Summer Bird could be HOY

[Antitrust32]

[quote=CSC]

For me I respect what she has done, you have to be not a fan of racing to not respect her year, I just don't like how it is being portrayed that she beat Summer Bird at 1 1/8 at a point of time when he was still developing and she was at her peak and though we can debate that race till the cows come home, that race far suited her talents more than Summer Bird's. He lost fair and square, okay but he took her on when the Haskell suited her game to a tee, and due to the preemptive strike JJ had in mind for HOY, Summer Bird will not have a chance to avenge that loss. Dubious or not that is the way it is.

He won the Classic Belmont, then "developed" in the Haskell, and then won the Travers & JCGC.

You make no sense. He only "developed" in that race because its the only way you can make your argument.

[slotdirt]

To be fair in recompense, did it really require much developing for Summer Bird to dispatch with Dunkirk, Mine that Bird, and Charitable Man in the Belmont?

[NTamm1215]

I'd love to know how anyone could say that the track playing more towards Rachel Alexandra's strengths helped her beat SB in the Haskell when the fact of the matter is that they were basically eyeball to eyeball around the turn. If anything, he was short from running in two Triple Crown races, but she ran in the Oaks and Preakness herself.

The excuse wagon could go on and on and on but the bottom line is that Rachel Alexandra beat Summer Bird like a drum at Mth. Is he a better horse now? Probably but unfortunately we'll have to wait until next year to find out if he's now better than her.

NT

[dalakhani]

[quote=Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by CSC

He won the Classic Belmont, then "developed" in the Haskell, and then won the Travers & JCGC.

You make no sense. He only "developed" in that race because its the only way you can make your argument.

Is it fair to say that Curlin was a more developed horse at the BC his three year old year than he was at Monmouth a few months earlier? Was Tiznow the same horse at the BC in 2000 as he was in the Pacific classic a few months earlier?

I think you can find plenty of examples, especially in three year olds, where there is rapid development and improvement within just a few months.

[CSC]

[quote=dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Is it fair to say that Curlin was a more developed horse at the BC his three year old year than he was at Monmouth a few months earlier? Was Tiznow the same horse at the BC in 2000 as he was in the Pacific classic a few months earlier?

I think you can find plenty of examples, especially in three year olds, where there is rapid development and improvement within just a few months.

The point is alot of smart handicappers here recognize Summer Bird was a better horse in the Travers and JCGC, showing tractibility, stamina, and finish in those races, the beyers will of 110-111 will back this up. The issue we are addressing here is, is to the crowd that still believe that RA is 7 lengths better than SB is, my point all along as much as people keep wanting to make this a Haskell argument, is that in the present day, looking forward RA would have had an extreme challenge beating Summer Bird today and had she run in the JCGC she would have lost, This is what I am talking about future races, the races to come, not what has happened.

[Antitrust32]

[quote=CSC]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

The point is alot of smart handicappers here recognize Summer Bird was a better horse in the Travers and JCGC, showing tractibility, stamina, and finish in those races, the beyers will of 110-111 will back this up. The issue we are addressing here is, is to the crowd that still believe that RA is 7 lengths better than SB is, my point all along as much as people keep wanting to make this a Haskell argument, is that in the present day, looking forward RA would have had an extreme challenge beating Summer Bird today and had she run in the JCGC she would have lost, This is what I am talking about future races, the races to come, not what has happened.

The thing is, Summer Bird ran a REAL NICE RACE (expecting to get bitched out by fatman for this) in the Haskell. I thought he ran as well there as he did in the Travers. Rachel was hands down spectacular that day, just off the track record on a wet track.. but Summer bird ran his eyeballs out in that race and ran a winning Haskel race, if she hadnt done what she did.

So I just dont see the huge improvement when I thought SB ran very well in the Haskell too. It would be one thing if he would have lost by 30 lengths and ran last, but he was a "real nice colt" in that race too.

[the_fat_man]

[quote=Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by CSC

The thing is, Summer Bird ran a REAL NICE RACE (expecting to get bitched out by fatman for this) in the Haskell. I thought he ran as well there as he did in the Travers. Rachel was hands down spectacular that day, just off the track record on a wet track.. but Summer bird ran his eyeballs out in that race and ran a winning Haskel race, if she hadnt done what she did.

So I just dont see the huge improvement when I thought SB ran very well in the Haskell too. It would be one thing if he would have lost by 30 lengths and ran last, but he was a "real nice colt" in that race too.

SB chased in the Haskell and beat a bunch of nothings and a distance challenged Munnings for place. I give SB his due but he just hasn't beaten a REAL horse.

To put things in proper perspective, look at the thread of best Beyers by 3 year olds this year:

You have Munnings with a bunch of 110s or 111s and you have Zensational with a single 111. In what ****in' UNIVERSE other than BEYER LAND or a biased DIRT TRACK does Munnings do anything but SNIFF Zensational's ass? Or that freak at WO that just won the other day running those insane splits? Where's his 'fast' Beyer?

The old paradigm leads to cluelessness.

[Antitrust32]

[quote=the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

SB chased in the Haskell and beat a bunch of nothings and a distance challenged Munning for place. I give SB his due but he just hasn't beaten a REAL horse.

To put things in proper perspective, look at the thread of best Beyers by 3 year olds this year:

You have Munnings with a bunch of 110s or 111s and you have Zensational with a single 111. In what ****in' UNIVERSE other than BEYER LAND or a biased DIRT TRACK does Munnings do anything but SNIFF Zensational's ass? Or that freak at WO that just won the other day running those insane splits? Where's his 'fast' Beyer?

The old paradigm leads to cluelessness.

You have to understand my perspective, I dont bet much at all. I like to follow dirt and turf racing, and I have yet to follow poly racing. I havent checked out the stats lately, but when poly was in its initial stages, there were full fields galore, which leads to better gambling opportunities, though you disagree with that I think.

So we have two completely different thought processes. You want to make money, and I follow this sport like I do the NFL, and only once and awhile to I make a bet.

[CSC]

[quote=the_fat_man]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

SB chased in the Haskell and beat a bunch of nothings and a distance challenged Munnings for place. I give SB his due but he just hasn't beaten a REAL horse.

To put things in proper perspective, look at the thread of best Beyers by 3 year olds this year:

You have Munnings with a bunch of 110s or 111s and you have Zensational with a single 111. In what ****in' UNIVERSE other than BEYER LAND or a biased DIRT TRACK does Munnings do anything but SNIFF Zensational's ass? Or that freak at WO that just won the other day running those insane splits? Where's his 'fast' Beyer?

The old paradigm leads to cluelessness.

I already posted the context of the Haskell race too many times, look for a 3 year old that just started running on Mar 3rd of this year, he's already accomplished alot. A hell of alot more than many 3 yr olds that have been declared great or atleast very good by some, your argument may have some legitimacy next year though I doubt it, he's the real deal. But realistically who can you expect from a horse to beat after only 9 career races. He will prove this in time.

[CSC]

[quote=Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by CSC

The thing is, Summer Bird ran a REAL NICE RACE (expecting to get bitched out by fatman for this) in the Haskell. I thought he ran as well there as he did in the Travers. Rachel was hands down spectacular that day, just off the track record on a wet track.. but Summer bird ran his eyeballs out in that race and ran a winning Haskel race, if she hadnt done what she did.

So I just dont see the huge improvement when I thought SB ran very well in the Haskell too. It would be one thing if he would have lost by 30 lengths and ran last, but he was a "real nice colt" in that race too.

He just ran in the Belmont(his 5th career race), cut back from 1 1/2 after a breakthru win, never showed any tractibility at that point, was put on the pace to engage Munnings, ran on a track that will most will concede was more beneficial to RA's style than SB's and still hung on for second. Given the context of these things yes it was a good race, but to suggest he is 7 lengths worser to a horse at 1 1/8, a horse that had infinite amounts of exp over SB. Are these excuses no...but in the context in which this discussion has turned the comments of beating SB like a drum, the implication that he is somewhat inferior to her, they do not belong in the same league, this distortion has to be addressed. Did she beat him by 7 in the Haskell yes, it's in the charts why anyone is even addressing this is a waste of time, will she beat him by 7 again or had they met in the JCGC Sat, I say not a chance she would have.

[CSC]

[quote=Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by CSC

He won the Classic Belmont, then "developed" in the Haskell, and then won the Travers & JCGC.

You make no sense. He only "developed" in that race because its the only way you can make your argument.

You fail to understand he is a better horse today(present) than he was in the Haskell or Belmont, what is hard to accept or understand about this from a 3 yr old colt that broke his Mdn in Mar of this yr? Again not to reiterate The JCGC and The BC Classic is at 1 1/4 a he distance he has already proven to be very adept at running at. RA hasn't and I suspect she will have to one day so that Jess can have his legacy preserved for her.

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

You make no sense.

Hey, that's what I said! Stop stealing my stuff!

Do you like though his Macho Again analogy where he completely disregards what happened in those two races?

And his adamant refusal to address that?

[CSC]

Originally Posted by Indian Charlie

Hey, that's what I said! Stop stealing my stuff!

Do you like though his Macho Again analogy where he completely disregards what happened in those two races?

And his adamant refusal to address that?

On the refusal to address issues, I wrote you a nice long reply yesterday you ignored, you out of smart replies? Other than 'you make no sense'. Just brillant!

[Indian Charlie]

Originally Posted by CSC

On the refusal to address issues, I wrote you a nice long reply yesterday you ignored, you out of smart replies? Other than 'you make no sense'. Just brillant!

I must have missed it.

I guess I'm not as brillant as you.

[CSC]

[quote=Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by CSC

He won the Classic Belmont, then "developed" in the Haskell, and then won the Travers & JCGC.

You make no sense. He only "developed" in that race because its the only way you can make your argument.

Okay let's use just say he is a different horse today than he was then and that he has developed into a better horse. If you didn't understand the jist of my comment, though I thought it was obvious, my regrets.

[Antitrust32]

[quote=CSC]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

Okay let's use just say he is a different horse today than he was then and that he has developed into a better horse. If you didn't understand the jist of my comment, though I thought it was obvious, my regrets.

Just ignore that post of mine and check out reply #163. I put my feelings into words better there.