No, the point is cherry-picking races that suit your argument and ignoring races that don't. That's what every one of your arguments entails. So keep waiting until next year.

I'm not sure I am doing anything different than what others are doing, I think I asked which race is looking better now, the Woodward or the Travers? It's a good question when you bring into context of what we are discussing. I'm not sure if we were talking about another horse this be such a big deal. I think it's a worthwhile topic but to mention it you are somehow being dishonest, disingenous, and other not too flattering adjectives I have been called lately.

Didn't want to ignore this comment, Summer Bird or any of the other 3 yr old males are not older horses. Obviously the comment didn't include Gio Ponti or the Euro's either. Mostly this 3 yr old crop can be a very good one.

To just mention it is not to be dishonest or disingenuous, which is why you'll see plenty of people making those arguments and not getting taken to the woodshed for them...because even if they're making a bad argument, they're doing it in good faith.

To have made about 74 different, terrible, dishonest and disingenuous arguments like you have....is to be dishonest and disingenuous. And lots of what you've been typing for several months isn't even good faith debate, because you change the goalposts, change what matters, and change the criteria whenever it suits you, then get all defensive and sullen when people call you on it and then you act like you're getting the short end of it from all these mean people who just love picking on you.

Dishonest and disingenuous. People just calling it as it happens.

Haven't heard that in awhile. Is it still Politically correct.

Well, the origin of the saying long predates any negative connotation that had been given to it (even if erroneously given) in more recent times.

But I'll edit it out for the sake of being safe.

just jokin.

Eh, but I'd rather not have it out there if someone may take it the wrong way. My bleeding heart won't let me keep it there if I run that risk :D

Lets call a spade a spade and say that there is a troll a troll'n you fools to death.

Eh. You win.

I read Crist's article today on this...not disagreeing with his points, but I think this is the third or fourth post BC article on Zenyatta and there is a common state

"This is no knock on Zenyatta"

"While Zenyatta is a fine horse, but ....."

"She won the Classic but..."

Every article is written as a counterpoint to what the horse has done. I think its interesting.

However you want to backtrack it...

In the end you proved to know little about Lady's Secret's career, yet had no problem comparing her unfavorably to Zenyatta, which makes anything you say in the matter of little service since your bias is already exposed.

Yes, let's take Einstein's BC Classic at face value as though it was his typical A-game performance, just as Einstein himself took Rip Van Winkle's azz in the face at the 3/16ths pole eliminating from any hope of putting in a run.

Interesting in the way that people thinking Rachel is HOY don't want to appear to denigrate what a quality horse Zenyatta is so they're trying to put the padding up before somebody comes in swinging over something ridiculous. We were lucky to have either one of them in our lifetimes. Doesn't mean that one's overall 2009 season doesn't come out ahead for its overall strength. It's not a counterpoint to what Zenyatta did, it's a counterpoint to the implication that we don't fully appreciate everything that she is by saying RA's year was worthy of HOY. It's absolutely ridiculous to be down on either horse. It's like asking someone if they'd rather have the wealth of Bill Gates or Warren Buffett. Zenyatta is magic. I still wouldn't give her the trophy over RA.

I think this is a good post. It might end up RA got horse of the year but Zenyatta gets the better horse label when the career is over.

I feel like saying give RA the award, Zenyatta the statute. She's being beatified in California as we speak, how about just finish it off. I'm sure RA will get a similar honor somewhere at some point. They're both getting into the Hall of Fame, who are we kidding? Now if anybody tries to go re-naming, say, the Ruffian or the Personal Ensign after Rachel, so help me I'm gonna go crack some heads together.

As for who the better horse is, racing style just makes that way too hard. They're both extraordinary at what they do. I get more enjoyment out of figuring out what RA has to do to compete with Gallorette in the pantheon. Still not entirely convinced Ruffian was actually a mere mortal so comparing her to anyone is just weird.

Good post.

In the words of BWS, I wonder how we're going to spin Flashing's two G1 wins since getting steamrolled by RA.

And beating the California wonder-horse Stardom Bound to boot.

NT

Someone remind me, how many lengths did RA beat Flashing by? Oops, nevermind, found it. That'd be 31 1/2.

Did anyone really think Stardom Bound has been a wonder horse this year?

Am I the only one who smiles when things blow up on IEAH?

I was being coy. There were people (here included) who thought she was still good this year.

I absolutely love it when things blow up on IEAH. I am eagerly looking forward to Diamondrella losing the Matriarch.

NT

Not that I think Stardom Bound is good, but the pace in the Gazelle today was dreadfully slow (24 and 48 if I remember), and the Ashland had a crawling pace as well. I think if Stardom Bound was ever a better price, she would be a good play in a race with some speed.

Granted that the pace was slow but stardom bound did not gain any ground and looked tired at the end. She is probably the slowest multi Grade 1 winner in history.

The track was extremely slow today. The :48 half was not really that slow. Stardom Bound was just never that good. Don't make DrugS come out of hiding and post the "where are they now" of the 2008 BC Juv Fillies field. It's frightening.

NT

I always thought she was a late running sprinter

I could see that. I actually told someone that's why I wasn't betting her in the Oak Leaf or the BC.

NT

Remember when people thought she was a Derby winner? And you were a bad person to think otherwise.

Suspect the LaBrea would be a good spot to prove it.

I think she's very typical of many 2-year-old fillies of years past... they're awesome at 2, but they do not progress to 3 like their male counterparts. Then you combine that with the fact she was part of a weak group to begin with (BC field-wise, anyway).

To play devil's advocate, she did win 2 grade 1s in 4 starts this year.

If you factor the injury post-Ashland and the dirt this weekend then I wouldn't write her off just yet.

Ship back to SA for the La Canada series as someone suggested.

Just don't transfer her to Gary Stevens.

:tro: great post & completely accurate.

Just what have I said that was terrible, dishonest or disingenuous? Please tell me. Is questioning her competition terrible, dishonest or disingenuous? Is questioning her stopping on Sept 5 terrible, dishonest or disingenuous? Is believing Zenyatta is a better horse than her terrible, dishonest or disingenuous? Is saying if I had a vote for HOY I would vote for Zenyatta terrible, dishonest or disingenuous? I repectfully differ but it seems to me that it is you that gets all defensive and sullen when one simply questions RA on these specific things. I challenged a poster a few weeks ago to find one post that I have made that I said Rachel was a bad horse, there were none. You are barking up the wrong tree, because you cannot accept anyone's opinion that is different than yours.

OMFG someone call the waaaaambulance for CSC....I'm terribly sorry I don't have the time to go back and pull out EVERY time that you've changed the goalposts, made an intentionally dishonest argument, and ignored when people have called out every inconsistency in your arguments, of which there have been about two dozen. Sorry, I already have a full time job and don't have the hours to document it, but luckily anyone who has been reading in real-time as you've been doing it all these months already knows full well what I'm talking about, so there actually isn't any need for me to go do it for YOUR sake, since you're the only one still pretending you're not doing it.

Coach was right the other day -- I've gotten badly punked, because the entire paragraph I just typed basically explains EXACTLY what a troll is. Damnit, I'm always the last to know...

Changed goalposts on what? The error I think you are referring to I addressed and explained when I found out it was an error, I don't know why you cannot accept this. I too work F/T and don't have access to certain horseracing sites during the day. The discussion was on the name change of The Lady's Secret, while the site I went to only listed her BC Distaff as a major SA accomplishment, her other wins didn't change my mind because Zenyatta's SA accomplishments were better. If it had you can bet your bottom dollar I would have changed my view on that. That's the crux of it.

Again I ask you how have I made terrible, dishonest and disingenuous arguments towards Rachel Alexandra? I was on record as saying she was my choice for HOY prior to the BC, and as like anyone in their right mind reserved the right to adjust that opinion if there were any extraordinary performances later in the year. Isn't this the right of any horseracing fan?

The free speech straw man. Always one of my personal favorites.

Seriously, if you'd just call me a Nazi or compare me to Hitler, you'd have hit for the troll cycle.

So basically everyone that agree's with your viewpoint is alright in your eyes... And anyone who has a different opinion better shut up and sing...so to speak. :rolleyes:

No. There are people I respect who think Zenyatta should be HOY, even if I don't agree with them. They just make cogent arguments that don't rely on lies, distortions, gross inaccuracies, and disingenuous tactics.

That's what you fail to understand. That's why the free speech argument is so rich, since the only thing you have to fall back on is accusing me of denying you your right to your opinion, when all anyone is doing is pointing out the numerous fallacies in your opinion...fallacies that you need to be true in order for you personally to have a coherent argument. That's something you still don't really have. There is an argument that I disagree with on making Zenyatta HOY or naming the Lady's Secret after her or whatever else it is you want to crow about, but that's not the argument you're making. You're just throwing $hit at a wall and hoping it sticks....and after three months of similar arguments, it's still clean.

Oh well. You can make this about ME all you want. Everyone else will keep making it about the facts and the real arguments. But that's what people do when they have no other argument, they make it about being a victim of those mean people who call your arguments dishonest or disingenuous.

"Santa Anita Park" also joined the Facebook group Zenyatta For Horse of the Year. :rolleyes:

I'm probably gonna regret bringing this post back to the forefront, but I'm surprised nobody posted this so far. Crist nails it on the head:

http://www.drf.com/drfNewsArticle.do...3&subs=0&arc=0