Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Indian Charlie
Just listening to ATR with DrugS and that first caller.
Comparing RA to SBD or R2R is one thing, but GFW and Ruffian? That seems very premature at this point.
I'm pretty confident that the trio of Inside Information, Sardula and Lakeway, when they were right, were better.
I don't see it as a stretch saying that RA is better than SBD, but Doug's assessment that she's better than Rags at distances up to 1 1/4 miles seems pretty dodgy.
One thing people don't take into account is that Rags was making only her sixth start when she won the Belmont, with that being her fourth straight grade one win.
Rachel Alexandra, on the other hand, had six starts just as a two year old. She had far more seasoning by this point in their respective careers and until Saturday was facing far less talented fields of runners than Rags had been.
I'd also like to point out that Rags maiden win going 7f at SA (dirt) was spectacular. I would say RA would have a tactical advantage in a 7-8f race but by no means would she be a lock.
I think had Rags not gotten hurt (or Pletchers barn gone south?) her career would have been something truly special.
|
quite a possibility. sadly, we'll never know.
i think comparing to go for wand or ruffian would be premature. to horses such as personal ensign and genuine risk as well. BUT, it remains to be seen. we know what those horses did, of course rachel is still a work in progress. she's generating lots of excitement, moreso it seems in the press than rags did....the attempt to keep her out of the preakness only produced that much more interest in the race. there is no such thing as bad p.r.
as for facing more talent til saturday, that may be the case. but i thought rachel ran an outstanding race in md. that at least puts her on par with rags at this point, if not slightly ahead.