Asmussen: No Rachel for Blossom

[johnny pinwheel]

Originally Posted by westcoastinvader

It's ironic that you suggest that Rachel Alexandra's camp somehow mismanaged their filly. Her 2009 season was clearly one of the greatest campaigns for a 3yo filly of all time. Unfortunately, it appears as though that campaign has gutted her in much the same way that fillies like Silverbulletday, Winning Colors, and Genuine Risk were gutted.

Of course, Zenyatta supporters will turn a blind eye to this probability, equating the 3yo Rachel Alexandra with the 4yo version. Sadly, that group must rely on Rachel Alexandra failing this season to be able to trump up their own heroine, who, ironically, has few real noteworthy accomplishments herself, save one.

As far as Zenyatta is concerned, make no mistake, being "managed well" has more to do with what races you don't run in, not what races you do.

Yes, the Moss's and the Shirreffs have pulled off an amazing stunt; they have created the illusion that Zenyatta is unbeatable. And it is the main blight on her career.

__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ ____

First, I'm more of a fan of enjoying Zenyatta's wins than saying claiming she is unbeatable. However you are correct in that Zenyatta has never been beaten in 15 races.

It's an agreed in advance tainted stat, but Rachel Alexandra has been beaten in over 25% of her 15 races. She may have taken on all comers, but not necessarily successfully.

If her connections brought her to the Breeders Cup she might have moved to being beaten in 31% of her races. We'll never know, because they didn't show. They don't run their horse on that kind of track (though Berkeley's Jess Jackson will get his grapes and $$ from California soil).

I agree that Rachel Alexandra had one of the greatest 3 year old filly campaigns of all time. Through those 8 races she was placed and managed with perfection.

When I cite mismanaged, I note she had six+ months off and returned to lose and then seemingly her camp has given up on seeing Zenyatta anytime soon. Even calling off a scheduled date in their comfort zone dirt and supposedly out of Zenyatta's comfort zone.

It was seven months between the September 5 Woodward and the April 9 Apple Blossom.

Knowing what the racing world was thinking, expecting and all were pointing to, I'm now sure anyone here defends they played all their cards superbly.


I'm happy to celebrate Rachel Alexandra's great success AND Zenyatta's fun career.

so true. i agree with your post 100%. you left out rags to riches who lasted in one start, the belmont. the campaign was great but it came at a price. as it always does and your examples are proof. if the horse is that good and can't run in 7 months (unless hurt). theres a problem. they took a royal flush and got about a full house now (with equipment changes). i would not call that playing your hand superbly.

[DaTruth]

Originally Posted by johnny pinwheel

so true. i agree with your post 100%. you left out rags to riches who lasted in one start, the belmont. the campaign was great but it came at a price. as it always does and your examples are proof. if the horse is that good and can't run in 7 months (unless hurt). theres a problem. they took a royal flush and got about a full house now (with equipment changes). i would not call that playing your hand superbly.

It is playing your hand superbly if your goal is to have your 3yo filly complete one of the most remarkable dirt campaigns by a filly or mare in decades. Racing should be thankful that RA ran in the Preakness, Haskell, and Woodward instead of spending all summer and fall beating up on her own sex.

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by DaTruth

It is playing your hand superbly if your goal is to have your 3yo filly complete one of the most remarkable dirt campaigns by a filly or mare in decades. Racing should be thankful that RA ran in the Preakness, Haskell, and Woodward instead of spending all summer and fall beating up on her own sex.

People have it in their heads for some reason that Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta have been locked in some sort of long distance rivalry since they both started racing. There was really no mention of a matchup until after both won on the same day in May (the Mother Goose and Milady respectively).

I guess Jess Jackson and co. at that point should have skipped any significant and/or tough race (it worked for Zenyatta...) so they could be ready at a moment's notice when Team Z decided they needed to run against Rachel Alexandra.

[prudery]

Originally Posted by RolloTomasi

People have it in their heads for some reason that Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta have been locked in some sort of long distance rivalry since they both started racing. There was really no mention of a matchup until after both won on the same day in May (the Mother Goose and Milady respectively).

I guess Jess Jackson and co. at that point should have skipped any significant and/or tough race (it worked for Zenyatta...) so they could be ready at a moment's notice when Team Z decided they needed to run against Rachel Alexandra.

Team Z didn't decide to run against Rachel--it was a mutual decision by all connections , and Team Z was going to the AB anyway as per schedule ...

Several months of prep for an April 9 race is not a moment's notice .

Nobody wants to see these two run when one or both are not prepared, but the operative word may be prepared .

If--as some have said--Rachel was not ready for the " toughest race of her career " , what does that unintentially say about the Haskell, Preakness, and Woodward--not to mention Zenyatta ???

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by prudery

Team Z didn't decide to run against Rachel--it was a mutual decision by all connections , and Team Z was going to the AB anyway as per schedule ...

This year is not what is being discussed. A couple of people have suggested that Stonestreet was somehow foolish for racing Rachel Alexandra in a demanding manner last season because it may have burned her out as a 4yo.

Several months of prep for an April 9 race is not a moment's notice .

Actually, how many people thought Zenyatta would race in 2010 last fall? When did Charles Cella announce the $5 million purse, mid February or so?

If--as some have said--Rachel was not ready for the " toughest race of her career " , what does that unintentially say about the Haskell, Preakness, and Woodward--not to mention Zenyatta ???

Nobody said that Zenyatta isn't a formidable opponent, or even the most formidable opponent Rachel Alexandra will ever face...but does that mean Rachel Alexandra should have stayed in the barn at 3 to await a possible showdown?

No...because there wouldn't be talk of a showdown if Rachel Alexandra hadn't built up her reputation last spring and summer. Zenyatta would have run in the Ladies Classic and would be in a breeding shed somewhere right now...

[prudery]

I believe this year was discussed in reference ot getting ready on a momnet's notice ... I cvertainly did not bring up last year.

No one-- least of all me suggested anythinbg about Rachel staying in the barn at any time...

And no one knows for sure if Zenyatta would have run in the Ladies Classic as you suggest last year ...

I believe the AB matchup was at least several weeks before mid-February ..

It gave Rachel about 2 months for a prep race and the actual race ...

I really do not mind favoritism, but not at the expense of exaggeration free comments .

Originally Posted by prudery

I believe this year was discussed in reference ot getting ready on a momnet's notice ... I cvertainly did not bring up last year.

No one-- least of all me suggested anythinbg about Rachel staying in the barn at any time...

And no one knows for sure if Zenyatta would have run in the Ladies Classic as you suggest last year ...

I believe the AB matchup was at least several weeks before mid-February ..

It gave Rachel about 2 months for a prep race and the actual race ...

I really do not mind favoritism, but not at the expense of exaggeration free comments .

Do you have Asperger's?

[RolloTomasi]

Originally Posted by prudery

I believe this year was discussed in reference ot getting ready on a momnet's notice ... I cvertainly did not bring up last year.

Sorry. You quoted my earlier post so I took that to mean you were discussing its content, which had everything to do with 2009.

No one-- least of all me suggested anythinbg about Rachel staying in the barn at any time...

Again, people mentioned she was mismanaged. If that doesn't refer to her 2009 campaign then I guess the 6 month layoff was a bad idea?

And no one knows for sure if Zenyatta would have run in the Ladies Classic as you suggest last year ...

If Rachel Alexandra wasn't a heavy favorite for HOY, it was highly likely Zenyatta would have been in the Ladies Classic.

I believe the AB matchup was at least several weeks before mid-February ..

Nope. February 4. At which time Jackson said she wouldn't be ready.

It gave Rachel about 2 months for a prep race and the actual race ...

It gave her just over 1 month (that is, if you are allowing for a prep race).

I really do not mind favoritism, but not at the expense of exaggeration free comments .

What did I exaggerate exactly?