Valiant loss puts Zenyatta's prowess in perspective

[CSC]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Hard to disagree with any of that.

Personally I certainly don't think she deserves the title of best filly/mare ever, but for those who do want to make the case that she is, I don't think her 2nd place finish yesterday really detracts from their argument one bit. Obviously their argument would be stronger if she had won the race, but overall I agree with Beyer in thinking more of her today than I did on Friday.

This was essentially the point I was trying to make yesterday when we exchanged replies, it was a loss in the record book but it certainly doesn't detract from her legacy. For the record I never said she was the greatest, I think there is this misconception out there by some that if you cheer, admire Zenyatta you get lumped into a group that may or may not think she is the greatest, Beyer hit the nail on this one, anyone that wants to argue that she is the greatest filly/mare ever, can so now without being summarily dismissed. Greatest horse of all time, is a moot point, she is not. (I should have typed mute)

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by CSC

This was essentially the point I was trying to make yesterday when we exchanged replies, it was a loss in the record book but it certainly doesn't detract from her legacy. For the record I never said she was the greatest, I think there is this misconception out there by some that if you cheer, admire Zenyatta you get lumped into a group that may or may not think she is the greatest, Beyer hit the nail on this one, anyone that wants to argue that she is the greatest filly/mare ever, can so now without being summarily dismissed. Greatest horse of all time, is a moot point, she is not. (I should have typed mute)

If that is what you meant to say....okay.
I was confused because what you actually did say was: "she will get more respect out of finishing second than winning the race."

That obviously makes no sense. She quite clearly would get even more respect if she had gotten past Blame in those final strides than she gets by failing to do so.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by miraja2

If that is what you meant to say....okay.
I was confused because what you actually did say was: "she will get more respect out of finishing second than winning the race."

That obviously makes no sense. She quite clearly would get even more respect if she had gotten past Blame in those final strides than she gets by failing to do so.

Mig and Haskin just used the Seattle Slew analogy I used Saturday in defeat, have a listen on Steve's show. Coach should have a listen also.

Originally Posted by CSC

Mig and Haskin just used the Seattle Slew analogy I used Saturday in defeat, have a listen on Steve's show. Coach should have a listen also.

Yeah it's totally the same as Seattle Slew.

You're right. Now stfu.









































Just sayin!

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Coach Pants

Yeah it's totally the same as Seattle Slew.

You're right. Now stfu.








































Just sayin!

I'd much rather have opinions like guys like Haskin and Mig on my side then an expert like Coachpants. Right back at ya MOFO.

Originally Posted by CSC

I'd much rather have opinions like guys like Haskin and Mig on my side then an expert like Coachpants. Right back at ya MOFO.

Either way you're still a pissant.





































Just sayin!

[CSC]

When I need help posting pictures, I'll ask you. As for horseracing opinions you are useless. P off Bro.

[tector]

JFC, you two. Your "irony spaces" or whatever are getting frigging annoying. Get a room already.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by CSC

Mig and Haskin just used the Seattle Slew analogy I used Saturday in defeat, have a listen on Steve's show. Coach should have a listen also.

Okay, you're still not getting it.
There is absolutely no question in my mind that your statement:
"she will get more respect out of finishing second than winning the race"
is incorrect.

Let's take your Slew example. Of course he gained a great deal of respect by running such a good race against how the race set up and running a good second to a great horse. But if we apply your above statement to that race it implies that if he had done that same thing and actually managed to hold off Exceller and won the race he would get/deserve less respect than he got for running a good second.
That is completely nonsensical.

Let me break it down for you further:

Yes, both horses second-place finishes earned them more respect than they had before the race.
But, no, both horses second-place finishes did NOT earn them more respect than they would have received if they had actually won their races.....which is what you said.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by miraja2

Okay, you're still not getting it.
There is absolutely no question in my mind that your statement:
"she will get more respect out of finishing second than winning the race"
is incorrect.

Let's take your Slew example. Of course he gained a great deal of respect by running such a good race against how the race set up and running a good second to a great horse. But your statement that I highlighted reads that if he had done that same thing and actually managed to hold off Exceller and won the race he would get/deserve less respect than he got for running a good second.
That is completely nonsensical.

Let me break it down for you further:

Yes, both horses second-place finishes earned them more respect than they had before the race.
No, both horses second-place finishes did NOT earn them more respect than they would have received if they had actually won their races.....which is what you said.

Then either you misunderstood what I wrote or the context was not the way I intended it. When I say something like Zenyatta lost nothing in defeat, comparing it to Seattle Slew's defeat. I expect a person of knowledege, as I expect from you to know exactly the context I was using it as. If the wording confused you, I duelly regret this. Now that you understand the analogy do you not agree in Mig and Haskin's view?

[Dahoss]

Originally Posted by CSC

Then either you misunderstood what I wrote or the context was not the way I intended it. When I say something like Zenyatta lost nothing in defeat, comparing it to Seattle Slew's defeat. I expect a person of knowledege, as I expect from you to know exactly the context I was using it as. If the wording confused you, I duelly regret this. Now that you understand the analogy do you not agree in Mig and Haskin's view?

The problem is you are about as bad as it gets in expressing yourself. You think by trying to talk smart, it'll make you sound smart. It doesn't. Your opinion is often very confusing to decipher. That's on you. No one else.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Dahoss

The problem is you are about as bad as it gets in expressing yourself. You think by trying to talk smart, it'll make you sound smart. It doesn't. Your opinion is often very confusing to decipher. That's on you. No one else.

I've seen your multiple aliases, you on the other hand are easy to spot with your MO. No problem deciphering you.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by CSC

Then either you misunderstood what I wrote or the context was not the way I intended it. When I say something like Zenyatta lost nothing in defeat, comparing it to Seattle Slew's defeat. I expect a person of knowledege, as I expect from you to know exactly the context I was using it as. If the wording confused you, I duelly regret this. Now that you understand the analogy do you not agree in Mig and Haskin's view?

I continue to vehemently disagree with this statement of yours: "she will get more respect out of finishing second than winning the race." However, I think you have recognized the ridiculousness of that statement and (in your way) sort of retracted it so we'll let that go.

That has nothing to do with the rest of the discussion you are trying to have. As I've already said about 50 times, I do think more of Zenyatta after the race than I did going into the race. So, in that way the analogy to Slew in the JCGC certainly works.

However, I think it is probably important to note that in that race the dynamics of the race worked AGAINST Slew, and he still turned in that performance. That is why his reputation grew even in defeat. In the case of the recent BCC, the race set up IN FAVOR of Zenyatta. So I certainly do not think her performance was anywhere close to what Slew did in '78.

That being said, if you told me before the race that the pace was going to be what it was and that the race would have totally melted down the way it did, I would have predicted that Zito's and Baffert's 3yo colts would have finished in front of Zenyatta. That's why I wagered on LaL. Zenyatta flew by both of them down the stretch, and nearly got to Blame too, so because of that, I think she's better now than I did before the race. But that doesn't mean that she did what Slew did or (even more preposterously) that she would deserve or get less credit if she had won.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I continue to vehemently disagree with this statement of yours: "she will get more respect out of finishing second than winning the race." However, I think you have recognized the ridiculousness of that statement and (in your way) sort of retracted it so we'll let that go.

That has nothing to do with the rest of the discussion you are trying to have. As I've already said about 50 times, I do think more of Zenyatta after the race than I did going into the race. So, in that way the analogy to Slew in the JCGC certainly works.

However, I think it is probably important to note that in that race the dynamics of the race worked AGAINST Slew, and he still turned in that performance. That is why his reputation grew even in defeat. In the case of the recent BCC, the race set up IN FAVOR of Zenyatta. So I certainly do not think her performance was anywhere close to what Slew did in '78.

That being said, if you told me before the race that the pace was going to be what it was and that the race would have totally melted down the way it did, I would have predicted that Zito's and Baffert's 3yo colts would have finished in front of Zenyatta. That's why I wagered on LaL. Zenyatta flew by both of them down the stretch, and nearly got to Blame too, so because of that, I think she's better now than I did before the race. But that doesn't mean that she did what Slew did or (even more preposterously) that she would deserve or get less credit if she had won.

I too thought about pointing out the race shape of the Slew race vs the race shape of the BCC, but I concluded that it would be pointless, as he'd be unwilling to try to understand the difference between the two races.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I continue to vehemently disagree with this statement of yours: "she will get more respect out of finishing second than winning the race." However, I think you have recognized the ridiculousness of that statement and (in your way) sort of retracted it so we'll let that go.

That has nothing to do with the rest of the discussion you are trying to have. As I've already said about 50 times, I do think more of Zenyatta after the race than I did going into the race. So, in that way the analogy to Slew in the JCGC certainly works.

However, I think it is probably important to note that in that race the dynamics of the race worked AGAINST Slew, and he still turned in that performance. That is why his reputation grew even in defeat. In the case of the recent BCC, the race set up IN FAVOR of Zenyatta. So I certainly do not think her performance was anywhere close to what Slew did in '78.

That being said, if you told me before the race that the pace was going to be what it was and that the race would have totally melted down the way it did, I would have predicted that Zito's and Baffert's 3yo colts would have finished in front of Zenyatta. That's why I wagered on LaL. Zenyatta flew by both of them down the stretch, and nearly got to Blame too, so because of that, I think she's better now than I did before the race. But that doesn't mean that she did what Slew did or (even more preposterously) that she would deserve or get less credit if she had won.

I disagree whether she won by a nose or lost by a nose, in the context of doubt whether she can handle dirt. A win or loss is not going a huge swing in sentiment with critics and fans alike. The question has been answered. Obcourse a win is better record wise, that is obvious. But I think you would agree that was not the main question we were waiting for the last 3 years.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by CSC

Then either you misunderstood what I wrote or the context was not the way I intended it. When I say something like Zenyatta lost nothing in defeat, comparing it to Seattle Slew's defeat. I expect a person of knowledege, as I expect from you to know exactly the context I was using it as. If the wording confused you, I duelly regret this. Now that you understand the analogy do you not agree in Mig and Haskin's view?

The difference is that Seattle Slews valiant loss came after he had been an undefeated TC winner and overcame terrible management to win several truly great races. Zenyatta's is basically the measure of her greatness.