Fleur de Lis and Foster online?

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by ateamstupid

St Trinians is better than Jessica Is Back? Show me the proof of that. I dare you. Rachel stepped forward today from the last two races. If you can't see that, I worry about your ability to watch races.

If St Trinians isnt better than Jessica is Back (which itself is extremely questionable), i would wager most would agree that Zardana certainly is. No? Show me proof she is not. i dare you.

You can question my race watching ability all you want and no doubt it is certainly questionable (ask youbet!) but what was so much better about that performance yesterday? She faced weaker company than she had previously faced and she was able to draw off in the stretch. In her last race, replace unrivaled belle with jessica is back or that other nag from yesterday and Rachel does the exact same thing. How is this better? Because her speed fig came out higher?

I don't want to get deep in to this whole "who is better" thing. I am just saying that Rachel did what she was supposed to do yesterday and she did it stylishly but you aren't going to be able to tell anything about where she is until you put a real horse in there against her as opposed to the claimers she beat yesterday. Is that not a fair statement?

[RockHardTen1985]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

If St Trinians isnt better than Jessica is Back (which itself is extremely questionable), i would wager most would agree that Zardana certainly is. No? Show me proof she is not. i dare you.

You can question my race watching ability all you want and no doubt it is certainly questionable (ask youbet!) but what was so much better about that performance yesterday? She faced weaker company than she had previously faced and she was able to draw off in the stretch. In her last race, replace unrivaled belle with jessica is back or that other nag from yesterday and Rachel does the exact same thing. How is this better? Because her speed fig came out higher?

I don't want to get deep in to this whole "who is better" thing. I am just saying that Rachel did what she was supposed to do yesterday and she did it stylishly but you aren't going to be able to tell anything about where she is until you put a real horse in there against her as opposed to the claimers she beat yesterday. Is that not a fair statement?

On dirt, I think JIB would destroy ST, but ST is pretty solid on synthetics. Who knows who she comes back today though? She has a lot of issues and is pretty dam crooked.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by RockHardTen1985

On dirt, I think JIB would destroy ST, but ST is pretty solid on synthetics. Who knows who she comes back today though? She has a lot of issues and is pretty dam crooked.

She has never run on dirt. You are assuming that JIB would "destroy" St Trinians based on all of the success Jessica has had in beating Graded Stakes winning foes?

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by dalakhani

If St Trinians isnt better than Jessica is Back (which itself is extremely questionable), i would wager most would agree that Zardana certainly is. No? Show me proof she is not. i dare you.

You can question my race watching ability all you want and no doubt it is certainly questionable (ask youbet!) but what was so much better about that performance yesterday? She faced weaker company than she had previously faced and she was able to draw off in the stretch. In her last race, replace unrivaled belle with jessica is back or that other nag from yesterday and Rachel does the exact same thing. How is this better? Because her speed fig came out higher?

I don't want to get deep in to this whole "who is better" thing. I am just saying that Rachel did what she was supposed to do yesterday and she did it stylishly but you aren't going to be able to tell anything about where she is until you put a real horse in there against her as opposed to the claimers she beat yesterday. Is that not a fair statement?

i disagree. she may have managed a win rather than a scant second, but she seemed better to me yesterday than in her last two as well. we'll see how things go from here.

[dalakhani]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i disagree. she may have managed a win rather than a scant second, but she seemed better to me yesterday than in her last two as well. we'll see how things go from here.

Fair enough Zig. I look younger next to Joan Rivers.

[parsixfarms]

Because of the significantly lower level of competition yesterday, it's hard to truly assess Rachel's performance yesterday versus her first two races this year. Do I think she improved over the Fair Grounds race and the La Troienne? Yes. Do I think "she's back" to where she was last year? No. Because of her running with her head cocked to the side, I still have nagging doubts about where she's at.

I hope that her connections point her to the Ruffian at Saratoga. To bite off something more than that would probably be doing Rachel a disservice at this time.

[Rileyoriley]

Originally Posted by parsixfarms

Because of the significantly lower level of competition yesterday, it's hard to truly assess Rachel's performance yesterday versus her first two races this year. Do I think she improved over the Fair Grounds race and the La Troienne? Yes. Do I think "she's back" to where she was last year? No. Because of her running with her head cocked to the side, I still have nagging doubts about where she's at.

I hope that her connections point her to the Ruffian at Saratoga. To bite off something more than that would probably be doing Rachel a disservice at this time.

Agree! I hope they put Rachel first and not succumb to their egos or the fans wishes.