Derby Trail Forums
Page 11 of 15 « First < 910 11 1213 > Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Derby Trail Forums (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/index.php)
-   The Paddock (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2)
-   -   Asmussen: No Rachel for Blossom (http://www.derbytrail.com/forums/showthread.php?t=34961)

kgar311 03-23-2010 09:01 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by westcoastinvader
I was a fan and a witness for most of those match ups. I realize that current event accomplishments real time often seem to pale in comparison to accomplishments by achievers of yore. Time heals wounds, and time helps good stories ferment, develop and gain traction in acceptance.

I think the Zenyatta and Rachel Alexandra stories and races of 2009 and 2010 certainly deserve more than mention in the names you reference, and others. And trump some of them.

Again, I have great respect for Rachel Alexandra and have enjoyed her career. I just don't think the Rachel Alexandra connections played their cards as well and managed their filly as well as the Zenyatta connections managed their unique and great mare.



Possibly the most idiotic, stupid, off the wall statement I have ever heard in my entire life :wf

CSC 03-23-2010 09:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kgar311
How am I handling it? I would say I couldnt be happier with the race Rachel ran. I along with everyone else knew she was short for that race. She gains 150lbs, is off 6 months and is probably 50% fit going into the race. Zardana had been racing all along and probably peaked in that race and Rachel ran into a buzz saw and still only lost by a length. Id like to see Zardana in a couple months and she wouldn't even be able to see Rachel at the finish line. As far a Zenyatta goes, I still cant wait till the meet up and Rachel is at 100%, it wont even be a contest. Rachel doesnt lose again for the rest of the year guaranteed!!!
I can see her moving forward off of the prep, however aren't you somewhat off that she was only 50% fit going in? To me she looked closer to 85% fit. What was evident was the lack of high cruising speed she showed in 09. That is what I would be concerned more with rather than the fitness part, if indeed she is to not lose again the rest of the year as you have guaranteed.

kgar311 03-23-2010 09:23 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSC
I can see her moving forward off of the prep, however aren't you somewhat off that she was only 50% fit going in? To me she looked closer to 85% fit. What was evident was the lack of high cruising speed she showed in 09. That is what I would be concerned more with rather than the fitness part, if indeed she is to not lose again the rest of the year as you have guaranteed.
Im not concerned about anything I saw in that race. I saw the Rachel I know, all heart but poor conditioning. She was rushed into that race and now they will take the proper time to have her ready next time out. You will see the Rachel of last year in her next race

Antitrust32 03-23-2010 09:47 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSC
I can see her moving forward off of the prep, however aren't you somewhat off that she was only 50% fit going in? To me she looked closer to 85% fit. What was evident was the lack of high cruising speed she showed in 09. That is what I would be concerned more with rather than the fitness part, if indeed she is to not lose again the rest of the year as you have guaranteed.
I would equate the lack of high cruising speed with her being about 85% fit. That and Borel had a big hold on her, so who knows what her speed would have been like if she was let to run. I do think that was a big mistake by Assman and crew.. telling Borel to only get into her at the 1/16th pole. I guess they assumed they were running against a bunch of pigs who couldnt break a 89 beyer.. they were wrong.

I'm not a trainer by any means, but I would think if you are really holding a horse back and not giving her her head, and she's only 85% fit to begin with, wouldnt it wear out the horse a lot more to fight with her the whole run?

TouchOfGrey 03-23-2010 10:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32
Borel had a big hold on her, so who knows what her speed would have been like if she was let to run. I do think that was a big mistake by Assman and crew.. telling Borel to only get into her at the 1/16th pole. :::snip::
I'm not a trainer by any means, but I would think if you are really holding a horse back and not giving her her head, and she's only 85% fit to begin with, wouldnt it wear out the horse a lot more to fight with her the whole run?
I would think it would have to. She never looked happy going down the backstretch. Her ears were pinned the entire time. I wonder if they're going to continue with the figure-eight.

CSC 03-23-2010 10:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32
I would equate the lack of high cruising speed with her being about 85% fit. That and Borel had a big hold on her, so who knows what her speed would have been like if she was let to run. I do think that was a big mistake by Assman and crew.. telling Borel to only get into her at the 1/16th pole. I guess they assumed they were running against a bunch of pigs who couldnt break a 89 beyer.. they were wrong.

I'm not a trainer by any means, but I would think if you are really holding a horse back and not giving her her head, and she's only 85% fit to begin with, wouldnt it wear out the horse a lot more to fight with her the whole run?
I watched the replay only as an afterthought after Borel's comments where he said he may have been misquoted, from my view she wasn't held as much as was believed when reading and hearing all the things regarding figure 8's and riding to Asmussen's instructions. To me she didn't have the same explosiveness as to some of her races last year. It's something to watch for, though off 1 prep race I can agree it is hardly conclusive.

Sightseek 03-23-2010 10:22 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by RolloTomasi
The point was that all those pairings mentioned faced each other multiple times with merely an iota of the press these two horses have received for a matchup that still has yet to take place.



Rachel Alexandra's legacy will likely pay the price for Zenyatta coming out of "retirement" and getting another streamlined campaigned with the main focus maintaining an unbeaten record as opposed to taking on all-comers. Zenyatta seems poised to maintain her form whereas Rachel Alexandra appears hard-pressed to find her 3yo form, not to mention any improved form related to maturity.

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.
:tro:

CSC 03-23-2010 10:30 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kgar311
Im not concerned about anything I saw in that race. I saw the Rachel I know, all heart but poor conditioning. She was rushed into that race and now they will take the proper time to have her ready next time out. You will see the Rachel of last year in her next race
It was a prep race designed to get her ready for the Apple Blossom 1 day short of 4 weeks away, if Zardana stayed in California, Rachel would have won by 10 or 11 and it would have been a perfect conditioning race for her. I don't see how one can be rushed for a prep race?

MaTH716 03-23-2010 10:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSC
It was a prep race designed to get her ready for the Apple Blossom 1 day short of 4 weeks away, if Zardana stayed in California, Rachel would have won by 10 or 11 and it would have been a perfect conditioning race for her. I don't see how one can be rushed for a prep race?
Yes, it was supposed to be a prep. But they weren't expecting it to be any kind of race. She was supposed to glide to the front and win in hand. Just a paid workout. They weren't expecting her to have to be all out in the stretch. I'm not a trainer either, but I'm guessing it was too much too soon for her and they thought that she would maybe regress going into the AB.

kgar311 03-23-2010 10:56 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by CSC
It was a prep race designed to get her ready for the Apple Blossom 1 day short of 4 weeks away, if Zardana stayed in California, Rachel would have won by 10 or 11 and it would have been a perfect conditioning race for her. I don't see how one can be rushed for a prep race?
Ill give you 5million reasons she was rushed into that "prep race" No way she runs in that race if the AB wasnt right around the corner. She still wouldnt have race this year. Im thinking this or next weekend would of been ideal for her return.

CSC 03-23-2010 11:37 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaTH716
Yes, it was supposed to be a prep. But they weren't expecting it to be any kind of race. She was supposed to glide to the front and win in hand. Just a paid workout. They weren't expecting her to have to be all out in the stretch. I'm not a trainer either, but I'm guessing it was too much too soon for her and they thought that she would maybe regress going into the AB.
I disagree this was exactly the type of race (to have a workmate in Zardana) where a horse would get the most out of a race to improve her conditioning, from what I saw she was not running all out in the stretch, as she was ridden not to win. Just watch Borel's hands, he was protecting her for her next start rather than trying to win a race at all costs. Now it's anyone's guess why JJ avoided the Apple Blossom (though I have a good idea why...) only 30 mins after his trainer declared that she came out of the race in great shape. She beyered 100 so that fits the 85% readiness, a rushed horse running at 85% of her ability doesn't equate to me.

10 pnt move up 03-23-2010 11:39 AM
So win the Breeders Cup Distaff (which is the top filly and mare race to win)....then win the Classic (the top race of all races for older horses to win).............and somehow you have been managed into your reputation.

Good grief

kgar311 03-23-2010 11:43 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up
So win the Breeders Cup Distaff (which is the top filly and mare race to win)....then win the Classic (the top race of all races for older horses to win).............and somehow you have been managed into your reputation.

Good grief
Where were those races run again? Oh yea at her home track on used condoms

the_fat_man 03-23-2010 12:00 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Antitrust32
I do think that was a big mistake by Assman and crew.. telling Borel to only get into her at the 1/16th pole. I guess they assumed they were running against a bunch of pigs who couldnt break a 89 beyer.. they were wrong.
I keep reading this and I keep wondering if people who believe this actually watched the race. If RA was able to draw off and was run down late, then maybe I'd buy into some of it. But, the moment she took the lead, Zardana was gunned and came like a shot to hook her. This indicates that she basically had RA measured no matter what the latter did. If RA is sent, meaning she runs faster earlier, she's buried even more than she was. In fact, she's wiped out -- and knocked out for who knows how long. I suspect the connections realize some of this and that's why they're pulling back. They don't even want to face 3rd string Z; expected improvement or otherwise.

Antitrust32 03-23-2010 12:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the_fat_man
I keep reading this and I keep wondering if people who believe this actually watched the race. If RA was able to draw off and was run down late, then maybe I'd buy into some of it. But, the moment she took the lead, Zardana was gunned and came like a shot to hook her. This indicates that she basically had RA measured no matter what the latter did. If RA is sent, meaning she runs faster earlier, she's buried even more than she was. In fact, she's wiped out -- and knocked out for who knows how long. I suspect the connections realize some of this and that's why they're pulling back. They don't even want to face 3rd string Z; expected improvement or otherwise.
like I said, I'm not a trainer. I dont know if it takes more out of a horse to let them run or to restrain them. Especially when said horse is 85% fit.

MaTH716 03-23-2010 12:11 PM
It's kind of funny, that this debate has gotten so heated/argumentative and honestly out of hand that it's turned some Rachael fans totally against Zenyatta and vice versa. Kind of like Yankees Red Sox. Almost like you can't root for Zenyatta if you are for Rachael and so on.
I'll be honest and say for a while I had mixed emotions whether I wanted Zenyatta to win or lose her comback after Rachael lost earlier in the day.
Then after the fact, I personally realized that both the girls are great for the game and that I was glad that Zenyatta was able to stay perfect. Both have been very good/impressive in their own ways and deserve all the accolades that they have recieved. I hope they both continue to be successful (obviously healthy) as they continue with their 2010 campaigns. It would be nice to see them race, but I would settle at this point if they just continue to race throughout 2010.

10 pnt move up 03-23-2010 12:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kgar311
Where were those races run again? Oh yea at her home track on used condoms
So you are saying it would have been better for her to be managed differently instead of those two races in mind?

You have to play the hand your dealt, it in no way changes the success.

I got news for you, she would have cleaned Music Notes clock at Belmont as well.

Carl Lewis would have won the gold in 84' if they ran the 100 in sand, he was just better then they were.

kgar311 03-23-2010 01:41 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up
So you are saying it would have been better for her to be managed differently instead of those two races in mind?

You have to play the hand your dealt, it in no way changes the success.

I got news for you, she would have cleaned Music Notes clock at Belmont as well.

Carl Lewis would have won the gold in 84' if they ran the 100 in sand, he was just better then they were.
Well the hand dealt to her had 7 cards in it and the rest had 5. All im saying is those races where handed to her on a silver platter. She didn't have to do anything extraordinary to win them, sh*t she never had to leave her own bed. The distaff she may have won but the classic, not a shot outside Cali

10 pnt move up 03-23-2010 01:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kgar311
Well the hand dealt to her had 7 cards in it and the rest had 5. All im saying is those races where handed to her on a silver platter. She didn't have to do anything extraordinary to win them, sh*t she never had to leave her own bed. The distaff she may have won but the classic, not a shot outside Cali
because Gio Ponti was so good on dirt? Who the heck was there, RA had already been zapped and laid up.

kgar311 03-23-2010 02:04 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 10 pnt move up
because Gio Ponti was so good on dirt? Who the heck was there, RA had already been zapped and laid up.
Gio Ponti never would have been in the classic if it was run on conventional dirt, it would of been a whole different field. Not a bunch of dirt and turf specialists running on plastic.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:54 PM.
Page 11 of 15 « First < 910 11 1213 > Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.