This talk about RA being better than... - Page 2

Danzig · #1 05-19-2009, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kasept

Yeah.. exactly.

But while track conditions are viable as explanations for beats, they aren't a free pass. Round Table is my favorite horse of history, and he was continually vulnerable in wet conditions. If he hadn't been, he'd be one of the Top 8-10 horses of all time instead of one the Top 15-20.

Go for Wand did do more as a two year old than Rachel Alexandra, but Rachel Alexandra has made up the difference with this dominating series of performances.

a fave of mine as well, and imo the best u.s. turf horse ever.

Kasept · #2 05-19-2009, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by King Glorious

Rachel is good. She's special. She could do things to surpass Go for Wand. But she's got a long way to go for that and I doubt she ever will. There's good and then there's great. Then there's the true superstars. Go for Wand is at that highest level to me.

Of those that I've seen first hand, Go for Wand is my favorite filly. The summer and fall of 1990 summary of her performances is nice. I saw every one of them in person. But they aren't germane to the conversation that was had on the air yesterday. The comparison made was that of the fillies TO THIS POINT IN THEIR CAREERS. And Wand's and Rachel Alexandra's are very comparable to this point in time (Spring of their sophomore seasons).

King Glorious · #3 05-19-2009, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kasept

Of those that I've seen first hand, Go for Wand is my favorite filly. The summer and fall of 1990 summary of her performances is nice. I saw every one of them in person. But they aren't germane to the conversation that was had on the air yesterday. The comparison made was that of the fillies TO THIS POINT IN THEIR CAREERS. And Wand's and Rachel Alexandra's are very comparable to this point in time (Spring of their sophomore seasons).

It's an interesting conversation. There are two ways to look at things. For example, one could say that thru three career races, Secretariat only had a maiden win and an allowance win. Thru three career races, Majestic Warrior was a grade one winner, Tale of Ekati was a grade two winner, War Pass and Wicked Style were both undefeated grade one winners. I think you get the point. I think so many things factor into what a horse is able to accomplish but that doesn't always have a direct correlation to ability. Personal Ensign beat the boys once because she only got one chance. Azeri and Zenyatta may have been able to beat them a few times too but they didn't have the chances so does that automatically mean that Personal Ensign accomplished more? As far as accomplishments and record, Rachel and GfW are comparable. Was the discussion in regards to accomplishments or talent?