Quote:
Originally Posted by ateamstupid
Sounds like you're the one arguing semantics. The point is, he bestowed extreme praise on her and then backed off by saying he's not crowning her. Both ways it can't be.
And yes, he lacks perspective when he aligns the achievements of Personal Ensign and Zenyatta the way he does. What Zenyatta did against St Trinians, while impressive, is absolutely irrelevant to what PE did against Winning Colors, because their competition were in two completely different classes of animal.
See, this is the problem with Zenyatta freaks. They like comparing her to the great racemares of the past, and their justification for doing so is her record and her running style. But record and running style are next to meaningless if you're beating up on ordinary horses 95% of the time. And yes, ST is an ordinary horse, I don't care what the toteboard in the Big Cap said.
It's also a problem with racing fans in general, the constant impulse to compare horses of the present to horses of the past, and it's usually unfair to the horse of the present. Instead of everyone appreciating Zenyatta for what she is, a very good mare with a beautiful and admirable will to win, rational racing fans are inundated with comparisons to Cigar and Citation and Personal Ensign and Secretariat and Picasso and Rembrandt. It's tiresome and unnecessary. Why is there such a rush to measure up the stars of today against the ghosts of the past while horses like Zenyatta are still writing their own stories?
|
Davidowitz only backed off when he was getting admonished for "anointing" Zenyatta. He was basically saying, "I'm not "anointing" her. I'm just giving my opinion." What's wrong with a guy giving his opinion, even if he is wrong. I think Davidowitz knows enough about the game to be able to give an opinion. His opinion is certainly an educated opinion whether you agree or disagree with him.
I agree with you that it is tough to compare current stars to past stars in any sport but people still like to try to do it. It makes for interesting conversation. Everyone has a different opinion.
There are people who are "positive" that Tiger Woods is better than Jack Nicklaus and there are others that are "sure" that Jack was better.
Any time someone (a person or a horse) keeps winning, the question will always come up as to how this person (or horse) would comapre to stars of the the past.