Winning Colors vs. Rags to Riches

[Danzig]

talent doesn't bring home trophies, running and winning does. hell, there could have been a thousand other fillies born with more talent then both-so what? talent is in the eye of the beholder, and opinion, while race record/opponents defeated, is a fact.

to say rags was improving is pure speculation. she won over the boys at an obsolete distance that none will ever see again. how does that equate to multiple wins over the boys? or winning the derby? or losing in the last jump to an undefeated personal ensign, a champion who also defeated males, including an eclipse winner? it doesn't.

[kentuckyrosesinmay]

Originally Posted by Danzig

talent doesn't bring home trophies, running and winning does. hell, there could have been a thousand other fillies born with more talent then both-so what? talent is in the eye of the beholder, and opinion, while race record/opponents defeated, is a fact.

to say rags was improving is pure speculation. she won over the boys at an obsolete distance that none will ever see again. how does that equate to multiple wins over the boys? or winning the derby? or losing in the last jump to an undefeated personal ensign, a champion who also defeated males, including an eclipse winner? it doesn't.

Talent and accomplishments. WC would have never beat Curlin in that Belmont Stakes. WC would have never beat Street Sense in the Derby. WC would have not been able to match Curlin and SS in the Preakness. I can see Rags to Riches being right there in all three. She would have been very close if not hitting the wire first. All of it is pure speculation really. I just like Rags to Riches better because I think that she is the better horse. I think that she would have beat winning colors every time. And if Rags to Riches can beat both Curlin and Hard Spun, then I think she could have won multiple other Grade Is against the boys if she would have ran in them. I think that she would have been Horse of the Year if she would have stayed healthy.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

Talent and accomplishments. WC would have never beat Curlin in that Belmont Stakes.

rags wouldn't have won last years derby, let alone the one in which winning colors ran-and won.
everyone knows the derby is ranked ahead of the belmont. it's why all 10f races are referred to as the 'classic' distance. not 12f. the belmont is an anomaly, as are quite a few of its winners!

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by kentuckyrosesinmay

Talent and accomplishments. WC would have never beat Curlin in that Belmont Stakes. WC would have never beat Street Sense in the Derby. WC would have not been able to match Curlin and SS in the Preakness. I can see Rags to Riches being right there in all three. She would have been very close if not hitting the wire first. All of it is pure speculation really. I just like Rags to Riches better because I think that she is the better horse. I think that she would have beat winning colors every time. And if Rags to Riches can beat both Curlin and Hard Spun, then I think she could have won multiple other Grade Is against the boys if she would have ran in them.

i'll take cold, hard facts/results over speculation any day.

WC did hold her own in the preakness against the likes of forty niner and risen star, after defeating all comers in ky, and held her own vs the great personal ensign. i'll take that over rags one memorable race any day.
rags didn't run three straight races vs boys, winning two, and showing an incredible will in the third, just two weeks after a win vs those boys. winning colors finished third, unable to run her usual race, and with a horse running with ONE goal-to keep her from winning.

rags had a spring campaign nothing like winning colors.







"At 3:
Won Santa Anita Derby (G1), Kentucky Derby (G1), Santa Anita Oaks (G1), La Centinela S.
2nd Breeders' Cup Distaff S. (G1), Las Virgenes S. (G1), Maskette S. (G1)
3rd Preakness S. (G1)
4th Spinster S. (G1)
At 4:
Won Turfway Breeders' Cup S.
4th Maskette S. (G1)

1988 Eclipse Champion Three Year Old Filly.

One of three fillies to ever win the Kentucky Derby."

hell, winning colors has won more races than rags has even run in.


and could you explain the bold above? rags didn't even try, so what does speculation about what Winning Colors would have done last year have to do with rags? keep in mind, winning colors repeatedly took on the top three year old colts-with a win in the derby--not a no show like rags.

[blackthroatedwind]

It's also worth mentioning that when she was second in the Maskette she lost by a half length to Personal Ensign.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

It's also worth mentioning that when she was second in the Maskette she lost by a half length to Personal Ensign.

i can't imagine rags finishing within daylight of personal ensign. or winning colors for that matter.

[blackthroatedwind]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i can't imagine rags finishing within daylight of personal ensign. or winning colors for that matter.

I actually think Indian Charlie put it best when he pretty much alluded to Rags's incomplete resume. For those of us who actually saw Winning Colors race, and have real perspective, there is really no comparison.

However, if you were to choose one for the Temple Gwathany then perhaps Rags to Riches would be the right horse. Perhaps.

[miraja2]

I always think it is a shame that Goodbye Halo never gets mentioned in in these kind of threads. She was from the same crop as Winning Colors, and while WC certainly has to be considered the best 3yo filly from that year, Goodbye Halo was a hell of a filly and a 7-time G1 winner.
If you haven't watched the famous '88 Distaff in awhile, check it out on youtube. That race wasn't simply a 2-horse finish by any means.

I think I might take her over Rags as well.

[Cajungator26]

Winning Colors. I don't see how there could be an argument against that.