Zenyatta v. Rail Trip?? - Page 8

cmorioles · #**141** 05-10-2010, 04:24 PM

That is just sad. Rail Trip is the highest mountain possible? What a clown.

NTamm1215 · #**142** 05-10-2010, 04:26 PM

John Shirreffs is a terrific trainer and seemingly a nice guy but he has now provided us with two incredibly stupid statements in the last month regarding where Zenyatta will run.

NT

cmorioles · #**143** 05-10-2010, 04:28 PM

Rail Trip and the Rockies, boxing equivalents to Joe Louis and Muhammad Ali, and both apparently mountains too tough to climb.

slotdirt · #**144** 05-10-2010, 04:31 PM

Waiting for the Jay Hovdey defense of all things Zenyatta at drf.com in 3, 2, 1...

cmorioles · #**145** 05-10-2010, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by slotdirt

Waiting for the Jay Hovdey defense of all things Zenyatta at drf.com in 3, 2, 1...

How can it be possible the winner of the BC Classic is now afraid to tackle the mighty Rail Trip? This has to be a bad dream. I'm sure Mr. Krone will lend some support.

Port Conway Lane · #**146** 05-10-2010, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmorioles

How can it be possible the winner of the BC Classic is now afraid to tackle the mighty Rail Trip? This has to be a bad dream. I'm sure Mr. Krone will lend some support.

I'm very disappointed to hear this.

It appears as though he's thinking that when you're holding a pair of aces don't risk them against a possible 456 flop until you get to Churchill.

freddymo · #**147** 05-10-2010, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Port Conway Lane

I'm very disappointed to hear this.

It appears as though he's thinking that when you're holding a pair of aces don't risk them against a possible 456 flop until you get to Churchill.

I hope he has a pair of aces because he certainly doesnt have a pair of ballz

smuthg · #**148** 05-10-2010, 05:02 PM

I wouldn't say "embarrassed" but I'm disappointed... If you believe in the "goal" (the Breeders' Cup Classic at Churchill) then I think they get a bit of a pass, but the passes are running short...

Indian Charlie · #**149** 05-10-2010, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardus

The other gem in that article is Sheriff's quote regarding the Vanity: she will run in the Vanity "if the weights are good."

Aside from Zenyatta fan Parsixfarms, are there any other Zenyatta fans in Internet Land who are embarrassed by the stream of nonsense emanating from Sheriff's mouth recently?

Recently? This has been going on a lot longer than since her supposed retirement.

the_fat_man · #**150** 05-10-2010, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

John Shirreffs is a terrific trainer and seemingly a nice guy but he has now provided us with two incredibly stupid statements in the last month regarding where Zenyatta will run.

NT

I don't look to trainers (or jocks or owners) for intellectual stimulation. Shirreffs has this mare 17 for 17. That and showing up in the BC is enough for me. When ANYTHING that has run to this point in time this year does something NOVEL, something Horse of the Year novel, someone wake me up.

blackthroatedwind · #**151** 05-10-2010, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

I don't look to trainers (or jocks or owners) for intellectual stimulation. Shirreffs has this mare 17 for 17. That and showing up in the BC is enough for me. When ANYTHING that has run to this point in time this year does something NOVEL, something Horse of the Year novel, someone wake me up.

So, running a 3YO filly in the KY Oaks, Preakness, Mother Goose, Haskell and Woodward, as part of an eight race campaign, isn't novel.......but running five races, four against cupcakes, with one tough race is novel.

I got so much to learn about this game.

the_fat_man · #**152** 05-10-2010, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

So, running a 3YO filly in the KY Oaks, Preakness, Mother Goose, Haskell and Woodward, as part of an eight race campaign, isn't novel.......but running five races, four against cupcakes, with one tough race is novel.

I got so much to learn about this game.

That was last year. Let the aforementioned filly show up this year and we can discuss this again. I'm sure the Z camp will probably reevaluate, should this happen. If they're giving this year's award for last year's performance, then maybe they can also take away last year's award based on this year's performance. Seems only right to me.

I mean, let's face it, even if Z beats the high Beyer numbering RT, Mike the EUNUCH and his group would still want to see a high Beyer on dirt. So, the argument still remains for the cultists. Z gains NADA by beating RT (at least here, and PA, which is where it really counts

).

Note this year in my post.

blackthroatedwind · #**153** 05-10-2010, 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

That was last year. Let the aforementioned filly show up this year and we can discuss this again. I'm sure the Z camp will probably reevaluate, should this happen. If they're giving this year's award for last year's performance, then maybe they can also take away last year's award based on this year's performance. Seems only right to me.

I mean, let's face it, even if Z beats the high Beyer numbering RT, Mike the EUNUCH and his group would still want to see a high Beyer on dirt. So, the argument still remains for the cultists. He gains NADA by beating RT.

Rachel Alexandra has faced tougher horses in 2010 than Zenyatta....and even you know that.

SCUDSBROTHER · #**154** 05-10-2010, 06:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

It's time to heed the advice of others....and where better to start than SCUDS.

This is a subtle use of a defense mechanism that reduces cognitive dissonance.
By diminishing the stature of the messenger – the narcissist minimises the impact of the disagreement or criticism on himself. He did it more strongly last night with Fat Man:

""Yes, I was wrong about Rail Trip. Happy? I doubt it....as you are as miserable as they come."

Now, after he did that, he quickly changes the subject:

"Now, that we have gotten past that, try to actually make one post that is related to the actual discussion. Surely you can do this once."

This is a double shift. When forced to admit something he doesn't like, he makes a definite effort to shift attention away from himself.

the_fat_man · #**155** 05-10-2010, 06:26 PM

That wouldn't be the case if RA showed up, like she was supposed to. You run against the field that shows up. Do you also want to assume that little Z handles Z in the morning?

In fact, I'm still wondering why all the other fine fillies in the land don't head out to CALI and take down Z -- she's so SLOW, after all. Or why they didn't bother showing up at OP. It must've been because RA was going to be there.

Last I checked, when you get taken out in an early round, the playoffs are kind of over for you until next year -- i.e. until you show up.

Let me take an additional moment to put SCUDS back on ignore. Clearly, he's not taking his meds and feels the need for unsolicited attention.

Antitrust32 · #**156** 05-10-2010, 06:26 PM

SCUDS are u a shrink or something? cause THAT would be scary!!

CSC · #**157** 05-10-2010, 06:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NTamm1215

John Shirreffs is a terrific trainer and seemingly a nice guy but he has now provided us with two incredibly stupid statements in the last month regarding where Zenyatta will run.

NT

Unfortunately, this one is dumber.

"All options are open," Asmussen said. Under the heading "Next Start Undecided".

SCUDSBROTHER · #**158** 05-10-2010, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

SCUDS are u a shrink or something? cause THAT would be scary!!

Again, attacking the messenger, and changing the subject. Anything necessary to take the attention off the Narcissist. It's as if he has taught the others how to carry his water for him.

SCUDSBROTHER · #**159** 05-10-2010, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Let me take an additional moment to put SCUDS back on ignore. Clearly, he's not taking his meds and feels the need for unsolicited attention.

Attacking the messenger, and trying to distract. The Narcissist is now being represented by his many enablers.

SCUDSBROTHER · #**160** 05-10-2010, 06:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SCUDSBROTHER

This is a subtle use of a defense mechanism known as cognitive dissonance.
By diminishing the stature of the messenger – the narcissist minimises the impact of the disagreement or criticism on himself. He did it more strongly last night with Fat Man:

""Yes, I was wrong about Rail Trip. Happy? I doubt it....as you are as miserable as they come."

Now, after he did that, he quickly changes the subject:

"Now, that we have gotten past that, try to actually make one post that is related to the actual discussion. Surely you can do this once."

This is a double shift. When forced to admit something he doesn't like, he makes a definite effort to shift attention away from himself.

Bump necessary to re-focus attention that the enablers strongly tried to displace.