Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cannon Shell
It has nothing to do with her "greatness" or any measure of it. It has to do with the fact that she is an overwhelming fav over the field she is facing. Running a overwhelming fav doesnt make you bold in my opinion. It makes you smart. This is a pretty logical spot for her as was the Haskell. The fact that it is against males is interesting and a bit historic but come on, this isnt like taking on Mike Tyson his his prime.
|
Chuck nothing has been logical in her campaign. They bought a filly for a pile of money. Instead of keeping her in company that brought her to a race that she whipped the KY Derby winner, Santa Deby winner running by far the toughest race. Then they go back to the girls were she is suppose to race and she crushes albeit zero but she crushes. Then off to the HASKELL and when has this been the logical next step for the Oak's and Goose winner? She beats the Belmont winner who comes back to validate his Grade 1 abilty with a strong winning run in the Travers. So back to her logical campaign after the Haskell they prep a 3 year old filly to race against older handicapped horse. UHM how the F is that logical? You are confussing logic from giving your superstar every opportunity to do what very few of her breed have ever attempted nevermind succeeded at. You want to suggest that you feel that as a horseman and given your take on Rachel's abilty that you feel she will have no problem handling older handicap horses and that while this is rare it speaks to both her immense abilty and the subpar nature of the current handicap division fine , but logical NO that simply is a very poor characterization.