ruffian and rachel

[randallscott35]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

When we say the greatest what exactly are we saying? Is she the greatest filly of our time? I think so, my time is the last 24 years..... Im not sure she's even the greatest horse of the last 9 years. Ghostzapper and Point Given were BRILLIANT. Candy Ride was a freak, turf and dirt. Im sure I will take a lot of **** for this. But if Ghostzapper, Point Given, Candy Ride and Rachel faced each other going 1 1/8 on dirt, IMO it is very logical to say she runs last, even if she fires her best shot.

Apparently you didn't read the title or the thread. We are looking at fillies and within that Ruffian and Rachel....Nothing else....Another reason why you got my vote for worst poster.

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Apparently you didn't read the title or the thread. We are looking at fillies and within that Ruffian and Rachel....Nothing else....Another reason why you got my vote for worst poster.

I read it, but almost every thread is about how great she is. So why does it matter where I post my opinion? Should I create a new thread for it?

[johnny pinwheel]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

I read it, but almost every thread is about how great she is. So why does it matter where I post my opinion? Should I create a new thread for it?

why even bother? shes real good, of course shes a great racehorse. but these boobs will go on and on about it. its as crazy as the guys that followed micheal jackson. there was even a thread about how "poor rachel" should not get whipped in hard races. its borderline absurdity. what do you people want to hear shes better than secretariat, forego and ruffian even though shes never won at 10 furlongs. hell, shes better than pegasus and he could fly. are you happy now. you call him the worst poster. i'll call this a stupid thread. every great horse has a place in history but some are not happy unless they argue about who was better. everyone jump in the waters great! get on the bandwagon folks. the whole point of this garbage is mute. if you spent as much energy handicapping maybe you could cash on something thats higher than 3-5!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel

why even bother? shes real good, of course shes a great racehorse. but these boobs will go on and on about it. its as crazy as the guys that followed micheal jackson. there was even a thread about how "poor rachel" should not get whipped in hard races. its borderline absurdity. what do you people want to hear shes better than secretariat, forego and ruffian even though shes never won at 10 furlongs. hell, shes better than pegasus and he could fly. are you happy now. you call him the worst poster. i'll call this a stupid thread. every great horse has a place in history but some are not happy unless they argue about who was better. everyone jump in the waters great! get on the bandwagon folks. the whole point of this garbage is mute. if you spent as much energy handicapping maybe you could cash on something thats higher than 3-5!

feel better now?

you're forgetting that people do this with all types of sports-who was better, joe montana or tom brady? were the patriots better than the '72 dolphins? sampras or federer, navratilova or graf?

[johnny pinwheel]

Originally Posted by Danzig

feel better now?

you're forgetting that people do this with all types of sports-who was better, joe montana or tom brady? were the patriots better than the '72 dolphins? sampras or federer, navratilova or graf?

the whole thing is stupid, what are you going to do resurect ruffian and race her? the same with the football teams or any other sport. different era , different tactics, different oppenents. blah, blah' blah.....it proves nothing. rachels the best theres ever been . are you all happy now !

[King Glorious]

Give me Go for Wand as the best 3yo filly I've seen followed by Miesque and then Zarkava. Winning Colors is next and then Rachel.

[dean smith]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Give me Go for Wand as the best 3yo filly I've seen followed by Miesque and then Zarkava. Winning Colors is next and then Rachel.

Really? I'm calling b.s. on this one. I think maybe you're just trying to be antagonistic. You're just trying to "go against the grain" and blow our minds with your four top filly picks. Nobody really thinks all four of those fillies were better than RA. Love the hype and the connections or loathe them, her body of work speaks much louder than the others. She hasn't ducked anybody and she doesn't lose. She has dominated her own kind, has soundly beaten the boys her own age, and then graduated from opening up cans of Whupass on colts to opening cans of Whupass on horses. All the way she's done it in dramatic fashion -- whether it be leaving the field 20 lengths behind or gutting it out down the stretch. C'mon. You're a more intelligent guy than that. Please retract your statement.

[dean smith]

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel

why even bother? shes real good, of course shes a great racehorse. but these boobs will go on and on about it. its as crazy as the guys that followed micheal jackson. there was even a thread about how "poor rachel" should not get whipped in hard races. its borderline absurdity. what do you people want to hear shes better than secretariat, forego and ruffian even though shes never won at 10 furlongs. hell, shes better than pegasus and he could fly. are you happy now. you call him the worst poster. i'll call this a stupid thread. every great horse has a place in history but some are not happy unless they argue about who was better. everyone jump in the waters great! get on the bandwagon folks. the whole point of this garbage is mute. if you spent as much energy handicapping maybe you could cash on something thats higher than 3-5!

Johnny Pinhead. What's the Michael Jackson reference all about, anyway? Everybody who knows anything about music is in agreement: Prince eats Jacko up for breakfast!

Believe it.

[Bigsmc]

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel

why even bother? shes real good, of course shes a great racehorse. but these boobs will go on and on about it. its as crazy as the guys that followed micheal jackson. there was even a thread about how "poor rachel" should not get whipped in hard races. its borderline absurdity. what do you people want to hear shes better than secretariat, forego and ruffian even though shes never won at 10 furlongs. hell, shes better than pegasus and he could fly. are you happy now. you call him the worst poster. i'll call this a stupid thread. every great horse has a place in history but some are not happy unless they argue about who was better. everyone jump in the waters great! get on the bandwagon folks. the whole point of this garbage is mute. if you spent as much energy handicapping maybe you could cash on something thats higher than 3-5!

moot

[richard burch]

Originally Posted by randallscott35

Apparently you didn't read the title or the thread. We are looking at fillies and within that Ruffian and Rachel....Nothing else....Another reason why you got my vote for worst poster.

ouch!

[dean smith]

Is there a website or book you can go to that supplies historical lifetime PPs? For instance, if I wanted to compare, say, Go For Wand and Ruffian's lifetime past performance records, where could I find them?

It would make these comparison threads a lot easier discuss (at least on my end).

P.S. I know GFW has nothing to do with this thread, but Rachel Alexandra is still active and it's fairly easy to get ahold of her PPs. I thought she would make a poor example.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by dean smith

Is there a website or book you can go to that supplies historical lifetime PPs? For instance, if I wanted to compare, say, Go For Wand and Ruffian's lifetime past performance records, where could I find them?

It would make these comparison threads a lot easier discuss (at least on my end).

P.S. I know GFW has nothing to do with this thread, but Rachel Alexandra is still active and it's fairly easy to get ahold of her PPs. I thought she would make a poor example.

http://store.drf.com/acb/stores/1/CH...026.cfm?AFID=6

[richard burch]

Originally Posted by dean smith

Is there a website or book you can go to that supplies historical lifetime PPs? For instance, if I wanted to compare, say, Go For Wand and Ruffian's lifetime past performance records, where could I find them?

It would make these comparison threads a lot easier discuss (at least on my end).

P.S. I know GFW has nothing to do with this thread, but Rachel Alexandra is still active and it's fairly easy to get ahold of her PPs. I thought she would make a poor example.

a great book to get is called Champions by the DRF. it does have the PP's and it lists all the great horses from1893-2004....and is updated every few years. currently at about 450 pages

here it is


http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/193...0R3KPJGA6D69CB

[VOL JACK]

Originally Posted by richard burch

a great book to get is called Champions by the DRF. it doesn't have the PP's but it lists all the great horses from1893-2004....and is updated every few years. currently at about 450 pages

the one I bought 2-3 years ago has the pp's.

[Phalaris1913]

a great book to get is called Champions by the DRF. it doesn't have the PP's ...

Champions has lifetime PPs of around 500 horses: all the Eclipse Award winners, through the time of release; all of the champions elected through the old DRF poll (1936-1970); an assortment of horses that pre-date the DRF poll, and a handful of additional horses.

[Round Pen]

For me this Sums it all up

Lucien Laurin, Secretariat's trainer, said this quote to the press "As God as my witness, she (Ruffian) may even be better than Secretariat."

[dean smith]

So, I've got to buy a $50 book to look at the lifetime statistics of a small fraction of the all-time greats of the sport? Are you kidding me?

I can get Hank Aaron's, Bobby Hull's, Jim Brown's and Tiny Archibald's career stats with a few strokes on the keyboard.

Website idea!

[DaTruth]

Originally Posted by dean smith

So, I've got to buy a $50 book to look at the lifetime statistics of a small fraction of the all-time greats of the sport? Are you kidding me?

I can get Hank Aaron's, Bobby Hull's, Jim Brown's and Tiny Archibald's career stats with a few strokes on the keyboard.

Website idea!

The PPs of every horse who has started in this country since DRF has kept statistics should be readily available at a reasonable cost. Some magazines sell portable hard drives that contain all their past issues. DRF should sell portable hard drives that have the scanned pages of every edition of the Form issued in a given year.

For a sport that cares so much about its history, there are few attempts to make this history available to fans or interested parties. How sad that if I want to see the video of a historical race, I have to hope someone has posted it on YouTube.

[Phalaris1913]

So, I've got to buy a $50 book to look at the lifetime statistics of a small fraction of the all-time greats of the sport? Are you kidding me?

I can get Hank Aaron's, Bobby Hull's, Jim Brown's and Tiny Archibald's career stats with a few strokes on the keyboard.

Website idea!

1. If all you want are basic racing records, it appears you can get that for free at BRIS these days. It'll show year-by-year stats back to the 1920s and stakes info for a bit further back.
2. Reconstructing actual past performances - considering that even the major data purveyors of the sport do not seem to have the material required to do that in electronic form prior to the 1970s - is a major undertaking and involves copyright issues.