Crist: The BC deserves NOT to have RA

[freddymo]

Rachel is a filly.. She is suppose to go against fillies in the Alabama.. Kensei is a colt that Jess would like to establish as a major Stallion prospect. Is the guy not entitled to fix the deck alittle. Rachel against multiple Grade 1 winning older males isn't enough? Or are you a let's see if the filly is a real man and go to the Arc guy? lol

[freddymo]

You can't be serious Fatty? Your super bowl analogy is comical. And clearly the GO GO Rams would not be flattered by Green Bay in Jan on grass...Don't fcuk with me with Football.. You are still missing that Poly while creditable surface is not dirt, hence a dirt horse should have to prove there mettle on it.. As for Curlin I never liked the horse, thought he was a the overrated colt of all time..

[the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by freddymo

You can't be serious Fatty? Your super bowl analogy is comical. And clearly the GO GO Rams would not be flattered by Green Bay in Jan on grass...Don't fcuk with me with Football.. You are still missing that Poly while creditable surface is not dirt, hence a dirt horse should have to prove there mettle on it.. As for Curlin I never liked the horse, thought he was a the overrated colt of all time..

Why it is comical? Why are DIRT horses the only ones WORTHY in BEYER LAND?

I'm not missing anything. Poly isn't dirt the same way a dome is not an open stadium (grass/dirt is not artificial surface).

You stone age MoFo's really need to get with the program. The game is changing and you just don't want to go along.

POLY IS HERE TO STAY. MONEY TALKS.

[gales0678]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Why it is comical? Why are DIRT horses the only ones WORTHY in BEYER LAND?

I'm not missing anything. Poly isn't dirt the same way a dome is not an open stadium (grass/dirt is not artificial surface).

You stone age MoFo's really need to get with the program. The game is changing and you just don't want to go along.

POLY IS HERE TO STAY. MONEY TALKS.

and slots ring true

[freddymo]

Originally Posted by the_fat_man

Why it is comical? Why are DIRT horses the only ones WORTHY in BEYER LAND?

I'm not missing anything. Poly isn't dirt the same way a dome is not an open stadium (grass/dirt is not artificial surface).

You stone age MoFo's really need to get with the program. The game is changing and you just don't want to go along.

POLY IS HERE TO STAY. MONEY TALKS.

You don't get that I personally think poly is OK for eacing and intially was 100% for it as i thought it was safer for the animal. I also thought that poly would lead to bigger fields as more horses would be sound to run on it.

Rachel not running on poly has nothing to do with if it is acceptable surface.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by freddymo

Rachel is a filly.. She is suppose to go against fillies in the Alabama.. Kensei is a colt that Jess would like to establish as a major Stallion prospect. Is the guy not entitled to fix the deck alittle. Rachel against multiple Grade 1 winning older males isn't enough? Or are you a let's see if the filly is a real man and go to the Arc guy? lol

No, that talk is foolish, but I'm not the one who said "champions should race against champions," as Jackson did when he bought her. I think Jackson wants to "challenge" her, but not too much. They have carefully managed where and when they race against the boys; the Preakness was a softer spot than the Belmont (hell, it was viewed as being such a soft race post-Derby that Barry Irwin was going to enter Hull until Rachel showed up), and putting her in any Saratoga spot other than the Travers, a race which by their own admission they are considering, would be opting for the path of lesser resistance.

[GBBob]

I wonder if Jackson owned Z if he would venture East? That would be the true test of his new found love of dirt.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Originally Posted by GBBob

I wonder if Jackson owned Z if he would venture East? That would be the true test of his new found love of dirt.

He probably would have .. Zenyatta gave a good account of herself on dirt even though she's better suited to synthetic from a style standpoint.

However, if Steve Asmussen trained Zenyatta, she probably wouldn't get past Briecat on synthetics ... and I'm talking level weights.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

He probably would have .. Zenyatta gave a good account of herself on dirt even though she's better suited to synthetic from a style standpoint.

However, if Steve Asmussen trained Zenyatta, she probably wouldn't get past Briecat on synthetics ... and I'm talking level weights.

How good would Zenyatta be with Asmussen at the helm, she would be enhanced for certain.

[The Indomitable DrugS]

Asmussen has nothing on her trainer.

Zenyatta has one of the absolute best .. and few if any are better at having a horse at their peak for one specific race.

[Bobby Fischer]

Right now Rachel is the star.

It will be a shame if the Classic shapes up like last year with some of the best European talent taking a serious shot, and her not participating. It will also be anti-climactic and disappointing if Rachel does not at least run in the biggest dirt races along the schedule.
Jackson has been bold so far with the Preakness and Haskel, I guess we have to hope he continues. Maybe she ships to Hanshin in Japan to get the Dirt Cup? Obviously Dubai World Cup is out of the question as this years world cup will be on synthetic with probably an improved cast featuring some of the same types of hard hitters that will be at this years Classic.

[10 pnt move up]

Originally Posted by The Indomitable DrugS

Asmussen has nothing on her trainer.

Zenyatta has one of the absolute best .. and few if any are better at having a horse at their peak for one specific race.

I think its silly to think Zenyatta would not be better drugged up like his barn is, thats naive.

[tector]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

No, that talk is foolish, but I'm not the one who said "champions should race against champions," as Jackson did when he bought her. I think Jackson wants to "challenge" her, but not too much. They have carefully managed where and when they race against the boys; the Preakness was a softer spot than the Belmont (hell, it was viewed as being such a soft race post-Derby that Barry Irwin was going to enter Hull until Rachel showed up), and putting her in any Saratoga spot other than the Travers, a race which by their own admission they are considering, would be opting for the path of lesser resistance.

So let me see now.

The one horse (filly) who has campaigned this year at 6 tracks in 6 states--undefeated, twice against boys in Grade 1s--is now obligated to follow Quality Road wherever he goes, before being then obligated to run off to California to run over a bogus crap surface to face a mare that is being campaigned with the most boring, borderline cowardly approach to HOY I have ever seen.

Uh, yeah.

If Pletcher really wants QR to face RA, is there some law preventing HIM from entering the Woodward? Why is the burden on the only horse that is being campaigned all over the place in a highly imaginative manner?

Screw you.

The bug some of you people have up your collective asses about Jess Jackson is pretty telling. Your petty jealousies say more about you than him.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by tector

The bug some of you people have up your collective asses about Jess Jackson is pretty telling. Your petty jealousies say more about you than him.

My primary point is we've all been down this road before with Jess Jackson. Last year, it was Curlin versus Big Brown that didn't happen despite all the clamoring for it. (And no, I don't completely absolve the IEAH crowd for that.)

Right now, there are three really first-rate horses racing over a distance of ground in this country: Rachel, Zenyatta, and Quality Road. I've only expressed my skepticism that Jackson will allow Rachel to face either of the other two. You want to give him a pass over the Breeders' Cup because of the synthetic surface, fine. However, the Travers is a championship-type race (the so-called "forth leg" of the Triple Crown for 3YOs) being contested on dirt track at a historic venue with the other two winners of the Triple Crown races also likely to contest the race. It's been 27 years since such a confluence of events happened. That would be a truly historic race for which national television coverage is already scheduled (SportsCenter at Saratoga, I believe). And certainly good for the sport.

I suspect that most racing fans would rather see that matchup than an untelevised matchup with the likes of Macho Again or Dry Martini in the Woodward, especially where it would get lost in the shuffle of the opening week of the NFL season.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

No, that talk is foolish, but I'm not the one who said "champions should race against champions," as Jackson did when he bought her. I think Jackson wants to "challenge" her, but not too much. They have carefully managed where and when they race against the boys; the Preakness was a softer spot than the Belmont (hell, it was viewed as being such a soft race post-Derby that Barry Irwin was going to enter Hull until Rachel showed up), and putting her in any Saratoga spot other than the Travers, a race which by their own admission they are considering, would be opting for the path of lesser resistance.

you gotta be kidding. she's raced in marquee events-challenge her but not too much? what is she supposed to do, run in the dandy saturday and the haskell sunday? she's exhibited the consistency that no other horse this year has shown, against the top colts. yes, a few were sidelined-but she's beated every horse they faced pretty easily. hell, her average margin of victory this year is over 9 lengths. i don't think the travers will develop as being the toughest race-summer bird may not go, and a few others including munnings are dropping back in distance.

[parsixfarms]

Originally Posted by Danzig

you gotta be kidding. she's raced in marquee events-challenge her but not too much? what is she supposed to do, run in the dandy saturday and the haskell sunday? she's exhibited the consistency that no other horse this year has shown, against the top colts. yes, a few were sidelined-but she's beated every horse they faced pretty easily. hell, her average margin of victory this year is over 9 lengths. i don't think the travers will develop as being the toughest race-summer bird may not go, and a few others including munnings are dropping back in distance.

No, my point is that as between the Preakness and the Belmont, the Preakness was the more opportune race in which to challenge the boys - and they opted for the Preakness (and having made that decision, I think they did the right thing by the filly in skipping the Belmont). Fast-forward to the summer, as between the Haskell and the Travers, the Haskell presented the more opportune race for her (on a speed-favoring oval at 9F against a stretch-out sprinter and a horse that had not competed since the Belmont and who was clearly prepping for the Travers).

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

No, my point is that as between the Preakness and the Belmont, the Preakness was the more opportune race in which to challenge the boys - and they opted for the Preakness (and having made that decision, I think they did the right thing by the filly in skipping the Belmont). Fast-forward to the summer, as between the Haskell and the Travers, the Haskell presented the more opportune race for her (on a speed-favoring oval at 9F against a stretch-out sprinter and a horse that had not competed since the Belmont and who was clearly prepping for the Travers).

I don't know about that - a lot of people were saying the Belmont was a better route for her than the Preakness when Jess first bought her since she wasn't initially being pointed there and hadn't been asked to turn around that quickly since she was a two year old.

Also, Big Drama is one of the horses who most conflicts with her running style and no horse like that was being pointed to the Belmont - so I don't see why you think he chose the more "opportune" spot.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Sightseek

I don't know about that - a lot of people were saying the Belmont was a better route for her than the Preakness when Jess first bought her since she wasn't initially being pointed there and hadn't been asked to turn around that quickly since she was a two year old.

Also, Big Drama is one of the horses who most conflicts with her running style and no horse like that was being pointed to the Belmont - so I don't see why you think he chose the more "opportune" spot.

Pimlico is 9.5f and generally considered speed favoring compared to the belmont at 12f. Regardless of pedigree, 12f was the unknown and was certainly the bigger risk between the two. They didnt know if SHE would like it but they also didnt know for sure which of the potential competitors would like it. In the Preakness, they pretty much knew what the competition was going to do except for Big Drama who was a sprinter stretching out. I think they knew that she could rate off of him.

I agree with Parsix. They have chosen their two spots very well and that certainly is no knock against the connections-that is what they are supposed to do. The Travers, pitting the respective winner of each classic, would be great for the sport. If the filly is well and you arent going to run in the BC, run her there.

[Sightseek]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

Pimlico is 9.5f and generally considered speed favoring compared to the belmont at 12f. Regardless of pedigree, 12f was the unknown and was certainly the bigger risk between the two. They didnt know if SHE would like it but they also didnt know for sure which of the potential competitors would like it. In the Preakness, they pretty much knew what the competition was going to do except for Big Drama who was a sprinter stretching out. I think they knew that she could rate off of him.

I agree with Parsix. They have chosen their two spots very well and that certainly is no knock against the connections-that is what they are supposed to do. The Travers, pitting the respective winner of each classic, would be great for the sport. If the filly is well and you arent going to run in the BC, run her there.

I agree with you that that is what any connection should do.

While they didn't know the entire field in the Belmont, the Preakness generally is a more quality race. They were taking on the top 4 finishers in the Derby whereas the trend in the Belmont the past few years is a field of horses that didn't run well in the Derby or plodders that the connections feel the distance will help them. They could have taken the gamble that by the time the Belmont rolled around, the better horses would have dropped out and they would have a fresh horse.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

No, my point is that as between the Preakness and the Belmont, the Preakness was the more opportune race in which to challenge the boys - and they opted for the Preakness (and having made that decision, I think they did the right thing by the filly in skipping the Belmont). Fast-forward to the summer, as between the Haskell and the Travers, the Haskell presented the more opportune race for her (on a speed-favoring oval at 9F against a stretch-out sprinter and a horse that had not competed since the Belmont and who was clearly prepping for the Travers).

i think they were considering the travers next all along-as long as she did well in the haskell. but with kensei's emergence, jackson has a second travers prospect. rachel seems better than the other colts, so i can a reason to try older horses in the woodward and try to get the travers with the up and comer. i just don't agree that they're taking the 'safe' route with her. that would be shirreffs doing that!