Winning Colors vs. Rags to Riches

[King Glorious]

Give me Winning Colors. Everyone remembers her Derby and her run in the BC Distaff but people seem to forget her SA Derby and her Preakness. What I like about her is that she beat the boys in races at regularly run distances and in races everyone was gunning for. She didn't come in at the last moment and have one horse to beat and do it at an irregular distance against a worn down rival. Not that what Rags did wasn't significant because it was but I would have liked to have seen it in the Derby instead. Also, for me, Winning Colors' Preakness might have been the moment that sealed it for me. In the SA Derby, the Ky Derby, the Maskette, and the BC Distaff, she displayed one talent........her speed. She was faster than her rivals, she went to the front, and she made them try and catch her. That Preakness, though she lost, she was great. Pat Day on Forty Niner had instructions to do whatever it took to not allow her to win. It was Forty Niner that was on the lead in that race (23 1/5, 47, 1:11 1/5), not Winning Colors. She sat right off of his neck on the outside in second. They both set it up perfectly for Risen Star but what impressed me was how it was Forty Niner that was the one backing out of it and not Winning Colors. She dueled with him and put him away. And if people don't remember, Forty Niner was a good horse. It was that race that showed me she wasn't just a one-dimensional speed horse. It's unfortunate that her ending diminshes her in some people's minds but at her best, she was damn good.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Rags to Riches

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

Rags to Riches

You weren't even alive, much less a preposterous know-it-all, when Winning Colors was running.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

You weren't even alive, much less a preposterous know-it-all, when Winning Colors was running.

So, I have all of her races on tape.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

So, I have all of her races on tape.

That's true, I forgot, you are an expert at judging horses from television.

Last year, for instance, you told us just by seeing the Tampa Bay Derby on television that there was no way Street Sense would even run in the KY Derby much less win it.

As long as you continue your medical school charade I seriously hope the US doesn't take tort reform seriously.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

That's true, I forgot, you are an expert at judging horses from television.

Last year, for instance, you told us just by seeing the Tampa Bay Derby on television that there was no way Street Sense would even run in the KY Derby much less win it.

As long as you continue your medical school charade I seriously hope the US doesn't take tort reform seriously.

At least I didn't say that Lawyer Ron was slow or that Lost in the Fog wasn't that good of a horse.

And horse racing experts agree with me about Street Sense and the Tampa Bay Derby. Something was amiss with that horse all winter, and it showed up again before the Belmont Stakes in his workout. You don't add front wraps to a horse for no reason.

BTW, Street Sense was my pick after the BG stakes to win the Derby because whatever was wrong with him was temporarily fixed, and he looked really nice in the BG stakes despite finished second.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

At least I didn't say that Lawyer Ron was slow or that Lost in the Fog wasn't that good of a horse.

And horse racing experts agree with me about Street Sense and the Tampa Bay Derby. Something was amiss with that horse all winter, and it showed up again before the Belmont Stakes in his workout. You don't add front wraps to a horse for no reason.

Lost in the Fog was one of the most overrated horses of my lifetime. A very nice, and well managed, horse but not even close to the horse people pretended he was. The fact that you don't know that is even further, unnecessary, proof of how little you really know while pretending to know everything.

As for the racing experts comment......note to self.....don't read your posts while eating or drinking.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

At least I didn't say that Lawyer Ron was slow or that Lost in the Fog wasn't that good of a horse.

And horse racing experts agree with me about Street Sense and the Tampa Bay Derby. Something was amiss with that horse all winter, and it showed up again before the Belmont Stakes in his workout. You don't add front wraps to a horse for no reason.

BTW, Street Sense was my pick after the BG stakes to win the Derby because whatever was wrong with him was temporarily fixed, and he looked really nice in the BG stakes despite finished second.

lemme go get my boots on, it's getting deep in here.

[King Glorious]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

At least I didn't say that Lawyer Ron was slow or that Lost in the Fog wasn't that good of a horse.

And horse racing experts agree with me about Street Sense and the Tampa Bay Derby. Something was amiss with that horse all winter, and it showed up again before the Belmont Stakes in his workout. You don't add front wraps to a horse for no reason.

BTW, Street Sense was my pick after the BG stakes to win the Derby because whatever was wrong with him was temporarily fixed, and he looked really nice in the BG stakes despite finished second.

Can you please let me know who these experts were so I can be sure to never read anything else they ever write and to laugh at them on sight? Something was amiss with him all winter. That explains why he won the Derby and ran the eventual HOY to a nose in the Preakness in the spring. The front wraps were added to further prove your point. That explains why he was able to win the Travers in the summer.

Look. After the Tampa Bay Derby, I was also on here saying that it wouldn't surprise me if either he or AGS were knocked out because it may have been too much, too early. What that's called is being wrong. It's ok to be wrong dear and to admit it. It's much better than sticking with the BS like you are doing now.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

So, I have all of her races on tape.

she got you there btw!

[Indian Charlie]

From what I've seen from both fillies, it's pretty obvious that WC at 3 was considerably better than R2R.

However, I thought prior to R2R getting hurt, that she hadn't shown us her best yet and that she was continuing to improve. The potential was there for R2R to be a better filly, especially since AP Indy's tend to get better with age, but speaking strictly as 3 yos, no contest.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

From what I've seen from both fillies, it's pretty obvious that WC at 3 was considerably better than R2R.

However, I thought prior to R2R getting hurt, that she hadn't shown us her best yet and that she was continuing to improve. The potential was there for R2R to be a better filly, especially since AP Indy's tend to get better with age, but speaking strictly as 3 yos, no contest.

Exactly. Based on accomplishments you would have to give it to WC, but Rags to Riches is the greater talent of the two. The Belmont Stakes proved it. Rags could get any distance, and was improving. WC obviously had distance limitations.

[SniperSB23]

Don't see how there can even be comparisons when Rags has still only run against the boys once. She'd have to do it at least once more for a fair comparison to be made.

[Danzig]

i would have to give the nod to winning colors--how could you not? she's far more accomplished, and consistently faced far better horses, than rags to riches.
but for a legendary horse running the race of her life, she'd have won that distaff.
even if she had never run past the derby, her santa anita/ky derby double put her ahead of rags. hell, just her winning the derby puts her ahead of a belmont winner.