:wf :wf :wf :wf I cant even believe im commenting on your comment here after you just displayed how little knowledge you have on the subject. Jess didnt even own here during the Derby, it was stated by her owner at the time she is a filly and will race only against filly's. This is why Jess bought her was to make sure this wasnt the case and find out how good she really is. She passed all tests and put in one of if not the greatest years of all time by any horse.

This has nothing to do with the connections, The RA camp are the one's that are claiming she took on the most challenging set of races available to her this year, I am just pointing out that this wasn't the case and it is foolhardy to keep saying she did.

you're joking right?

Read above.

Who cares what they said, this thread is about who we think should be HOY. Jess Jackson also said that Curlin was one of the all-time greats. He can say whatever he wants because from the time in which he bought her she did have one of the most challenging sets of races a horse has ever had, that's undeniable. You're choosing to pick them apart as if what she did is mundane.

If you want to dissect each horse's campaign then I think Zenyatta should have run in the race on Oaks day regardless of track condition, the Californian instead of the Milady, the Hollywood Gold Cup instead of the Vanity, the San Diego Handicap instead of the Clement Hirsch, the Pacific Classic instead of the Lady's Secret.

You see they were really ducking the phenomenal west coast handicap horses like Rail Trip, Dakota Phone, and Colonel John.

That ridiculous argument that I just posited is roughly equivalent to what you're saying about Rachel Alexandra.

NT

As with many I was critical of Zenyatta's campaign also, sure I would have loved to have seen her ship and be tested more, however seeing how she ran yesterday I can understand why they did what they did.

Neither camp wanted to ship to each others backyard so maybe both can be blamed for this, I do believe 1 extraordinary performance can sway minds, we talked about this with Summer Bird had he won the Classic, what Zenyatta did yesterday superceded the norm for me and she deserves HOY based on this IMO.

The whole "who is better" debate at this point is kind of pointless. They are both exceptional future Hall of Famers; it's like arguing over who's better, Willie Mays or Mickey Mantle.

However, one consistent theme of many on this board throughout the year has been that somehow Zenyatta is inferior to Rachel because she's much "slower" on the Beyer scale. If many let go of their slavish reliance on the Beyers (which are pretty unreliable on synthetic surfaces), they might discover that Zenyatta is not as "slow" as they thought. On the Ragozin Sheets, Zenyatta was the "fastest" route horse in yesterday's Classic. She earned a "0" for her Vanity win and a 1.5 for her much-maligned victory in the Hirsch. The only other Classic horses to run faster than a "2" on the Sheets in a non-turf route race were Summer Bird (.75 in JCGC), Einstein (1.25 in Foster), and Quality Road (1.75 in JCGC - he earned a pair of "2"s for his trumpeted wins in the Fountain of Youth and Florida Derby).

I guess if it was at Churchill, Rachel could go quite a bit faster than that and still have a great chance. In the Ky Oaks, I think she went :47 3/5. I don't know if anyone could have beaten her that day.

But the thing about Zenyatta as I said in my previous post is that we still don't know how good she really is. They've never really gotten to the bottom of her. She's never really been all out. If someone didn't recognize this, I could see how they wouldn't have thought she was that good before yesterday's race. Even after yesterday's race, I could see someone making an argument that she still didn't prove she's a true superstar. I mean it was a relatively weak field for the BC Classic. There were no Roses in Mays, Ghostzappers, Pleasantly Perfects, Curlins, Invasors, Bernardidnis, etc. I admit that it wasn't a great field. But that doesn't matter. It was the way she did it. Everything went against her. She came out of the gate totally flat-footed and didn't switch leads for well over an 1/8th of a mile. So she ends up 15 lengths back on a :24 1/5 opening quarter. Yet she still ended up winning relatively easily and she wasn't even all out.

With Rachel Alexander, I thought the sky was the limit after the Ky Oaks. She was winning by 20 lengths and she wasn't even all out. But eventually we did end up seeing her all out in both the Preakness and the Woodward. She barely won those races. She may be the biggest freak in the world at Churchill. But at other tracks, if she is close to a pretty fast pace, she is not invincible. She would have lost both the Preakness and the Woodward if there would have been a really good horse in either one of those races.

but.. but.. she had bigger beyers

Yeah, I'm joking. I don't think Zenyatta could beat Macho Again or Mine That Bird (the runners up in photos in the Preakness and Woodward).

Macho Again would have won the BC Classic easily yesterday.

Do you really think that was the same MTB that ran in the preakness? Zenyatta wouldn't have even beat MTB in the preakness she prob would have finished 4th behind Musket Man. MTB was at his peak in that race he's a shell of that horse now. If the classic was run on dirt yesterday no she would not have beaten Macho Again nor would she have beaten him or RA in the Woodward

You know she is by Street Cry the same sire of Street Sense who excelled at CD and Saratoga. Are you so sure she would be so bad on dirt(she has already won on at Oaklawn) to finish behind Musket Man? What makes you think she would be an inferior horse on dirt? I think you are pulling our legs here...

Macho Again would not win the synthetic classic, because he's a dirt horse as well.

When the Classic is run at Churchill, maybe he has an very small chance.

In fairness to Rachel, I don't think there is any question that she went way too fast early in the Preakness and the Woodward. The place to be early in both of those races was probably around 5 lengths back instead of being on the lead in :46 2/5.

I agree with you that MTB is not the same horse right now. You get no argument from me there. But I don't know how you come to the conclusion that Zenyatta would not be a great horse on the dirt. She ran once on the dirt and she ran great. She blew Ginger Punch off the track in the Apple Blossom. She ran really fast that day too. The Oaklawn Handicap was that same day and she ran faster than the boys did in the Oaklawn Handicap. The Oaklawn Handicap had a strong field that year too. Macho Again would have been 25-1 in that race and would have had no shot of hitting the board.

Im done arguing about this. He's the last thing I have to say. There is a correct answer to this debate. Rachel is hands down superior to Zenyatta. Most of the points you triy to make about Zen. being HOY are very hypocritical in the sense of easy paths and ducking etc. There are only two reasons why anyone would think Zen is superior and one is a west coast bias, ie you live there and 2 you have a synthetic bias ie you feel running on wax and plastic has a place in horse racing and should determine a champion.

Brownie Points blew Ginger Punch away as well. Maybe Ginger Punch had an off day.

As I said in my previous post, Zenyatta ran great on the dirt winning the Apple Blossom very impressively in a fast time. I think you would be hard-pressed to find any handicapper on any coast that thinks Macho Again or Musket Man could beat Zenyatta on the dirt.

Did you time her gallop out that day at Oaklawn? The Apple Blossom and Oaklawn Handicap are run at two different distances

NT

Z never raced outside of SoCal this year. If anyone was doing the ducking, it was Z's connections.

both fillies have had good years. who ends up being judged as having had the better year is yet to be seen. but there's no way of ever knowing which one of the two would triumph in whatever mythical race we want to set up in our minds. suffice it to say that both zenyatta and rachel are very, very special and that both will be remembered fondly in years to come. i'd imagine both will be used as a measuring stick for horses that we haven't yet seen.


native dancer is remembered now as having been a spectacular horse, one for the ages. he suffered only one blemish on his otherwise perfect career when his jock gave him a horrid ride in the derby. many place him on top of the heap as far as horses who only one two thirds of the t.c. not many still bring up the fact that he never faced a top older horse by the name of tom fool, another who is remembered fondly to this day. no one cares anymore that they never got a chance to square off. of course the breadth of years helps; with these two every one is still in the moment.

if zenyatta and rachel had faced each other, and i'd have loved to have seen it, one of them wouldn't have their perfect year. now they both do-might not be a panacea to everyone, but all we can do is appreciate what they both did.

bingo

Ginger Punch may not have fired that day. I agree with you that that is quite possible. In fact, I would guess that Ginger Punch didn't run her best that day. But that wouldn't take away from Zenyatta's perfomance that day. She won so easily and she ran really fast. She ran 1 1/16 miles in 1:42 3/5. The Oaklawn Handicap which was run that same day and went in 1:50 2/5 (1 1/8 miles).

you are 100% correct.


thinking about the bigger picture for the sport...... if they gave it to both i would not mind it at all.

it has been done before....

Sprinter - Dr. Patches/J.O.Tobin
2YO Male - Crimson Satan/Ridan
3YO Female - Two Lea/Wistful
Sprinter - Delegate/Royal Governor

bless you both r.a. and zen

The chart for the race says 1:48.3 (although no fractional times, so I don't know if there were any timing issues that day).

No it didn't. The final time of the OP Handicap was 1:48 and 3/5.

NT

No, I didn't time her gallop out. LOL. I know the one race is 1 1/16 miles compared to 1 1/8 miles. I was actually at Oaklawn that day. I think that her race was the faster race. I mean I think 1 1/16 miles in 1:42 3/4 is faster than 1 1/8 miles in 1:50 2/5. I think she could have run her last 1/8th in less than 8 seconds.

Can you find me the chart that says the OP Handicap was run in 1:50 and 2/5?

Cause Equibase says it was run in 1:48.60.

NT

I wasn't talking out of my ass, but I was incorrect. If you go to racereplays.com, they show the final time was 1:50.34. They obviously made a mistake. There was a problem with the clocking of the Oaklawn Handicap. I remember that. To this day, I'm not sure if any website has the fractions.

Ah, the Oaklawn Handicap has attracted some great horses: Cigar, Best Pal, etc. But not that year. That year the race was filled with slugs Tiago, Heatseeker, Reporting For Duty, Circular Quay, Buzzard's Bay, Fairbanks, and Silver Lord.

Yes, go to racereplays.com, pull up the race and hit the results tab. They show the final time as 1:50.34. I think that their number is wrong . I think the equibase number is right.

Scholars maintain that the translation was lost hundreds of years ago. RB

Fairbanks and Heatseeker were both SPECIAL.

Both Heatseeker and Tiago were very good horses on their best day. The Oaklawn Handicap was Heatseeker's next start following his win in the Grade I Santa Anita Handicap. And right after his 2nd place finish in the Oaklawn Handicap, he won the Grade II Californian at Hollywood.

Tiago had just run 4th in the SA Handicap and then ran 2nd in the Californian. They were two of the best horses in the country at the time.

Circular Quay was a multiple graded stakes winner coming into the race off a win in the Grade II New Orleans Handicap.

Fairbaks was a graded stakes winner (not to mention running 2nd in the Grade I Suburban) coming off a 2nd place finish in the Grade II Gulfstream Handicap.

Buzzard's Bay was a multiple graded stakes winner but I admit he appeared to be out of form for the 2008 Oaklawn Handicap.

I think the 2008 Oaklawn Handicap was a strong field.

the bc is for championships. just like football was used earlier. new england went 17 and 0. lost super bowl. so new england didnt get the reward. even with something that probably wont be repeated again.

I don't get it.

San Di Agoow... A whales vagina

Oh God.:wf

NT

Are you serious or are you being sarcastic? I hope you are serious. Heatseeker was a really good horse before he got hurt. He was a Grade I winner and made over $1 million.

Fairbanks ran a few big races. He made almost $900,000.

No they're not, that's what Greg Avioli would like you to believe.

Horse racing, unlike the NFL is simply a long season that has a culminating day where you can CHOOSE to run in them. That's why BC Classic winners in the past have earned no end of season honors.

NT