Quote:
|
Originally Posted by tector
OK by me. And to be complete, layoffs could be relevant to HOY if you are laid off so long you can only make 3 or 4 races that year. In that case you are backing yourself into a corner.
But I don't get the excitement about RA laying off, for example. If she needs to wait until June to come back, then she does. As I said, that might make a 2010 HOY difficult, unless she came back ran lights out in some top tier races.
Zenyatta's problem was that she ran in only one race that anyone outside of insular CA racing fans cares about--and that one, like all the rest, was on plastic. It was just too limited a campaign.
By contrast, RA ran in several races that everybody cares about--the Oaks, the Preakness, the Haskell, the Woodward. Everybody knows these races.
And they are on dirt.
To me, that is pretty much all there was to this choice. The rest was hot air.
|
There is no " excitement " for me in Rachel's layoff, and if these two meet, it should be under optimum conditions for both ...
I was merely responding--and NOT defensively--that Zenyatta got some flak for her delay ...
I have never refuted that Rachel ran more, beat males more and did it on dirt at age three .. She was legit to be a contender and a winner of HOY ...
I can pick apart some of her races and do not agree with some of the analyses of said races, and I cared at least as much for the Alabama, the Travers, and the JCGC as the ones you mentioned , but that is another issue ..
As a Zenyatta fan--called a tard by some here--I am realistic enough to accept a thinner campaign on a non-traditional surface as a valid critique ..
Though Zenyatta may be flawless, the pathway to accolades was not ..
I would have preferred more dirt, more males , more cowbell, but I had no hand in it ...