Match Races:Your opinion on what would happen. - Horse Racing Forum - PaceAdvantage.Com

RacingFan1992 · 12-28-2013, 10:34 AM

I know there are always discussions out there saying if there was a match race between this horse and that horse that this horse would win and blah blah blah. I have seen countless posts arguing who would win if they ever had a match race. I have seen some mean and nasty postings and I just say to myself "Wow, these people could be doing so much more with their lives and here they are fighting admittedly over something that will never happen.

What I would like for this thread is to hear peoples opinions of what they think would happen in a match race between two horses of their choosing. Mind you this is in fun and not to make sworn enemies and trash talking about someones character and what not.

Mine would be a race between Rachel Alexandra and Zenyatta. In the beginning Calvin Borel would take Rachel to the lead with Mike Smith ratting Zenyatta. Calvin Borel would also slow down Rachel and it would be a snails pace. These two horses will be still fresh coming into the home stretch. The entire time Borel will have Rachel sucked to the rail and Rachel will give a final kick in the end winning by 1/2 over Zenyatta.

Those are what I think would happen.

Let me hear what you have to say about this or different one you would like too see.

We can dream can't we.

RunForTheRoses · 12-28-2013, 12:46 PM

From a wagering standpoint they are really not that interesting at all. The speedier horse also seems to have the advantage.

mountainman · 12-28-2013, 04:01 PM

Take the 40 greatest of all time, make match-race brackets for any distance from 6 fur to one mile and a quarter, and point me to where I can bet on Dr Fager.

TheEdge07 · 12-28-2013, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mountainman

Take the 40 greatest of all time, make match-race brackets for any distance from 6 fur to one mile and a quarter, and point me to where I can bet on Dr Fager.

Bid and twice on Sunday...

letswastemoney · 12-28-2013, 05:53 PM

Rachel Alexandra would dominate Zenyatta by at least 5 lengths in a match race on dirt. The worst thing Borel could do in such a race is rate Rachel. Put her pedal to the medal and dare Mike Smith to duel.

mountainman · 12-28-2013, 06:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheEdge07

Bid and twice on Sunday...

nice pick.

thaskalos · 12-28-2013, 06:15 PM

In a match race, Rachel wins...because front runners have a big advantage in races of that sort.

But put both of them in with six other horses at a mile and an eighth...and Zenyatta wins nine out of ten races.

Ten out of ten if they go a mile and a quarter.

Saratoga_Mike · 12-28-2013, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thaskalos

In a match race, Rachel wins...because front runners have a big advantage in races of that sort.

But put both of them in with six other horses at a mile and an eighth...and Zenyatta wins nine out of ten races.

Ten out of ten if they go a mile and a quarter.

Against the 3-yr-old Rachel? I guess it would come down to the other horses in the field, but 9 out of 10 seems generous.

thaskalos · 12-28-2013, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

Against the 3-yr-old Rachel? I guess it would come down to the other horses in the field, but 9 out of 10 seems generous.

Not necessarily against the 3-year-old Rachel; against the ENTIRE Rachel.

Is it fair to judge a horse by one year alone?

Saratoga_Mike · 12-28-2013, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thaskalos

Not necessarily against the 3-year-old Rachel; against the ENTIRE Rachel.

Is it fair to judge a horse by one year alone?

In this case, yes

thaskalos · 12-28-2013, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Saratoga_Mike

In this case, yes

I know what you mean.

Several people here probably wish that Rachel's final racing year didn't exist.

RacingFan1992 · 12-28-2013, 10:34 PM

I still hear arguments about who would win in the Ruffian vs. Foolish Pleasure race and I was asked what I think and I think that I am not even going to touch that one with a 10 foot poll because either way I argue it won't bring back the best damn filly in the world of turf.

Regarding the Rachel vs. Zenyatta, I think it would sorta end up like the Miss Musket vs. Chris Evert. I think that John Sheriffs would have to retrain Zenyatta to go for the lead which never happened and Borel would out smart Smith because Borel would push Zenyatta until she cracked. Would I put Zenyatta in a field of 20 with Rachel and pick Zenyatta to win yes. It would depend on the type of race. Match: Rachel, Field: Zenyatta.

DeltaLover · 12-28-2013, 11:43 PM

Do we really need another RA vs ZEN thread?

RacingFan1992 · 12-28-2013, 11:59 PM

Dr. Fager was a speed demon if I have ever seen one. You got to admit that using a rabbit in Damascus' races against the ol' Doc was a genius idea. Dr. Fager was a rank, arrogant SoB. I don't think a horse could beat him in a match race because a lot are based on pure speed instead of stalking.

Oh BTW Delta Lover I just did that to start the discussion. I can see where you are coming from. If I had a dollar for every time I've heard people say how they think a race would unfold I would have enough money to buy every Derby contender for the next 20 years.

burnsy · 12-29-2013, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thaskalos

In a match race, Rachel wins...because front runners have a big advantage in races of that sort.

But put both of them in with six other horses at a mile and an eighth...and Zenyatta wins nine out of ten races.

Ten out of ten if they go a mile and a quarter.

I think it would be ten out of ten either way. Match races are a farce to begin with. The game is a "field" with trips and strategies. Rachel was a gifted, talented horse. On raw talent she was probably faster, but Zenyatta was a race horse.....she knew the game and how to beat the competition. That horse could slow herself down and reserve energy like one in a million. The horse was built like a truck with the brains of an "Einstein" in horse terms. Nothing seemed to bother her. That people were even silly enough to debate "who was better" is a joke. I was at the Preakness and the Woodward....those horses were nothing compared to who Zenyatta went against. Beating those horses and competing in the BC Classic are two different leagues. It proves people can't even read "class" to begin with and i love when they bet that way....Is Game On Dude going to be the favorite again next year??

Hes real speedy..

...Don't get me wrong i loved Rachel, she was really good. The only reason i drove to the Preakness was to see her win. But Zenyatta was the kind of horse that is so rare, her running style combined with her credentials. She could run in ANY race. I think she could of won (or placed) in Dubai if they shipped her. Her second place finish is a better race than Rachel ever ran. "They" don't even make horses like that more than once a decade. Please keep betting people....

That people even still bring it up proves they live in "dreamland". Why does it have to be a match race?????? Because thats the only shot Rachel would have at 9 furlongs or more.