Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV (Post 657177)

Zenyatta only spotted the boys 3 pounds in the Classic and I was refering to RA racing Zenyatta at equal weight at 1 1/4.

RA had a nice go as a 3 yo, but I still dont see undefeated in her PPs.

Originally Posted by dalakhani (Post 657291)

If St Trinians isnt better than Jessica is Back (which itself is extremely questionable), i would wager most would agree that Zardana certainly is. No? Show me proof she is not. i dare you. :p

You can question my race watching ability all you want and no doubt it is certainly questionable (ask youbet!) but what was so much better about that performance yesterday? She faced weaker company than she had previously faced and she was able to draw off in the stretch. In her last race, replace unrivaled belle with jessica is back or that other nag from yesterday and Rachel does the exact same thing. How is this better? Because her speed fig came out higher?

I don't want to get deep in to this whole "who is better" thing. I am just saying that Rachel did what she was supposed to do yesterday and she did it stylishly but you aren't going to be able to tell anything about where she is until you put a real horse in there against her as opposed to the claimers she beat yesterday. Is that not a fair statement?

Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 657295)

not much of a difference, but don't they go 126/121 in the classic as far as weight goes?

Originally Posted by Sightseek (Post 657260)

I think the difference is that Zenyatta is at the top of her game and therefore could be in races like the Californian or pointed to the Gold Cup, Goodwood etc. and that is why most people are unsatisfied with her schedule.

I think most people who question her campaign do so out of a respect of Zenyatta's ability. She could be dominating races like the Grade 1s for males all year. At this point, I would take a shot against the Rail Trips and Blames of the equine world before I would run against the fillies and risk Zenyatta getting a terrible trip and one of the other fillies getting a dream trip and beating her.

Originally Posted by dalakhani (Post 657291)

If St Trinians isnt better than Jessica is Back (which itself is extremely questionable), i would wager most would agree that Zardana certainly is. No? Show me proof she is not. i dare you. :p

You can question my race watching ability all you want and no doubt it is certainly questionable (ask youbet!) but what was so much better about that performance yesterday? She faced weaker company than she had previously faced and she was able to draw off in the stretch. In her last race, replace unrivaled belle with jessica is back or that other nag from yesterday and Rachel does the exact same thing. How is this better? Because her speed fig came out higher?

I don't want to get deep in to this whole "who is better" thing. I am just saying that Rachel did what she was supposed to do yesterday and she did it stylishly but you aren't going to be able to tell anything about where she is until you put a real horse in there against her as opposed to the claimers she beat yesterday. Is that not a fair statement?

Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 657300)

i disagree. she may have managed a win rather than a scant second, but she seemed better to me yesterday than in her last two as well. we'll see how things go from here.

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985 (Post 657296)

On dirt, I think JIB would destroy ST, but ST is pretty solid on synthetics. Who knows who she comes back today though? She has a lot of issues and is pretty dam crooked.

Originally Posted by parsixfarms (Post 657298)

In Breeders Cup Classic, older males carry 126 and older females 123. 3YOs get a four pound allowance based on their age.

Originally Posted by parsixfarms (Post 657304)

Because of the significantly lower level of competition yesterday, it's hard to truly assess Rachel's performance yesterday versus her first two races this year. Do I think she improved over the Fair Grounds race and the La Troienne? Yes. Do I think "she's back" to where she was last year? No. Because of her running with her head cocked to the side, I still have nagging doubts about where she's at.

I hope that her connections point her to the Ruffian at Saratoga. To bite off something more than that would probably be doing Rachel a disservice at this time.

Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 657295)

not much of a difference, but don't they go 126/121 in the classic as far as weight goes? also, granted that the classic was definitely zenyatta's best field she faced, doesn't it mean something that gio ponti hasn't won since? summer bird ran third, who rachel beat by eight earlier in the year. i don't think the classic was any more difficult than the woodward, and rachel was a 3 yo, whereas zenyatta was five at the time. i don't think pointing to winning that race means a thing versus winning against older in the woodward.
as for her having a nice go at 3, but not being undefeated, she was undefeated at 3. not in her career, but last year, her year was just as perfect as zen's. and with more starts.

Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 657316)

i'd like to see rachel at 1 1/4 just to know. i have a hard time believing a 16th further than her preakness run would be her downfall.

Originally Posted by dalakhani (Post 657299)

I agree with everything you say. I think Zenyatta's connections could certainly have been more adventurous in their campaign. At the same time, tomorrow's race isn't a walkover. She is spotting serious weight to a short field of accomplished horses. As far as taking a shot against Rail Trip though, does that really do any good? Even beating Blame yesterday would have hardly made the necessary statement and I think Blame is the best older male running right now besides Quality Road. Winning at Saratoga or Belmont in late summer and early fall are the only way outside of the BC to make any real noise.

Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV (Post 657321)

Seem to me that at some point weight makes a differance and when Zenyatta is dragging 129 today with a mare like St. Trinians getting first run on a closer and has a brillant turn of foot, I think Z gets beat today.

Originally Posted by 2Hot4TV (Post 657321)

Seem to me that at some point weight makes a differance and when Zenyatta is dragging 129 today with a mare like St. Trinians getting first run on a closer and has a brillant turn of foot, I think Z gets beat today.

Originally Posted by Danzig (Post 657316)

i'd like to see rachel at 1 1/4 just to know. i have a hard time believing a 16th further than her preakness run would be her downfall.

Originally Posted by Travis Stone (Post 657331)

If the Preakness was another 16th she loses.

But there's no shame in being a horse who handles 9f... and can go longer under the right circumstances.

Ruffian only comes around once every few decades.

Originally Posted by CSC (Post 657326)

The only way I can see Zenyatta losing today is if Mike leaves her too much to do at the 1/4 pole, if St. Trinians or Zardana are within striking range she will run them down. I agree about St. Trinians getting first run and it will be interesting if she can maintain her run without expending too much energy to hold off the inevitable run by Zenyatta, the way Mitchell horses are running at this meet it does make this an interesting race to watch.

Originally Posted by kgar311 (Post 657325)

You really think that Zen beating the best older males on synthetics or even more so traveling across the country and beating the best older males on conventional dirt at Churchill Downs would have hardly made a statement??? Seriously???:zz: So your saying her winning either race would of been ho hum. I suggest you rethink that ridiculous comment. It EXACTLY what she needs to do to start making Necessary Statements if they want her to win HOY.