W O W ! ! ! !

[cj]

Originally Posted by thaskalos

If the horse didn't repeatedly show up in the Classic...then there would be validity to the argument that she "ducked" somebody. But she showed up back-to-back, on TWO surfaces...so, these "ducking" arguments don't hold an OUNCE of water. Especially when those who are posing the "ducking" arguments are fans of a superstar filly who watched the Breeders Cup races on TV.

Zenyatta was a fabulous mare.

That said, she won most races on a gimmick surface that is basically gone from racing already. Nobody runs any serious races on it any more. Nobody ever has outside of North America (except a few years in Dubai). I don't buy that this would translate to turf ability. We've all seen countless synth horses flop on turf at short odds. We just have no way of really knowing. She is undoubtedly the best synthetic horse we ever saw. I just don't know how relevant that really is. Does anyone?

Had she had a more ambitious campaign maybe I'd think differently. When she was finally tested on dirt against top horses, she came up short. It isn't like she lost to Ghostzapper or Curlin. She lost to Blame. He was a nice enough horse but not much more than that. He'll be long forgotten other than being a footnote of who beat Zenyatta. I have a feeling had she been a dirt horse that would have happened more than once. In my eyes losses aren't that big of a deal. It is part of being a competitor. But for whatever reason her connections didn't feel that way and coddled her beyond belief. A few schedule changes certainly wouldn't have hurt her in November come Breeders' Cup time. It is too bad about her record. I think it held her back.

[AskinHaskin]

Gawd, people, at what point do you cease passing around the Rachel Alexandra Kool Aid??


We get that she once started 8 times in a season and won all of them... as the heavy favorite she was every time.


She was supposed to win all of those races.

But now that we have the benefit of history, why not, and for the first time open your eyes to the vast representation of "tomato cans" Rachel Alexandra was facing in so many of those spots?


Arguably the best competition she faced during all of 2009 was in the Mother Goose... but she knew the absurd benefit that was all of the others going eye-to-eye in 1:08 4/5 in a 9-furlong race, with Rachel sitting by herself behind them. By then it didn't matter who they were, or what Rachel' won by... it was only the collective stupidity of the other riders which created the result.


As for the Woodward... the rest of the field combined subsequently went 2-for-30, with both wins by insignificant Cool Coal Man in 5-horse fields.

The Haskell was in the slop and she did top subsequent Travers/J.C. Gold Cup winner, Summer Bird in that one, along with a trio of subsequent Gr II / Gr III winners.


The Preakness field was pretty shaky. Runner-up Mine That Bird never won again. Third horse Musket Man won next out at Tampa before placing in a handful of Gr. I / Gr. II stakes yet knowing only that single, subsequent win in a $52K stakes.

Preakness 4th Flying Private won a N3L allowance two starts later for his last career triumph.

Preakness 5th Big Drama was a great sprinter who later won the Breeders' Cup Sprint along with a Gr. II and a Gr. III.

Preakness 6th Papa Clem managed a single subsequent win in the Gr. II San Fernando.

Preakness 7th Terrain pulled up in his next start and never raced again

Luv Gov was 8th in the Preakness and he later netted a win in a $30K claiming race at Oaklawn to show for 16 future starts.

General Quarters was 9th in the Preakness and he later won the Gr. 1 Turf Classic and placed a few times (trio of Graded stakes) during 14 future starts.

Friesan Fire won a $72K stakes in Louisiana for his only win among 9 future starts.

Pioneerof the Nile never raced again after the Preakness.

The next horse, Tone It Down, won an optional claimer at Laurel next out and eventually toiled for $3500 claiming at Beulah.

Take the Points, last in the Preakness, never tried dirt again but did go on to finish first in a trio of Gr. I events on turf.



So there's the 2009 Preakness also-rans.



Now lets try the 2009 Kentucky Oaks:


Runner-up Stone Legacy, complete with 75 Beyer Speed Figure in that Oaks later won a $45K N1X allowance at Fair Grounds.

Third-place finisher Flying Spur never found the exacta again despite 10 future starts, all in allowance or optional claiming company.

(yes, that was third in the Kentucky Oaks, people )


Be Fair was 4th in that Kentucky Oaks and she did indeed later take a Grade III (turf) stakes that was washed off the lawn and went with a 4-horse field. That along with a $42K allowance at Oaklawn to show for 16 additional starts.


KY Oaks 5th-place finisher, "Nan", ended her fine career 1-for-18.


Pace-setter in the Oaks was Gabby's Golden Gal, who later won a pair of Grade I's (7f and 8f), but was completely spent on the lead in Kentucky.

Last in that rendition of the Kentucky Oaks was the great "Tweeter", who never reached the top 4 again in four additional starts.



So c'mon, take Rachel Alexandra for what she was... a runner who was plenty fast as distaffers go, but whose legacy was crafted more by the mediocrity falling down around her than by hair-raising talent that might have been required to win all of those races in more typical years.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

So c'mon, take Rachel Alexandra for what she was... a runner who was plenty fast as distaffers go, but whose legacy was crafted more by the mediocrity falling down around her than by hair-raising talent that might have been required to win all of those races in more typical years.

Whatever you say Steve.

[pandy]

Originally Posted by AskinHaskin

Gawd, people, at what point do you cease passing around the Rachel Alexandra Kool Aid??


We get that she once started 8 times in a season and won all of them... as the heavy favorite she was every time.


She was supposed to win all of those races.

But now that we have the benefit of history, why not, and for the first time open your eyes to the vast representation of "tomato cans" Rachel Alexandra was facing in so many of those spots?


Arguably the best competition she faced during all of 2009 was in the Mother Goose... but she knew the absurd benefit that was all of the others going eye-to-eye in 1:08 4/5 in a 9-furlong race, with Rachel sitting by herself behind them. By then it didn't matter who they were, or what Rachel' won by... it was only the collective stupidity of the other riders which created the result.


As for the Woodward... the rest of the field combined subsequently went 2-for-30, with both wins by insignificant Cool Coal Man in 5-horse fields.

The Haskell was in the slop and she did top subsequent Travers/J.C. Gold Cup winner, Summer Bird in that one, along with a trio of subsequent Gr II / Gr III winners.


The Preakness field was pretty shaky. Runner-up Mine That Bird never won again. Third horse Musket Man won next out at Tampa before placing in a handful of Gr. I / Gr. II stakes yet knowing only that single, subsequent win in a $52K stakes.

Preakness 4th Flying Private won a N3L allowance two starts later for his last career triumph.

Preakness 5th Big Drama was a great sprinter who later won the Breeders' Cup Sprint along with a Gr. II and a Gr. III.

Preakness 6th Papa Clem managed a single subsequent win in the Gr. II San Fernando.

Preakness 7th Terrain pulled up in his next start and never raced again

Luv Gov was 8th in the Preakness and he later netted a win in a $30K claiming race at Oaklawn to show for 16 future starts.

General Quarters was 9th in the Preakness and he later won the Gr. 1 Turf Classic and placed a few times (trio of Graded stakes) during 14 future starts.

Friesan Fire won a $72K stakes in Louisiana for his only win among 9 future starts.

Pioneerof the Nile never raced again after the Preakness.

The next horse, Tone It Down, won an optional claimer at Laurel next out and eventually toiled for $3500 claiming at Beulah.

Take the Points, last in the Preakness, never tried dirt again but did go on to finish first in a trio of Gr. I events on turf.



So there's the 2009 Preakness also-rans.



Now lets try the 2009 Kentucky Oaks:


Runner-up Stone Legacy, complete with 75 Beyer Speed Figure in that Oaks later won a $45K N1X allowance at Fair Grounds.

Third-place finisher Flying Spur never found the exacta again despite 10 future starts, all in allowance or optional claiming company.

(yes, that was third in the Kentucky Oaks, people )


Be Fair was 4th in that Kentucky Oaks and she did indeed later take a Grade III (turf) stakes that was washed off the lawn and went with a 4-horse field. That along with a $42K allowance at Oaklawn to show for 16 additional starts.


KY Oaks 5th-place finisher, "Nan", ended her fine career 1-for-18.


Pace-setter in the Oaks was Gabby's Golden Gal, who later won a pair of Grade I's (7f and 8f), but was completely spent on the lead in Kentucky.

Last in that rendition of the Kentucky Oaks was the great "Tweeter", who never reached the top 4 again in four additional starts.



So c'mon, take Rachel Alexandra for what she was... a runner who was plenty fast as distaffers go, but whose legacy was crafted more by the mediocrity falling down around her than by hair-raising talent that might have been required to win all of those races in more typical years.

Good analysis.

[PaceAdvantage]

And by the way, Steve...why even go to the Kentucky Oaks or any of the races Rachel faced females?

Or did you forget she was beating up on males most of the year instead? That important point was left out. You can rant on and on about what the MALES did whom she faced, but the fact that she faced the best 3yo males of the day and also some of the best older males around, and thrashed them...well....

And you also left out how in the Woodward, it wasn't so much about what OLDER MALES she beat in that Grade 1 race at Saratoga, but HOW she beat them...keep leaving out the important points in your rant...I'll be here to keep you honest.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by pandy

Good analysis.

Not really. He conveniently left out some really important facts.

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by classhandicapper

The club is larger than people that just resent the Zenyatta because of the hype or because they are hardcore Rachel fans. It's also made up of a lot generally very smart handicappers that were very wrong for a long time because their model for measuring horses was wrong.

Plus synthetics.

You can see it in cj's post. Synthetics were a failed experiment, that nobody runs any serious races on.

That's definitely how a lot of people felt about synthetics, and for that reason they hated Zenyatta, the synthetic specialist. (Nevermind that being good enough to finish 2nd behind Blame in that BC Classic field alone shows her to be one of the top dirt mares of the last few decades.)

Here's the thing. Of all the things that are said on this board, the screed against synthetics is probably the most wrong. 30 years from now, there's going to be a ton of racing on synthetics. Why do I know this? Because the surfaces are safer and because that's what has happened in every other sport that has introduced them. Tennis? Most tournaments are now on hardcourts, which are a lot safer than the ones introduced 40 years ago. Track and field? Everything is on synthetics, which are far better than the tartan at Mexico City in 1968. Football? Mostly played on synthetics, even on the high school level, even though the early forms of Astroturf were terrible and caused a lot of injury. Baseball is played on a lot of grass here in the US (because it is a summer sport and it doesn't tear up the grass so much), but everywhere else in the world it's played on synthetic surfaces, which are, again, much better than 1960's and 1970's Astroturf.

The racing world has not permanently rid itself of synthetics. This is a temporary pause that looks like a victory for the people who hate the stuff. But they will be back, as they get cheaper and even safer and more dirt-like. They are the future of the sport.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by dilanesp

That's definitely how a lot of people felt about synthetics, and for that reason they hated Zenyatta, the synthetic specialist.

I love how all those who didn't buy into Z as the second coming are now labeled haters of Zenyatta.

I guess all those currently trying to debunk Arrogate also hate the horse?

[dilanesp]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

I love how all those who didn't buy into Z as the second coming are now labeled haters of Zenyatta.

I guess all those currently trying to debunk Arrogate also hate the horse?

I'll back off a little. You are right. Zenyatta's critics (except maybe Andrew Beyer, who called her a "fraud") don't hate her, they think she's massively overrated. (And I think they are wrong about that, except maybe with respect to a few people who called Zenyatta the greatest horse of all time or something.) There's a legitimate distinction between that and hatred.

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Whatever you say Steve.

Wait!! I thought you said earlier that he ....

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by whodoyoulike

Wait!! I thought you said earlier that he ....

It's my poor attempt at humor

[whodoyoulike]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

It's my poor attempt at humor

I really didn't know and actually believed you. Fool me once etc.

[Dahoss9698]

I have to give kudos to anyone with the energy to still argue about Zenyatta and Rachel. I know I don't.

I will say I have grown to appreciate both even more now that years have passed. I definitely didn't appreciate Zenyatta enough at the time and a big part of that was surface. With Rachel I still marvel at the campaign she had as a 3 year old...especially because I think it was more owner driven than trainer.

[cj]

I've told this story before, but to rehash I drove a long 6 hours (and it is a shitty drive, trust me) to see Zenyatta race in person knowing full well Rachel wasn't coming. I thought she should have been HOY in her 4yo season. I was a fan.

I just think the connections were bullied by the record. She could have accomplished more in opinion. I don't think that qualifies me as a hater, just the opposite. Her last race impressed me most for one main reason...her age. It wasn't her best race by any stretch as some claim. That field was subpar for a Classic. But to do it at the end of her 6yo season is incredible. It only makes me wish her connections were more ambitious.


As for synthetics, they aren't coming back on any grand scale in my lifetime. I'd bet on it.

[pandy]

Zenyatta raced four seasons, so while she did not have the tough schedules as the horses of yesteryear, she did more than many modern day horses who retired after their three year old seasons, or a horse like Ghostzapper, who only ran 7 races.

I doubt Arrogate will race after this season, but, we have to take what we can get these days.