Rachel to Monmouth on July 24...

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by Danzig

what record did she set?

The one for number of meaningless watered down Grade I victories propped up by internet mouthbreathers as great accomplishments.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

The one for number of meaningless watered down Grade I victories propped up by internet mouthbreathers as great accomplishments.

i figured he meant wins in a row, but she didn't set a wins in a row record. pepper's pride, much as bloodhorse, tvg and zenyatta fans wish to pretend otherwise, holds the modern-day wins record.
it's pretty bad when they have to come up with some convoluted 'wins in a row by a horse not running in restricted races...er, restricted to state bred races... record. oh, don't forget 'modern day'...passed cigar and citation-but somehowe mr frisky and hallowed dreams usually don't get mentioned! it's hilarious.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i figured he meant wins in a row, but she didn't set a wins in a row record. pepper's pride, much as bloodhorse, tvg and zenyatta fans wish to pretend otherwise, holds the modern-day wins record.
it's pretty bad when they have to come up with some convoluted 'wins in a row by a horse not running in restricted races...er, restricted to state bred races... record. oh, don't forget 'modern day'...passed cigar and citation-but somehowe mr frisky and hallowed dreams usually don't get mentioned! it's hilarious.

Hence

the term

Zenyattard.

[Danzig]

http://startelegramsports.typepad.co...the-grade.html

an interesting article by gary west about rachels next race. make sure you read the comments section as well, with GW going into more detail about past racing...

[philcski]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://startelegramsports.typepad.co...the-grade.html

an interesting article by gary west about rachels next race. make sure you read the comments section as well, with GW going into more detail about past racing...

Great read. Thanks for finding that.

[Smooth Operator]

Lol … yeah, IC, Trinians ran like crap … probably should've skipped the G1 contest and run in half-a-dozen fake races (like RA) before taking on the big mare … LOL.

Mitch had her ready for a big effort in the V … which she clearly delivered.



By the way, Danzig, how many Breeders' Cup races did this Pepper horse win? LMAO

[RockHardTen1985]

I think this spot for Rachel is total comedy and I have lost all respect for the connections, any respect that I had left is now gone.... Even if she ran in the Whitney and got smoked it would still say more then running in this spot, this is a joke and its pathetic. If not the Whitney why not go 10f at Toga, why not an easy prep and defend your Woodward title, again even if you get beat it still says your willing to run, I dont see how any Rachel fans can bash Zenyattas connections after the Rachel camp settles on this spot. I hope she gets crushed at Monmouth and then retires, so we dont have to talk about it anymore.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Smooth Operator

Lol … yeah, IC, Trinians ran like crap … probably should've skipped the G1 contest and run in half-a-dozen fake races (like RA) before taking on the big mare … LOL.

Mitch had her ready for a big effort in the V … which she clearly delivered.



By the way, Danzig, how many Breeders' Cup races did this Pepper horse win? LMAO

yeah, i know....pepper's pride, such a pretender(but she's still the record holder, not zenyatta). she ran in all restricted races, so they shouldn't count-right?
based on that logic, zenyatta is 1/1.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

http://startelegramsports.typepad.co...the-grade.html

an interesting article by gary west about rachels next race. make sure you read the comments section as well, with GW going into more detail about past racing...

West's points are not exactly valid. First of all if someone would tell me why the added money is a big deal I could stomach it a little better. Just taken at face value considering the horse and owner it looks a little greedy. I am not against anyone making money and can't knock a track for adding money from its own pocket to entice a big draw but as Freddy would say, 90k is a drop in the bucket for Jackson. Come out and say you want to try to break the record for earnings for a filly if that is the goal. Of course he may not want to say that in case Zenyatta winds up with that title. Acting as though Monmouth didnt pander by not only raising the purse but date of the race and distance is well typical from this writer concerning anything Asmussen related.

The comparison to Kelso was incredibly stupid. Top horses of that era often tuned up in non stakes races between starts, you know sometimes like 5 or 6 days, not weeks, before the next race? The fact is that not only was there no grading system then, there were also a whole lot fewer stakes and transportation was a lot more complicated than it is now. For horses of that era, 17 starts was a season, not a career.

The other cases are laughable. How many horses did Damascus duck? Why wouldnt Holy Bull start his campaign in a sprint stake? That was how it was done then. Favorite Trick? As a 3 year old? LOL. He was a punching bag by that point. The irony in bringing up FT is she is certainly challenging his 3 year old campaign as the weakest by a returning horse of the year.

Plus Gary West is a sourpuss. He's a dial turner.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

West's points are not exactly valid. First of all if someone would tell me why the added money is a big deal I could stomach it a little better. Just taken at face value considering the horse and owner it looks a little greedy. I am not against anyone making money and can't knock a track for adding money from its own pocket to entice a big draw but as Freddy would say, 90k is a drop in the bucket for Jackson. Come out and say you want to try to break the record for earnings for a filly if that is the goal. Of course he may not want to say that in case Zenyatta winds up with that title. Acting as though Monmouth didnt pander by not only raising the purse but date of the race and distance is well typical from this writer concerning anything Asmussen related.

The comparison to Kelso was incredibly stupid. Top horses of that era often tuned up in non stakes races between starts, you know sometimes like 5 or 6 days, not weeks, before the next race? The fact is that not only was there no grading system then, there were also a whole lot fewer stakes and transportation was a lot more complicated than it is now. For horses of that era, 17 starts was a season, not a career.

The other cases are laughable. How many horses did Damascus duck? Why wouldnt Holy Bull start his campaign in a sprint stake? That was how it was done then. Favorite Trick? As a 3 year old? LOL. He was a punching bag by that point. The irony in bringing up FT is she is certainly challenging his 3 year old campaign as the weakest by a returning horse of the year.

all good points. i don't think the money matters to jackson-except insofar as adding to rachels overall money won. his bottom line is healthy whether she runs for 200k or 500k, or more.

i'm just trying to find a good reason for them starting her here. i haven't figured out the logic behind it yet, and thought west presented some valid points. it is true tho that horses of the past didn't start only in graded races, but as you say, there weren't a lot of them, and travel wasn't as easy then. horses didn't have works between races, they raced to stay fit.
so, why is jackson going here? why is he so chicken with her this year, after going so far with her last year? it seems a lukewarm effort, and one that makes no sense. he at least tried other things with curlin-he isn't trying anything new with rachel. seems a waste of her talents. her legacy would have been better had they just retired her last year.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by Danzig

all good points. i don't think the money matters to jackson-except insofar as adding to rachels overall money won. his bottom line is healthy whether she runs for 200k or 500k, or more.

i'm just trying to find a good reason for them starting her here. i haven't figured out the logic behind it yet, and thought west presented some valid points. it is true tho that horses of the past didn't start only in graded races, but as you say, there weren't a lot of them, and travel wasn't as easy then. horses didn't have works between races, they raced to stay fit.
so, why is jackson going here? why is he so chicken with her this year, after going so far with her last year? it seems a lukewarm effort, and one that makes no sense. he at least tried other things with curlin-he isn't trying anything new with rachel. seems a waste of her talents. her legacy would have been better had they just retired her last year.

No, horses did work between races then as well. I stand by my reasoning that he hates to lose more than he likes to win. Don't forget that she was odds on in all those tough races last year. And the Woodward was an awful weak edition last year. He is simply looking to run a layup drill a la Zenyatta though he is much more demanding that the Z crew. At least they recognize the competition is terrible and they dont need to resort to having races created for them.

[CSC]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

The one for number of meaningless watered down Grade I victories propped up by internet mouthbreathers as great accomplishments.

If you are going to criticize grade 1's as being watered down, atleast have the integrity, consistency, or honesty take your pick I don't care... and recognize the Woodward field was a watered down mediocrity last year.

[ateamstupid]

Originally Posted by CSC

If you are going to criticize grade 1's as being watered down, atleast have the integrity, consistency, or honesty take your pick I don't care... and recognize the Woodward field was a watered down mediocrity last year.

you lose.