This year is not what is being discussed. A couple of people have suggested that Stonestreet was somehow foolish for racing Rachel Alexandra in a demanding manner last season because it may have burned her out as a 4yo.

Actually, how many people thought Zenyatta would race in 2010 last fall? When did Charles Cella announce the $5 million purse, mid February or so?

Nobody said that Zenyatta isn't a formidable opponent, or even the most formidable opponent Rachel Alexandra will ever face...but does that mean Rachel Alexandra should have stayed in the barn at 3 to await a possible showdown?

No...because there wouldn't be talk of a showdown if Rachel Alexandra hadn't built up her reputation last spring and summer. Zenyatta would have run in the Ladies Classic and would be in a breeding shed somewhere right now...

I believe this year was discussed in reference ot getting ready on a momnet's notice ... I cvertainly did not bring up last year.

No one-- least of all me suggested anythinbg about Rachel staying in the barn at any time...

And no one knows for sure if Zenyatta would have run in the Ladies Classic as you suggest last year ...

I believe the AB matchup was at least several weeks before mid-February ..

It gave Rachel about 2 months for a prep race and the actual race ...

I really do not mind favoritism, but not at the expense of exaggeration free comments .

Do you have Asperger's?

Sorry. You quoted my earlier post so I took that to mean you were discussing its content, which had everything to do with 2009.

Again, people mentioned she was mismanaged. If that doesn't refer to her 2009 campaign then I guess the 6 month layoff was a bad idea?

If Rachel Alexandra wasn't a heavy favorite for HOY, it was highly likely Zenyatta would have been in the Ladies Classic.

Nope. February 4. At which time Jackson said she wouldn't be ready.

It gave her just over 1 month (that is, if you are allowing for a prep race).

What did I exaggerate exactly?

Do you have recto-cranial inversion ???

There may be therapy ...

Not to be nit-picky, but mid-Feb is not the first week ...

Jackson then changed his mind .

I would say " a moment's notice " is poetic license, if not exaggeration .

Elsewhere is speculation--which we all do--like Z would have been off to the breeding shed, if not for this year's " challenge " of beating Rachel .

They lost HOY, but as is said---HOY is not gotten with ONE race or beating ONE horse .

Is it difficult to consider that a five year old mare that may have been slated for the shed, looked too good to retire ??? And deserved another shot at HOY?

Had Z gotten HOY--I think she probably would have, but since she did not--all factors considered, it was not too much of a stretch to bring this very lightly raced, late maturing mare back at six to try for HOY---NOT necessarily to beat Rachel exclusively ...

No I don't.

Now answer my question, Corky.

OK bucko--here is the answer--no ...

But I have other more benign maladies -addictions to expensive breeches, Persian rugs, and old pottery ..

Thanks for your concern ...

Yes, that is nit-picky. Especially since you said it was "several weeks before" mid-February.

This was the instance where I'd agree Rachel Alexandra was mismanaged...in 2010.

It's called hyperbole. As you hint at by "poetic license", it is not meant to be taken literally.

I never said she came out of retirement strictly to face Rachel Alexandra. In fact, I basically said the same thing you just did when I said if Rachel Alexandra was a non-contender for HOY last year (eg by being "well managed"), Zenyatta would have won the award and rode off into the sunset...

Do you just make this stuff up? You make a statement at least provide some sound logic or fact for it.

I must be getting soft because reading this stuff just kind of rolls off my back now. You just had to know the excuse machine would be in full mode when they withdrew her from the Apple Blossom. Let's face it she had a very good prep, all systems were apparently all go with a month to fine tune her until JJ got cold feet because he is so concerned how history will look at Rachel if she lost again, the end result he doesn't run her. Too scared to win, too scared to lose.

Laughable. As if the converse (her running in the BC Classic was a foregone conclusion) was even remotely possible. She was cross-entered for both races, right? Considering how conservative and obvious they were campaigning her for the better part of 2 years, why would they stray from the straight and narrow if nothing was on the line?

How about the heavy politicing for HOY less than 24 hours after the race?

Shirreffs:

"She has a great shot to win the Ladies Classic, which has a very large purse. But the Classic is an opportunity to try to garner Horse of the Year honors, and to not run her when she’s doing so well would be a mistake."


"There was so much at stake," Shirreffs said. "All of the fans wanted to see her win and Horse of the Year was on the line."

[Shirreffs] noted that many East Coast-based writers, who are the ones who will decide the Horse of the Year question, got their first chance to see Zenyatta in person for the first time.

Were you reading at all? 10 Point's post is challenging the contention that Zenyatta only ran in the BC Classic because HOY was on the line, nothing regarding 2010 or the Apple Blossom is being debated at the moment.

Yeah, CSC, JJ really showed his ass here.

A real 'sportsman' would've run her back in the Blossom and taken a shot at the dual Breeders’ Cup champ … especially with 5000 large on the table.

Guy said he wasn't afraid to lose … until he lost … LOL

Time to lock this idiotic thread.

This.

Because they were certainly racing her all year as though conquering new worlds was their goal, or something that had even once crossed their mind.

Just once?

Riiiiight.

AMEN...I cringe when I see it at the top of the forum everyday. Same people making the same tired arguments while refusing to consider the other side's merits. Sounds like a bunch of politicians.

:tro: :tro: :tro:

What's great about your smugness is that of the 200-odd posts on this thread, you single handedly came up with the most idiotic post (your only contribution, of course--other than this final gem) of all:

I expect Zenyatta to lose [the Apple Blossom] anyway.

couldn't agree more...

No surprise that the RA fans want to torch this thread


Chicken Alexander … lol

The irony of this post is that of the 4 fascists who want the thread locked (because its too difficult to exercise some self-control and pass over a thread title that's in bolded blue), the only one who actually contributed in a sensible manner is a Zenyatta supporter.

Didn't realize they ran the Apple Blossom yet.

I am assuming the mantle of sensibility --and I am a Z fan, though I respect Rachel and appreciate her accomplishments..

I am essentially in agreement with your earlier post-with some qualifications, but they are not all that important and probably are nit picky...

I am curious why you would think Z will lose the AB though ...

Has logic consistently been applied by Jess Jackson to his decisions or, heck, his sentence construction? Did I miss something? He wanted that earnings record with Curlin once it came within reach and why wouldn't anybody? Protecting his interests in RA & Curlin at the same time ain't unreasonable. Just because you wouldn't do it, doesn't mean it wouldn't be done by Jess Jackson. It'd be bad enough to lose to Z, worse to watch her then eclipse Curlin's $$ record on top of everything, which she'd eventually do. Earnings records have mattered for years. It mattered with Citation.

As for unbeaten records, uh yeah that matters too. Just ask the folks with Pepper's Pride. There's gonna be a Tiznow-Pepper's Pride young'un this year because of it (probably is already, she was bred last March). The racing media sure reported on it like it was a thing to be impressed by. The Mosses didn't exactly throw caution to the wind all of last year. Z's campaign up to the Classic was relatively conservative. They sure seemed to care at least a bit about her unbeaten record, unless I missed something. Farms promote stallions like Seattle Slew and Smarty Jones as having done big things on the TC trail while unbeaten. It comes up virtually every time some talks about Personal Ensign. But yeah, who cares?

As for RA fans v. Zenyatta fans. Sorry folks, I consider myself a supporter of both horses. This ain't either/or. Calm down.

No, you weren't one of the 4 who wanted the thread locked.

No, that was randallscott. He said the thread was "idiotic". His throwaway post predicting a loss in the Apple Blossom way at the start went a long way in validating that description.

Sorry---I am tired tonight--it was Randall .

Wish all the Z vs R squabbles were this civilized as both mares have much to offer racing .....

Let's be clear, I made a general statement that anybody that would campaign their top class horses with those things (ie money records, unbeaten streaks) in mind is making a mistake. Now, did I disagree with you and say Jess Jackson wouldn't do it?

Nope.

Yeah, they wouldn't have had a shot to breed her to Tiznow if she only won 18 out of 19.

Pepper's Pride lost the Tiznow foal in November according to the DRF, by the way.

Well, that settles that.

That's the whole point of my post, if you had actually bothered to read it for the actual content, rather than coming to the ridiculous conclusion that I must be blasting you because I didn't blindly agree with what you posted.

The point was that altering a horse's campaign for a money record or an unbeaten career is a foolish enterprise, that IMO, takes away from the horse's legacy. Did Seattle Slew or Smarty Jones skip the Belmont and point for the Ohio Derby to preserve their unbeaten streaks?

Clearly not a supporter of literacy, however. I like how you tell everyone else to "calm down" when you completely lost your wad reacting (and misinterpreting) to a single sentence.

I agree, we're blessed to have both of them. I still haven't gotten a Triple Crown, but I've gotten these ladies radiating talent and charisma race after race, and I'm pretty grateful.

What do you think happened to those collector cards they were gonna hand out? Did they ever print them? They'd actually be great souvenirs even without RA & Z meeting in the Apple Blossom. Hardly "Dewey Defeats Truman" but interesting racing pieces, esp. if they have an epic showdown later.

Apparently they did ...

Some people I know got some, and there are some already on Ebay ...

Agreed. For what its worth, my criticisms are directed at the connections of the two horses. And while I criticize the Mosses to no end, that doesn't mean I support Jess Jackson lock, stock, and barrel.

If there was one thing worthwhile in Merlinsky's post above, it was that this does not have to be an "either/or" issue.

Though a lot of obnoxious posters on this board seem to think, and presume, so.

The either/or or black/white dichotomy--as I call it is not exclusive to arguing about horses--it is all pervasive ...

I also have had " problems " with both connections, and while I do not support the Mosses entirely, I find Jackson more of a public relations shill type ...

This isn't actually an effort to go point by point and call you obnoxious, I swear. I know breaking it down can look like that, and I think we've gotten caught up in the classic 'misinterpretation of tone on the internet' situation.

That's just it, it's not useless to everyone even if it's just sentimental for some folks. If it's your horse, and you bet on your horse, I could imagine it mattering from a financial standpoint. Don't some of these owners drop a lot of cash wagering on their own horses? Thinking your horse is invincible or is in a soft spot could affect your wallet.

Regarding Pepper's Pride's foal, that's very sad. My point with her you gotta wonder if going 6-7-6 entirely in New Mexico would get her a date with Tiznow--her record demonstrated consistently, soundness, talent. Not that constantly being on the board doesn't. This just raises it to another level. The efforts of her team (and of Zenyatta's) is also highlighted by the achievement because it's no small thing to do. The record could be a feather in the cap of the trainer that conditioned a horse to do it, yes? It doesn't matter what level, it's something that gets a trainer press, and I would hope getting good press attracts people to their stable. The aura of being a winner, evident horsemanship, etc.

You said "The only thing more useless and more circumstantial than an unbeaten record is the earnings record.", I felt it was easily understood. Perhaps not. The words you chose seem to carry an implied :rolleyes: and it felt like a dismissal of my thought as foolish. You did quote me, and reading your remark with my quote it sure came across as snarky. Did you not mean for that tone to exist in that sentence? All you need to do is say "I think you misunderstood me."

Well of course they didn't skip the Belmont, because a Triple Crown is even more important to them. They did mention it on ads though, I've read them. Why do that if they didn't think it would matter? I don't disagree that it can damage a legacy, although I do wonder how much damage it does to Zenyatta since she very nearly won Horse of the Year in spite of it. I agree with you that a legacy can be stronger when there's not a protectionist attitude. (I agreed with you! Let's hug!) It bugged me when Azeri could've branched out and didn't, and I will still wonder what could've been with Zenyatta even though she's won a BC Classic. How weird for that not to be enough.

I offer you this not as a counterpoint (since we've clearly crossed wires) but as a source of amusement--I have a B.A. in English. ;) Making observations about tone conveyed in text is something I've had to do many a time. I don't worry as much about proper grammar and punctuation on a message board. Clearly I've used my powers of analysis for evil.

:o Aw shucks. A quasi-compliment.

This thread woulda been 21 pages long if KG was still around.

Oyy.

Zardana ducks Zenyatta!

If Zenyatta was truly the best, why is Shirreffs afraid of running Zardana?

Oh well, it's a conflict of interest probably. If Zardana was kept in the race, Shirreffs could have very well undertrained Zardana somehow because his heart is set on Zenyatta winning.

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/hor...ory?id=5032043

"The Apple Blossom field will not include Zardana or Rachel Alexandra, one-two finishers in the New Orleans Ladies at Fair Grounds on March 13. Shirreffs and owner Arnold Zetcher said Friday that Zardana will skip the Apple Blossom on April 9 and point instead for the Grade 2 La Troienne Stakes on April 30 at Churchill Downs. Zardana "could use a little time off," Zetcher said. He and Shirreffs also believe the 1 1/16-mile distance of the La Troienne suits Zardana more than the 1 1/8-mile Apple Blossom. "

Zardana should be just as sharp as Rachel. I guess neither are quite ready for the Apple Blossom.

Exactly right. The 3rd stringer in the barn beats the reigning horse of the year, pretty much GUTS her

BUT here (and on other forums)

it's really all about how the connections want to PROTECT a horse that's 15 for 15 ; in this case by not running her caddy against her. :rolleyes:

Nothing like emulating Mike the Eunuch.

There clearly are ducking Zenyatta to protect Zenyatta's record

Zetcher has been quoted as wanting "to be in the big races" for the past month.

And now all of a sudden he changes his mind and decides a race with a lesser purse at Churchill is more important?

It's more likely Shirreffs had a talk with him or that Zetcher realized it would be a conflict of interest

...wow:confused:

Do people really think Zardana is a good horse, or is it she caught a great horse on a bad day and setup?