Grade 1's are kind of irrelevant when it comes to these two phenoms. They practically write Grade 1's just for these two.

i'm just mentioning that for hoy voting purposes. it's a shame zenyatta is most likely thru, she may have 'done enough'. but i'd like to see her get the win streak record.

And to add to that, trained by Steve Assmussen.

If they both meet in the Classic next year at CD, and if Zenyatta can maintain her form at age 6, I think people will realize just who the better filly truly is and was.

I'd take Rachel's Haskell over Zenyatta's Classic six days a week and twice on Sunday.

Thats a might big IF but hope it happens.
I'd say there is a way greater chance you'll never see either run in another race again.

Do you have a dart-board at home with a picture of Rachel Alexandra?

NT

Obcourse I don't, but I also don't feel questioning a horse even if she is loved by many if not all, a personal attack. It is a single opinion. However I have my reasons, let's see how she progresses from 3 - 4, she ran some awfully fast races from a numbers perspective that may be hard to repeat and regarding the Woodward in my opinion she looked very ordinary. Asmussen is an unknown with returning horses if one wants to use Curlin as an example, I don't rely on beyers as gospel so maybe I look at these 2 differently, one can hope both horses will meet in a race down the line. At this point barring RA improving as a 4 yr old I would say Zenyatta is a better horse, if they had both run in the classic whether it was held at CD or SA, I have no problem saying Zenyatta would have beaten her at 1 1/4.

I honestly just wish we had seen Zenyatta on dirt more often. Winning 13 of 14 races on a third surface just doesn't do much for me. Her Apple Blossom, however, was outstanding. Too bad Moss/Shireffs were chicken for the rest of her career.

Seriously do you have a mental deficiency? She was challenged by every single horse in the race and put them all way. Not only did she do this while sprinting the whole way she had to deal with a fresh Macho Again who did nothing but loaf he first 7 panels and uncorked a huge run at her. She dispatched every horse in the race and still didn't let MA go by here after the wire. Your bias for west coast racing and running on rubber and wax is getting in the way of allowing you to think clearly.

I said it earlier, I think she can be even more dominant on dirt. I agree with the assertion that Sheriff's keeping her on poly has actually kept fans from seeing how much better she could be. Look at her pedigree, and synth beyers are notoriously unreliable and unflattering, if she gets a chance next year who knows where the sky is with her.

I've read your posts and there is only one person here who has a mental deficiency.

You're out of your mind. All of your arguments are way out in left field. I really think you need to look into talking to a shrink, you've officially lost it.

Wrong

Wrong again

Can we please stop this she was "sprinting the whole way" nonsense when referring to Rachel's Woodward? Yes, the fractions that she set were fast for a 3YO filly, but she was running in a Grade I race for older horses going 9F at Saratoga. In that historical context, her opening quarter was fast, but her first half and 6F splits were about "average" for such races at Saratoga this decade (and there were 9F races run by NY-breds such as Future Prospect and Fiddlers Afleet this year at Saratoga that were faster to the half).

2002 Whitney (Left Bank): 23.0, 45.4, 1:09.1

2003 Whitney (Medaglia D'oro): 23.2, 46.4, 1:10.2

2004 Whitney (Roses In May): 22.3, 45.1, 1:08.4

2005 Whitney (Commentator): 23.2, 46.2, 1:09.3 (Ironically, many of the same people who have tried to knock Commentator on this board by arguing that he got away with soft fractions in his match-up with Saint Liam are stating that Rachel Alexandra survived a suicidal pace.)

2006 Whitney (Invasor): 23.0, 47.0, 1:11.1

2006 Woodward (Premium Tap): 23.3, 47.1, 1:11.4

2007 Whitney (Lawyer Ron): 23.4, 47.1, 1:10.1

2007 Woodward (Lawyer Ron): 23.1, 46.2, 1:10.2

2008 Whitney (Commentator): 24.0, 47.3, 1:11.4

2008 Woodward (Curlin): 22.4, 46.1, 1:09.3

2009 Whitney (Bullsbay): 23.2, 46.1, 1:10.0

2009 Woodward (Rachel Alexandra): 22.4, 46.2, 1:10.2

Are those fractions the winner's fractions or the race fractions? If it's the latter, I think that argument is spurious, at best.

They are the race fractions, many of which were attended or set by the eventual winner. Only Invasor, Curlin and Bullsbay won either of these races as "deep closers."

Many of Which? not so much buddy, she fought off EVERY horse in the race and every challenge that came at her. Which means every single horse folded in the race except her because of the PACE.