Makes me wonder why they interpreted that race as a "she's not ready" instead of "she needed the race".

Jackson tried to micro manage RA just the same as the Moss's with Zenyatta.

The problem was that RA didn't want to race anymore.

I gathered that that was not his idea. Zardana's owner is the one that wanted to take her on, wasn't he? I always thought Shirreffs would've preferred not to do that. It's not like the Mosses had any say.

Complete and utter bullshit.

Says you and RA stopped racing at her best after getting the whip in the Woodward.

RA had enough pure talent to hang in there as a 4yo when she really didnt give it her best effort, but you're the EXPERT.

Obviously I'm sorry to see her go, but I am far from suprised. I thought they were going to retire her when she lost on Oaks day. As unpopular as her connections are, they did give her the opportunity to race and try to regain her 3 year old form. Unfortunately she just couldn't reproduce it. But no one could ever take away from that 3 year old campaign that she ran. She was awesome and I'm glad to say I saw her in person.

You're the one who thinks you can read the horse's mind and tell how she's feeling and what she wants to do. But yeah, I'm the know-it-all.

Rachel stopped running well because she was whipped in the Woodward, according to you. Are you a writer for Disney? Because that's fabricated fairytale presumptive nonsense.

The only thing that bothers me is the timing of the retirement. If she's healthy, she should finish off the year.

Hopefully in the next few years we'll get another matchup that fans want to see and we'll have owners who actually want to see it also. Owners that aren't so wrapped up in their own ego.

The thing that has bothered me all season is I wonder what she would have done if she had stayed in training with Wiggins instead of getting transferred to Asmussen. He lost her over the winter somehow. I'm selfish so I wanted to see her once more, best or not, but she'll always own the best 3yo filly campaign of my lifetime.

It shows another problem with the game when this great filly competes for 3 seasons and never goes to the Breeders' Cup, which is designed (I guess) to showcase the top stars in an end of the year event that should decide championships.

It is no wonder that we never develop new fans in the game. They would observe "So what's up with the healthy defending HOY being retired five weeks before the biggest day in US racing after running all season"?

the bc is not the super bowl or world series of horse racing. there is top racing all year, or should be. in other words, i disagree. the last two years had the bc on poly, which many don't care for, and won't run their horses on. if the bc committee is unhappy with some horses not showing, it's their own fault.

again, they probably felt the classic wasn't for her, and the distaff would please no one. i'm surprised they've lasted this long thru the year with her.

i don't think they thought zardana would win. she was a third string "feel out" the competition entry. the real tip off was when they pulled out of the big race. why pull out because you lost the first race back after a long layoff? answer: they knew rachel was not right before everyone else and losing confirmed their fears......look how they picked her schedule after that. a couple of those races were a joke compared to last year. the horse went from taking on any race to special set up races that she lost half of. the race (at monmouth) that set her up for the personal ensign was a disgrace. "oh, we beat a bunch of claimers lets stretch her out to 10 furlongs, in a grade one." the horse probably should of retired months before that! the "faceoff" race that some are crying about would of been a farce if it happened at all this year.

He did Jackson a favor by sending Zardana. Jackson did not want to face Zenyatta in April. Jackson declined the Apple Blossom at first before Cella painted him in a corner by moving the race back a week. When Jackson did the calculus, a loss to Zardana after a long layoff would be easier to dismiss than a loss to Zenyatta in her second start back.

The most logical early season targets for Rachel were the La Troienne and the Fleur de Lis. Moss could have had some fun by shipping Zenyatta to CD after the Apple Blossom to await Rachel. Instead she returned to SoCal and all this foolishness about the Rockies started.

I've always greatly appreciated Rachel Alexandra. Even when losing my $$ thinking I might have an angle to make betting money on a day that might not be hers.

My biggest stake in the Rachel Alexandra-Zenyatta discussions has been believing many Northeasterners have been remiss in easily dismissing what Zenyatta has done.


My first gut thought is that Jess Jackson has no grapes hanging. No show, No show and now another no show.

However, as an occasional wine drinker I know Jess Jackson does have some grapes....on the vine.....for "the crush."

I do not want to disrespect Rachel Alexandra in any way, but my second gut thought/memory about the connections is of the Sugar Ray Leonard-Roberto Duran fight.....

No mas

Why would it of never happened if both had owners who were true competitors? And do you honestly think zero fans would have been gained from the race? Really, are you kidding? Races that turn semi-interested/casual viewers into diehards are the ones that feature legendary horses pitted against each other. Affirmed and Alydar's great battles, Easy Goer and Sunday Silence, Personal Ensign and Winning Colors 88 distaff, hell even the 90's triple crown rivalries Silver Charm and Free House/Touch Gold/Captain Bodgit, Real Quiet and Victory Gallop. You mean to tell me the best horses in the division facing each and making great races does nothing for the sport at all? Think about it.

Great point.

I'll offer that just getting to a track to see racing and the sport live and in person makes the most fans.

At least I think that's true for most of us here.

I cut my thoroughbred racing fandom teeth as a young kid watching very cheap claiming races with old and sore horses at tracks that no longer exist in Ohio.

And never lost the fever after seeing the happy connections and horse in the Winner's Circle and maybe having a place bet my Mom could collect for me.

That experience makes the special races you note extraordinarily special in my memories.

To grow this sport we just need to get more people out to the track. For a day in the sunshine. Or slop.

Very much like your last idea lol

Was looking to see what Lotta Kim's been up to. I know Rachel's her only surviving foal right now. Turns out she was to be bred back to Medaglia D'Oro this year and as of 12 days ago was in foal. Let's see if she rejects this one. Rachel had to be put on a nurse mare. I don't know if the now deceased Empire Maker colt had to be, but Lotta Kim's ornery so maybe it's just necessary if she extends that to her mothering. LK's the last picture on this blog from Bloodhorse. http://cs.bloodhorse.com/blogs/throu...-the-sale.aspx

I noticed that there was mention here http://horsesracingetc.yuku.com/topic/570 of Lotta Kim maybe passing on a large heart gene to Rachel although it doesn't seem like anybody's checked officially as of last year. I'd love to know. I've always been interested in that particular aspect of pedigrees.

I can barely even stomach Jess Jackson without wanting to vomit.

I can never remember being less interested to talk about horse racing than I've been since I started to bet a lot more races over a lot more circuits with less preparation time.

There's a total burnout factor at midnight - and it's tremendously exciting to think about that New England offensive machine. Moss won't be here forever people. Enjoy New England's offense while you still can.

no doubt it would have been a great event and horse racing would have had some attention that day... but it would still have been just one day. I just disagreed with the sentence of hers that I highlighted (The match-up would have done wonders for the sports popularity and general public opinion, they failed.) not her whole post. The two should have met. But it wasnt going to make anything popular, except maybe for 2 minutes. The gambling aspect is the only way this sport can become popular again... these smart marketers at tracks need to figure out how to make that happen.

Both owners are still terrible for never making it happen... I just feel it like it would have satisfied us horse racing junkies, and not too much else.

you might take it that way ...but heres what i'm saying. rachel is a great race horse....they ran her into the ground and then rested her too long...she never came back (the same)....and she should of retired months ago when all this was apparent. instead we heard ......."we are going to run her into condition until she returns to greatness"....or some simular garbage to that.....its not robbery when you have to run in easy races...for a horse that was that good....its called a shame or a sham......lol

this is very true. hit one bet and you're close to becoming hooked. & it's crazy how beginners luck works. I swear everyone who I've taken to the track was a winner on their first day. (and not from my opinions!!)

Amen.

Strange timing for the announcement, I must say. But then, there were several strange things about the management of her 2010 campaign.

What a 3-year-old season! I'm so thankful I got to see it. Best wishes, Rachel.

Funny that Hal Wiggins just mentioned this on ATR... A shame the "Great" Jess has yet to thank Hal for his work with the filly.

Are you all so blinded by wagering that you don't realize the way to save this sport is to make it appealing to the youth?!?! The value of a lifelong fan with true passion for the thoroughbred racehorse is much more important to this sports future than anything else. There will always be those interested in solely the gambling aspect of this game, there are those horse lovers that could not care even a little about placing a bet. But the real beauty of it all is that when exciting races happen between THE BEST horses your going to see a little bit of both come out in more than the majority of viewers. NO singular race drastically changes the popularity status of this game (I can see where what I said was read as that), but it is more the accumulation of consistent great rivalries and great races that will bit by bit bring more and more fans out of the woodwork. Without getting the two best horses of this decade to race against each other we are going nowhere but backwards.

This is definitely foreshadowing that Mayweather vs. Pacquiao isn't gonna happen either.

If this is the case, then like Steve Haskin just mentioned, why did they work her like they did on Monday? It was like a exhibition for the barn crew and that's it....

I am disappointed as most of us are and think there is more to this than what is being said by Jackson.

Can we start a petition to get iamthelurker to go back to doing what he does best, i.e., lurking?

As great a race as the Woodward was....it zapped her that day and she was never the same horse. ...ask Rags to Riches.

Scat

This is ridiculous. Go back and watch the fleur de lis again from this year and then explain to me why it is so much worse than most of her races last year, or how it is evidence that she "didn't want to race."
Just because she won the Oaks by a huge margin last year doesn't mean she ran better in that race than she did this year going 9f at CD. In fact, she basically ran the exact same race again except this year she ran a little bit faster while also carrying a couple of extra pounds.
Clearly she didn't turn in performances this year that were quite on par with what she did in the Haskell and Woodward last year, but her races this year stack up pretty well with what she did last year at Oaklawn, and in the Oaks and Preakness, etc. I think the idea that she fell out of form dramatically this year is completely wrong.

You have a lot of posts.

Really? My theory is that she was so depressed about Law and Order being taken off the air that she decided to only give 98% effort this year as a form of protest.

Where does this crap come from?

I just don't understand how anybody could possibly surmise that anything but gambling drives horse racing. That's the way it's been forever in this country, and that's the way it's going to be. Having five year olds run burlap sack races inbetween the fifth and sixth at Laurel on a Thursday is all well and good, but besides buying some soda pop and a funnel cake, what the hell do young folks do for racing besides think horses are pretty and get in the way of the folks who actually spend money?

My point was that if you spike someone in the 10-18 age groups interest now, that by the time they are an old grump like yourself, they will confidently say that horse racing is their favorite sport. And from ages 18-90 they will also be a helpful part of the handle just like the rest of us.

How do you get someone interested in a sport for its stars when the best of the best rarely appear on a racetrack more than four or five times a season? Sounds great in theory, but horse racing for the general populace has permanently been reduced to a three race schedule and then a tiny blip for the "world" championships in October/November. Sad, but true.

SAD BUT TRUE IS MY POINT, now with the unchangeable fact that you just stated, wouldn't it be really nice if just ONE of those 4 to 5 races were as big as Z vs. RA would have been.

I gotta mess with clyde once more this week before I go lurking again, so sorry my posts that hold some form of youthful enthusiasm have bothered your oldness slot.

I disagree with the bolded. people who watch races and dont wager on them dont hold much value to this sport IMO. Personally, I dont hold value to this sport because I do not wager much. Everyone involved at the race track makes money only one way.. through wagering.

Though you arent going to get an arguement from me about the stupid owners & trainers these days that dont race the horses and dont create rivalries. It would be very good for the excitement of the people involved in the sport, I just question what it will do to bring in more gamblers. I think its a different world now than the 70's.. dont know if rivalries would bring in the new blood. Besides, things arent going to change so even if there are rivalries.. what are two horses running against each other 4 times and then retiring going to do for anyone?

Showing people that they can make money from this sport is the best way to grow popularity IMO. There are TONS of people out there who love to gamble... poker, sports betting, etc. We somehow need to get their attention. I think that once those action junkies could visit a race track live a few times.. it would create so much new blood. How do we get them to come to the track?