Haskel, Travers? Man, how exciting would that be.

Awesome, keep on accepting what trainers and owners say as gospel. The horse has absolutely no soundness issues and there aren't any big races on the horizon for months. She's got plenty of foundation and I don't understand why everyone's so quick to say "this is in the best interest of the horse" as if they're in her phucking barn. I think they don't believe she can go 12 furlongs and would've been passed by Mine That Bird if the Preakness were 1/16th longer. I'm not stating that as fact though, like some of the "doing right by the horse" experts.

Why? Why would one more race knock her out until October? This is ridiculous. How the hell do you say this with any certainty? No one gives a flying crap about the Haskell and Travers in the mainstream. We're all so damn excited when the Preakness ratings are up, then when they duck the last remaining nationally important race with the sound horse who brought those ratings, we applaud. This is ridiculous.

Anyone find anything incongruous in this Jacksonian jewel?

I know it does sound ridiculous but if you talk to enough trainers they will tell you the same thing. The series takes alot out of horses who are bred fragile anyway. Besides, she was dead on her feet in the win circle at the Preakness. It is the right decision for the horse and if it wasn't for Jackson, would have been made last week.

You are right. The distance is a question mark. And you are right that she was getting tired in the Preakness and might have gotten beat had the race been 1 1/4 miles. When you consider those things, why in the world would they want to bring the horse back in 3 weeks running 1 1/2 miles? How would that be in the horse's best interest?

It clearly took a hell of a lot out of Curlin and Hard Spun two years back. They were never seen again, except for those 4 more combined graded stakes victories and 3 Grade I's in the summer and fall and 1-2 finish in the BC Classic.

How do you know she is sound?

Sorry, but I usually take "the horse's best interest" to be referring to health. I doubt Rachel cares if she loses at the Belmont, so if she's sound and they're just ducking, I don't want to hear this "long-term health" nonsense.

Steve she jogged in the Preakness..What did the guy do wrong? He bought the filly, raced her in the second leg of the triple crown, and then was smart enough to give her a break.. The guy is sick and isn't long for this world maybe you should give the guy a break all he does is race horses.. He had Curlin try the grass in the hopes that he would be good enough to race in the Arc, when he wasn't he changed gears.. I get the fact you dis like his ways but in all cander the guy does what so many don't.. He races his horses.. Let him die in peace and let him race her a few more times under the advisement of Ass.. Filly is in WAY better hands today then with the mighty Hal Wiggins..

Because she's had two full campaigns so far and because there haven't been any reports whatsoever of soundness issues and because that's not the king of thing owners/trainers are shy about divulging?

He paid $10 million for her. He can do whatever he wants. It's his filly.

I really would have liked to see her run in the Belmont. Now that she isn't, I'll just have to wait for her next start (if there is one).

As you said, there have been some great horses such as Curlin that ran well in all three legs of the Triple Crown and then were still able to run some more great races later in the year. But there aren't many horses that can do that. There have been far more horses that were either never the same or who needed a long rest to recover. And most trainers know this. That is why they didn't run Street Sense in the Belmont. They knew there was a high probability that it would knock him out, so they decided to skip the race.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Jackson took alot of heat for running her in the Preakness off two weeks rest. You know he'd be a bullseye for mucho criticism if he were to admit openly that she came out of the race with an issue. I hope it's just a matter of fatigue and that we'll see her down the road. In my opinion many Jackson haters are objectivity-challenged when it comes to Rachel Alexandra.

Why would it have knocked out Street Sense if it didn't knock out Curlin and Hard Spun? Street Sense was trashed by those two later in the year, so who really was "knocked out"? Like I said, if you're ducking, say so. If the horse has no soudness issues, don't give me "long-term health" as your reason. It's hollow, and I'm surprised so many people not connected to the horse blindly nod along with it.

Curlin's effort in the Haskel was his dullest effort all year. He rebounded with a sound effort in the jockey cup gold cup against Lawyer Ron. But his dull effort had to do with his difficulty rebounding from that triple crown series. Now Rachel may be able to handle it better than Curlin because she has alot more bottom to her than Curlin. She raced 6 times as a two year old. However, if Jackson could see a way to run her and win, he would obviously do it. A Belmont victory would stamp her as the greatest filly of all time in most fan's books. A place she may get to anyway. Hard Spun still amazes me. I still can't see how a horse could run those fractions for so friggin long.

I am not sure she is better then Rag too Riches

Your Super filly while wonderful has never run a 110 beyer

I'm not a Jackson hater, if you'll read the other thread started by Ogygian, I strongly defended him. I just don't buy the long-term health explanation as quickly as others.

Hard Spun would have buried Rachel