Rachel Alexandra (116 Beyer for Haskell)

[rpncaine]

Do you think the flood at CD will affect the track this Fall?

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by rpncaine

Do you think the flood at CD will affect the track this Fall?

Probably not

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

I havent made this into a pro poly thing. Jackson wants to be lauded for "doing the best thing for racing". Not running in the BC (or Travers for that matter) regardless of surface isn't the best thing. The history of racing is full of top horses trying different surfaces (and she has already run on a synthetic track so it isnt exactly new). Dr Fager and Secretariat are both good examples. John Henry is another. If he were to run her in the Travers (lets face it the Woodward against class C types like Macho Uno is hardly a marquee event) against the other TC winners and the hot horse of the day it would be phenomonal for the sport and its fans. A true classic race with all the legitimate top horses in it. And if she were to win that and another tuneup along the way, a matchup against older horses and an undefeated Zenyatta in the Classic (I know you have need Moss to grow a set to make this happen) would be a huge event.

Denying this is true is silly and as Steve would say myopic. For RA would have already wrapped up HoY going into that race and really have nothing to lose. If she wins? Jackson really does have himself a true legend (Then maybe he will stop insisting that Curlin is some great of the sport) and he can take on the world in Dubai (on that middle eastern "plastic")

that's right-if anyone thinks he makes any move for the good of anyone other than himself, they are mistaken. i'm glad that he has made an unusual move twice now in running rachel where her previous owners would not-but i don't think he did that for racings well-being. if he was only interested in what was good for racing, he'd be going to the bc. i understand why he doesn't want to-but i also don't understand why people keep trying to make him out to be some sort of good sport about it all. it's almost as logical as jackson making curlin out to be other-worldly.

[Merlinsky]

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/hor...ill&id=4369570

I'm not sure if this was discussed in the previous 12 pages, but I just now got to the Bill Finley article figuring Munnings is gonna beat Rachel Alexandra and had a good chuckle. I am having a grand old time doing a mini-marathon of Rachel's greatest hits on Youtube, much like Tiznow's back to back Classics. RA's one of those horses that you figure won't lose from any deficiency on her part. She is something truly extraordinary and it gives me chills.

[Travis Stone]

Originally Posted by King Glorious

It's sort of like with Tiger Woods. Before him, I didn't watch golf. Now, I do. Only when he's playing. When he missed the cut at the British Open, I didn't watch the weekend. When there's no Tiger, there's no me. And the ratings show that I'm not alone in this.

The ratings for the Buick Open over the past weekend were up 167%... that's insane. Tiger has power. Stars have power. No stars = less power. It's pretty basic.

The debate whether or not Rachel Alexandra running in the Breeders' Cup is good/bad for horse racing is a moot point. No one in a million years can argue that Rachel Alexandra in the gate would have a negative impact on the success of the Breeders' Cup, whether you define success as viewers, fans on the rail, programs sold or handle dollars.

The bottom line in all of this is racing has created, through various evolutions of its racing calendar and schedule, a distorted and lopsided approach to promoting its racing on a daily/weekly basis, and in turn, has eroded the ability to market the basics of our game to the general public.

Back on point, the best thing for racing is Rachel Alexandra in the starting gate for the Classic. But the Classic is on synthetics, and right now, she's a superstar on dirt. So therefore the best thing for racing is not to have the Classic on synthetics, but unfortunately it is. So therefore the best thing... this is all a slippery slope.

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by Travis Stone

The ratings for the Buick Open over the past weekend were up 167%... that's insane. Tiger has power. Stars have power. No stars = less power. It's pretty basic.

The debate whether or not Rachel Alexandra running in the Breeders' Cup is good/bad for horse racing is a moot point. No one in a million years can argue that Rachel Alexandra in the gate would have a negative impact on the success of the Breeders' Cup, whether you define success as viewers, fans on the rail, programs sold or handle dollars.

The bottom line in all of this is racing has created, through various evolutions of its racing calendar and schedule, a distorted and lopsided approach to promoting its racing on a daily/weekly basis, and in turn, has eroded the ability to market the basics of our game to the general public.

Back on point, the best thing for racing is Rachel Alexandra in the starting gate for the Classic. But the Classic is on synthetics, and right now, she's a superstar on dirt. So therefore the best thing for racing is not to have the Classic on synthetics, but unfortunately it is. So therefore the best thing... this is all a slippery slope.

Well said..A man who understands that horses that excell on dirt don't necessarily excell on Pro Ride.. BTW suggesting that Rachel is ok on Pro Ride because she beat vermin is different then thinking she will be able to beat horses that can and will excell on it.

[10 pnt move up]

Bottom Line is horse racing is mired in problems that no one really cares to fix, they all are trying to save themselves with slots. There is not enough time in the day to complain about all that is wrong with horse racing. Anyone getting into this sport as a fan and a gambler should have their head examined.