Didn't Rachel win nicely on poly?

Saratoga, Monmouth, Pimlico, Churchill, Oaklawn, Fairgounds. All that travel last year bought her the pass. I think both of these horses are beasts and really look forward to seeing them face each other. Z gets plenty of respect (well deserved), people like to argue mythical head to heads, this just happens to be one where, if the stars align (pun intended) we will actually get to see it.

:tro::tro:

I take opposition to this.
1) The premier race in the country for her gender and age (selected by her previous connections, otherwise they probably would have gone in the Derby.)
2) The 2nd jewel of the Triple Crown- against males.
3) A G1 at Belmont Park (very few showed up- understandably on their part.)
4) One of the two "midsummer Derbies"- against males.
5) A G1 at the premier track in the country against older males.

Calling that cherrypicking is crazytalk.

:tro:

Dammit Phil, I gave your other post :tro::tro: because it was the best of the thread and now you go and get sucked into this tired tired argument.

I retract my :tro:

LOL. DAMMIT!!! I just state the facts,sir.

You and I know the only true test that she had last year was the Preakness. List away all you want, she didn't show up when the best competition raced nor did she challenge herself on synthetics, I can't wait for her to prove me wrong this year and try, maybe then we can end this charade when her bubble finally bursts against top flight competition, and not the 2 hamburgers she met in the Woodward...Bullsbay and or Macho Again.

If you don't think that running her in the Haskell, especially based on what races were available to her at the time, was a test then you're way more clueless than I ever thought.

NT

Holy mother of God. You are incorrigible. I give up on this tired, beaten argument.

Yeah, they cherry picked the hell out of her races at three. And I'm sure they're ducking Careless Jewel. Just stop it. Did you ever think that perhaps not every single decision they make for RA is with Zenyatta in mind? This pretending that the BCC would've been a fair fight over a surface Rachel never set foot on and one that Zenyatta basically slept on is laughable.

You must have quite the limited list of great horses then, if success on three different surfaces is a prerequisite.

She won an N2L at Keeneland. Do I really have to explain why that's different than the Breeders' Cup at Santa Anita? And I'm sure Curlin would've been dusted by a bunch of European turf horses had the BCC been on dirt. As for your other comment, there's a difference between seeking out top competition and perhaps not finding it (even though I think RA's comp in '09 still outweighed Zenyatta's) and running against the same four or five handpicked tomato cans in your backyard all year.

I know she whipped my boy Summer Bird, I just wish he ran his race that day so we could better gauge how much better she is to him, that is unless one truly believes he is only a half length better than the distance challenged Munnings as the Fanclub seems to do.

I didnt compare a N2L to the Breeder's Cup, but she did show an affinity for it. Curlin was all out to beat Past the Point and Wanderin Boy his last two starts before the Breeder's Cup. His loss in the BC gave Jackson an excuse for Rachel not to run on synthetics. My only other point is everyone knew where Zenyatta was last year. Why didnt they (Rachel notwithstanding) ship there to face her? Especially since the Breeder's Cup was in Cali. The argument goes both ways I think.

Was Flashing or Gabby's Golden Gal better than Life is Sweet? Was beating Gio Ponti and Twice Over on a surface they preferred not as impressive as the Haskell or the Woodward.

Gio Ponti preferred synthetics? Based on what? And Twice Over? For real? And you're cherry picking some of the lousier horses behind RA and comparing them to the best mare behind Zenyatta.

I think a good horse winning an N2L over a synthetic track doesn't demonstrate an "affinity" for synthetics the way you say. And people are conveniently downplaying the role that the different surface in the BCC played and how much the race's result would be overblown. They knew Zenyatta loved the SA surface. They had no idea how Rachel would like it. They knew the winner would be called the definitively better horse. I would've said it's not worth it as well. Once again, it's demonstrably easier to transfer synthetic form to dirt than vice versa.

Final word until I may need to leave this forum again, I want to leave the fanclub so they can bask again in the afterglow of Rachel's return to her winning ways or one can hope this Fri. If she ever faces Zenyatta, she will be exposed, you heard it here. You guys know I called Summer Bird months in advance of his Belmont win, one of my last posts here before my hiatus was calling the Interactif in the Hall of Fame at Saratoga and I also just called the Derby Trial and yes it sucks being good, but I am telling you Rachel will not beat Zenyatta in the Classic if they do meet down the road. Count on it.

We'll be waiting with baited breath for your return Nostradamus.

This post should forever go down in the annals of Derby Trail history. You are the best.:tro:

NT

DrugS, hacked my account...That wasn't me.

Where are the hard and fast statistics for this ?
To me there is a distinct possibility that the most talented 3yos happen to be training in California. If Lookin At Lucky had started his career in New York would he have run a worse race in the Breeders Cup? The statistics have to cover a much broader range than graded stakes to confirm this theory.

I'm sure for every dirt horse that fails to perform up to par on syn. a syn. horse can be found to underperform on dirt.

Not sure where this goes from here, but I just want them to remain healthy and happy. If they run against each other, so be it. One great champion will win and the other will go back to the Assmussen barn.