Finley on Jess...

[zippyneedsawin]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Amen. I don't get the negative either. It's like everyone on here is holier than thou and decide that they can't like a horse or don't want to see certain things happen because they don't like an owner because he's not the best person. It's horse racing. I couldn't care less about the owner or his personal life. He's giving us what we all want to see. No matter if we thought it was the right decision to run her in the Preakness or not, no matter if we'd have waited til the Belmont or the Travers or never run her against the boys........everyone will be watching the Preakness to see what she does and if she does something even halfway as special as what she did in the Oaks, we'll all be happy that he ran her there. This is what's good for the sport and I'm glad that there are some that do things that are good for the sport and not just for themselves. It's a risky sport and a risky business. It's funny how, in a sport that's based on gambling, people think it's so stupid for owners to take gambles. I wonder how the sport got so far away from the concept of having the best take on the best to see who is the best? That's what he's doing now. Right now, he's got the opportunity. Next month or three months from now, he may not.

I... agree. Sure, I may have some trainers/owners I favor.. but I'm not 'against' Jackson or assmussen... and I'm glad RA is pointing to the Preakness.. certainly makes the race more intersting in what was becoming a very boring/disappointing triple crown..

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by zippyneedsawin

I... agree. Sure, I may have some trainers/owners I favor.. but I'm not 'against' Jackson or assmussen... and I'm glad RA is pointing to the Preakness.. certainly makes the race more intersting in what was becoming a very boring/disappointing triple crown..

i'm not against jackson in that sense, where you root against his horses. BUT, i do have serious issues with asmussen, and do not understand why an owner would select a trainer like him. oh wait...yes, i do understand it. the problem most have with jackson is his assuming a mantle of sportsman, when the simple fact is that curlin would never have run at four unless the ownership issue was hanging over his head. for anyone to pretend otherwise is pure fantasy. he didn't do it to be sporting, or to take care of fans, he did it because he couldn't get a stud deal.
am i glad rachel is pointing to the preakness? absolutely. am i happy to know when she gets to the winners circle about who will be there with her? absolutely not.

[sumitas]

Originally Posted by zippyneedsawin

I... agree. Sure, I may have some trainers/owners I favor.. but I'm not 'against' Jackson or assmussen... and I'm glad RA is pointing to the Preakness.. certainly makes the race more intersting in what was becoming a very boring/disappointing triple crown..

Mine That Bird's win was "boring" ? I don't think so and the Preakness would be very exciting without Rachel Alexandra just to see if MTB can win again . Sure, she adds to the excitement but she's not the whole story here .