6/12 (CD): Foster (G1); Fleur (G2); Jeff, Regret, Dancer (G3's)

Indian Charlie · #1 06-12-2010, 08:28 PM

Am I the only one that didn't think RA looked so fantastic?

To me, she ran basically the same type of race as her previous two.

The only difference being that instead of 10 lengths back to 3rd, it was 10 back to 2nd.

10 pnt move up · #2 06-12-2010, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Am I the only one that didn't think RA looked so fantastic?

To me, she ran basically the same type of race as her previous two.

The only difference being that instead of 10 lengths back to 3rd, it was 10 back to 2nd.

the time?

Indian Charlie · #3 06-12-2010, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up

the time?

What about it?

ateamstupid · #4 06-12-2010, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Am I the only one that didn't think RA looked so fantastic?

To me, she ran basically the same type of race as her previous two.

The only difference being that instead of 10 lengths back to 3rd, it was 10 back to 2nd.

So you're saying that this field was significantly weaker than the last two she faced? I can't say I agree with that. She dominated every part of the race and snuffed out her competition (weak as it may have been) pretty much one-by-one.

Indian Charlie · #5 06-12-2010, 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

So you're saying that this field was significantly weaker than the last two she faced? I can't say I agree with that. She dominated every part of the race and snuffed out her competition (weak as it may have been) pretty much one-by-one.

Maybe it was, I dunno.

What I am saying was that it was a long way back behind RA in all three races, to the next horse.

Double digits in the first race back. Something like 5 last time out, then double digits again. If you remove the winner from those first two races, visually speaking, all three of these races look an awful lot alike.

I bet you even the speed figures will not be that far apart either. No doubt this will get the highest figure, but that was to be expected anyways, because of conditioning.

So, in other words, this race really didn't change anything in my opinion.

Yes, the RA of today most likely would have won those two other starts, but not by anything like what we saw today.

CSC · #6 06-13-2010, 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Maybe it was, I dunno.

What I am saying was that it was a long way back behind RA in all three races, to the next horse.

Double digits in the first race back. Something like 5 last time out, then double digits again. If you remove the winner from those first two races, visually speaking, all three of these races look an awful lot alike.

I bet you even the speed figures will not be that far apart either. No doubt this will get the highest figure, but that was to be expected anyways, because of conditioning.

So, in other words, this race really didn't change anything in my opinion.

Yes, the RA of today most likely would have won those two other starts, but not by anything like what we saw today.

Hard to believe but I am agreeing with you, your observations are spot on with this one. When Rachel overmatches her opposition, she often looks better than what is truly the case, I liken her to that football team that runs up the score against overmatched opposition, she runs hard to the wire when she is full of confidence and when posed with very little challenges. When the opposition is more on par she wilts, due to the mediocrities that ran against her yesterday it is hard to gauge just how much she improved, I don't think it was as much as most believe.

Danzig · #7 06-13-2010, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSC

Hard to believe but I am agreeing with you, your observations are spot on with this one. When Rachel overmatches her opposition, she often looks better than what is truly the case, I liken her to that football team that runs up the score against overmatched opposition, she runs hard to the wire when she is full of confidence and when posed with very little challenges. When the opposition is more on par she wilts, due to the mediocrities that ran against her yesterday it is hard to gauge just how much she improved, I don't think it was as much as most believe.

yep, spot on. god knows she wilted like a wal-mart flower in the preakness and the woodward!!

tector · #8 06-13-2010, 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

yep, spot on. god knows she wilted like a wal-mart flower in the preakness and the woodward!!

Yes, every time you think he can't be a more ignorant, trolling fool he comes up with a new one, doesn't he?

This too shall pass.

CSC · #9 06-13-2010, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tector

Yes, every time you think he can't be a more ignorant, trolling fool he comes up with a new one, doesn't he?

This too shall pass.

Brilliant post, to quote a Coach-ism... F____ You

I'm not going anywhere.

CSC · #10 06-13-2010, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

yep, spot on. god knows she wilted like a wal-mart flower in the preakness and the woodward!!

Considering how Mine That Bird, Macho Again, Bullsbay, Unrivaled Belle and Zardana have done of late, yeah I agree she was the world of resistance. Like the Berlin Wall...that eventually fell. Wouldn't you agree?

Danzig · #11 06-13-2010, 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSC

Considering how Mine That Bird, Macho Again, Bullsbay, Unrivaled Belle and Zardana have done of late, yeah I agree she was the world of resistance. Like the Berlin Wall...that eventually fell. Wouldn't you agree?

apparently i would not. you said when she met resistance, she folded. that's not the case at all.

Antitrust32 · #12 06-14-2010, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSC

Considering how Mine That Bird, Macho Again, Bullsbay, Unrivaled Belle and Zardana have done of late, yeah I agree she was the world of resistance. Like the Berlin Wall...that eventually fell. Wouldn't you agree?

Indian Charlie · #13 06-13-2010, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSC

Hard to believe but I am agreeing with you, your observations are spot on with this one. When Rachel overmatches her opposition, she often looks better than what is truly the case, I liken her to that football team that runs up the score against overmatched opposition, she runs hard to the wire when she is full of confidence and when posed with very little challenges. When the opposition is more on par she wilts, due to the mediocrities that ran against her yesterday it is hard to gauge just how much she improved, I don't think it was as much as most believe.

That's not what I was trying to say, but that's pretty typical for any horse that badly out matches their opposition.

Except for big Z.

CSC · #14 06-13-2010, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

That's not what I was trying to say, but that's pretty typical for any horse that badly out matches their opposition.

Except for big Z.

More so for Rachel, she's the type of horse that runs hard to the wire, when she's feeling good and full of confidence she doesn't know how to gear down, unlike some horses like Cigar and yes Zenyatta.

ateamstupid · #15 06-13-2010, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CSC

More so for Rachel, she's the type of horse that runs hard to the wire, when she's feeling good and full of confidence she doesn't know how to gear down, unlike some horses like Cigar and yes Zenyatta.

WTF? Do you read Rachel's diary or something? Go take a look at the Fair Grounds Oaks and tell me "she doesn't know how to gear down." Or maybe you think Flying Spur really was making up 3 1/2 lengths on her late.

tector · #16 06-13-2010, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Yes, the RA of today most likely would have won those two other starts, but not by anything like what we saw today.

Yes

DaTruth · #17 06-12-2010, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Am I the only one that didn't think RA looked so fantastic?

To me, she ran basically the same type of race as her previous two.

The only difference being that instead of 10 lengths back to 3rd, it was 10 back to 2nd.

I completely agree with you. I don't understand why her natural speed isn't being used to full advantage like it was last year. It is almost as if they are set on having her engage in stretch battles so she can be better prepared to repel the challenge of a certain stretch runner.

slotdirt · #18 06-13-2010, 12:21 AM

Yeah, so can Blame run a little? I think so.

RockHardTen1985 · #19 06-13-2010, 01:18 AM

What are the odds of getting Blame, Zenyatta, Rachel, Quality Road in the same starting gate?

Merlinsky · #20 06-13-2010, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

What are the odds of getting Blame, Zenyatta, Rachel, Quality Road in the same starting gate?

I keep wondering what it would've been like had QR been in the starting gate in the BCC last year (without the wigging out costing him energy, either). I went back to watch the starting gate incident which has its own videos up on Youtube. I had to pause halfway through because I knew what was about to happen with his mental breakdown and all that kicking--scary every time. It's like someone told him he was in the rodeo as a bucking bronco, not in the Classic. Did anybody give that assistant starter a trophy yet? Cash reward? I sure hope someone said something to him at the very least.