Please god let them put this filly away for 3 months

[miff]

Paul,

If that filly is ever going to be in jeopardy it may be when she plants and sticks(instead of giving) on those garbage synth surfaces that robs horses of their brilliance.That was my point in not running.

You must be kidding as to what TGJB will say regarding when her next race should be.My guess is that JB has her somewhere between giving her last rites this morning,to breaking down in the Belmont.


Mike

[Silver Charm]

No he just put in a couple of normal efforts.

Like the filly did yesterday......

[jimbo66]

Mike,

That is a classic.   Very funny. \"Richie-Bee-like\".  Having a hard time explaining to wife and daughter right now, why I am cracking up laughing, over my keyboard.

Paul,

You should know what JB will think though, seriously.  He talked about watching the race \"wincing\" or \"cringing\".  He is at the head of the movement that all fast horses are in danger after big efforts.  Let\'s let JB make the figure for yesterday but it has to be a backward move off the negative 4.  Everybody will call it a backward move and she becomes a huge bet-against in the Belmont, if she runs.  I will bet against her too, but not because yesterday was a backward move.  I really don\'t think it was, no matter what the figure is.  She was pushed hard early, carried wide, ran a very legitimate pace, opened up 4 lengths on the field, then got tired late, over a track her jockey says she didn\'t handle.  Compare the fractions she ran with the fractions in other races on the card.  She ran a very legitimate pace and got no breather.  The only \"breaks\" she may have caught were 1)  not a single \"stalker\" in the race fired.  This race seemed to be filled with quality stalkers but not one of them fired  and 2)  Mine that Bird got a bad trip from Mike Smith.  I won\'t say bad ride because I didn\'t see a path inside he could have taken, but nonetheless he got stopped approaching the far turn and then talk the overland route and she was gone when he got through.   But even those \"breaks\" were small ones.  First off, the stalkers may not have fired because they had to chase her and she ran them off their feet.  And as for MTB not getting through, it is true, but he got the best of the fact that she did all the work on the front end, while wide, while he conserved energy at the back of the pack.  It is very doubtful that she gets pressed that hard in the Belmont early, unless Quality Road makes it back to the race.  

She ran fast all through the race, proved she could beat the best colts, not just the rats she ran against in the Oaks.  

Paul, sorry but I also hope she skips the BC. California made a huge mistake with synthetics and they need to correct it.  Having the stars skip the event may hasten the correction.

[Frank]

I can\'t imagine a scenario where RA would skip the BC excepting injury of course. Her Keeneland race as a 2YO removes any doubt that she can run on the synthetic surface. I look forward to a showdown with a hopefully still undefeated Zenyatta. Sure would add some juice to the Friday card.

[jimbo66]

Frank,

You are probably right and me talking about the BC is misplaced today anyway.  

I am reading all over this board today about her \"bounce\" yesterday.  She didn\'t bounce yesterday.  Not sure how JB will see the race, Beyer paired her up.  She was pretty wide first turn, so if JB sees track speed the same way Beyer did, the most she moved back was a couple points.  When you look at the OTHER factors in yesterday\'s race, like the race shape, energy exerted throughout the race, and increase in the level of competition she faced, it was NO BOUNCE.

[P-Dub]

miff Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Paul,
>
> If that filly is ever going to be in jeopardy it
> may be when she plants and sticks(instead of
> giving) on those garbage synth surfaces that robs
> horses of their brilliance.That was my point in
> not running.
>
> You must be kidding as to what TGJB will say
> regarding when her next race should be.My guess is
> that JB has her somewhere between giving her last
> rites this morning,to breaking down in the
> Belmont.
>
>
> Mike


Mike,

You\'re saying she will injure herself on Pro-Ride because she may plant and stick?? What makes you think that will happen??

Still laughing over your second point.

[miff]

Paul,

I have some friends who race out there and some of their horses don\'t handle those surfaces too well as it is VERY different from dirt surfaces.RA did win on KEE Poly but Pro Ride is not the same, nor is cushion.

I\'m sure she\'ll go there, this owner wants to run everywhere.


Mike

[BitPlayer]

Jimbo -

Hard for me to believe she didn\'t do what TGJB said was likely in his comments:  go back a few points (maybe 3 or 4) and still win.  I think Mine That Bird gets about what she did (by virtue of the added 5 pounds) and the others aren\'t that far behind.  If she paired the negative 4, it would be raining negative numbers.

Borel\'s comments after the race about her preferring a harder surface were interesting to me.  If Belmont is indeed \"Big Sandy\", she might not find it to her liking.

[TGJB]

Miff and Jimbo-- So let\'s see...

Last year, when Rachel had run 5 times and not won a stake, I recommended her purchase to four clients, telling them that she was as good already as Stardom Bound, and the favorite to win the Kentucky Oaks.

Before the Preakness, when some were scoffing at bounce theory, and others were predicting she would bounce to the sky (and wondering why I did not also), I predicted the most likely eventuality was a backward move of a few points that would make her about 50/50 to win. I haven\'t done the figure, but judging from who was where at the wire (including Lukas\' horse), I would say I nailed it, and sure enough, she won, but not by a lot.

So you figure the right idea this time is to dismiss my comments about her future. Good thinking. And when something goes wrong with her before or after her next race-- and it will-- we will hear the words \"Kool-Aid\" again. Her best chance to avoid injury is either a) to pass the Belmont and not run again until late July or August, or b) protect herself in it if she goes, like Big Brown did. If she makes it to the gate and runs hard to the wire, you won\'t be seeing her again for quite a while.

The most signifigant comment on this board since the race was made by Covello about Borel\'s comments about her handling the track, and I thought exactly the same thing the second he said it.

Here\'s what Borel knows-- that she strode out differently in the Preakness. Here\'s what he CONCLUDED-- that she was not comfortable (undoubtedly correct), and that the reason had to do with the surface. If you knew how many times I have had trainers tell me that (or report jockey\'s saying that) when it was either a) an obvious bounce situation, or b) there was something wrong with the horse that showed up soon...

This is the third (and last) time I am going to say this here. The most likely explanation for horses getting hurt a race or two after giant efforts is that the effort causes stress, which causes discomfort (like I felt after playing golf for the first time in 9 months last Tuesday), which causes a change in mechanics to avoid the discomfort (like I did nine months ago because of two golf induced knee surgeries), which then causes an injury somewhere else. Except in my case changing my swing just resulted in my elbow swelling up and being frozen at a right angle for three weeks, in the case of a pitcher changing arm angle just results in an arm injury. With a thousand pound animal moving 40 miles an hour and coming down on something really small, the mechanics have to be perfect. If a horse changes his (or her) stride because of discomfort, the results can be catastrophic.

[miff]

\"So you figure the right idea this time is to dismiss my comments about her future. Good thinking. And when something goes wrong with her before or after her next race-- and it will-- we will hear the words \"Kool-Aid\" again. Her best chance to avoid injury is either a) to pass the Belmont, or b) protect herself in it if she goes. If she makes it to the gate and runs hard to the wire, you won\'t be seeing her again for quite a while\"

JB,

From 35 years around the track I know that horses get hurt all the time for a VARIETY of reasons. If RA gets hurt/ill, that will not be surprising to me. You seem to think that only \"efforts\" cause problems, that is not correct.I never said that a big \"effort/s\" is not ONE of the causes that horses go bad, but it\'s not the only reason.

I do not share your myopic view on this regarding her backing up, fig wise. You have ignored the fact that she \"warred\" with a fast colt for most of the race causing her to slow late, skewing final time.I don\'t buy that she backed up SOLELY because of her previous effort, big league race dynamics had just as much to do with it.

Mike

[miff]

The Day After: Still Raving About Rachel The Day After

Borel and Steve Asmussen, who took over the training of the Medaglia d\'Oro filly less than two weeks earlier after owner Jess Jackson purchased the winner of the Kentucky Oaks (gr. I), both took time out from their daily business at Churchill to meet with the media. During the  interview, the pair could not contain their euphoria over Rachel Alexandra’s performance the previous day.

“She’s one of a kind,” Borel said, noting that the filly overcame a lot to win the second leg of the Triple Crown. “If she had gotten beat yesterday, I would not have been disgusted. She was racing against the best horses in the country and it was over a track she didn’t like.”

Borel said the filly had to stand in the gate an unusually long time as Big Drama threw his rider and had to be reloaded in the Pimlico starting gate. When the gates opened, Rachel Alexandra stumbled slightly before Borel settled her into the lead in the 1 3/16-mile race. Finally, Borel said the track was looser than the filly prefers, since the Pimlico maintenance crew did not water it as much as normal because they had been expecting rain prior to the race.

“Yesterday, you did not see the real Rachel Alexandra,” Borel said. “She struggled so much over the track. But she showed what she’s made of. She got the job done. God knows what’s next.”

Asmussen was equally bullish in his praise of Rachel Alexandra, noting “She ran an incredible race. We are extremely proud of Rachel Alexandra. She is truly a special horse in her own right. He (Jackson) was correct in his assumption she could handle the boys.”

The trainer, who also conditioned two-time Horse of the Year Curlin for Jackson and Midnight Cry Stable, said he was concerned that Rachel Alexandra was on the lead as the Preakness unfolded with fast early fractions. In the end, however, the filly won as a result of her ability and Borel’s ride.

“The only reason she won was because she was good enough and because Calvin gave her a chance to win,” Asmussen said.

The trainer said Rachel Alexandra left Baltimore early Sunday, May 17, and was back in her Churchill Downs barn by noon. She said she recovered from the race without any problems, but was non-committal about a possible start in the June 6 Belmont Stakes (gr. I).

“I don’t think there is the sense of urgency now that it was yesterday,” Asmussen said.

He added that he believes Rachel Alexandra is the front-runner for Horse of the Year honors and that the rest of her 2009 campaign will be structured around solidifying that status.

Asmussen said a decision on whether filly will be pointed toward the Belmont will be made as a result of an evaluation on how she came out of the Preakness. He said the filly will return to the track for some light exercise May 20, and would have her next workout Monday, May 25.

[TGJB]

Miff-- use the search engine on this site and find me one time I said huge figures are the ONLY thing causes injury.

What you have said many times contradicts what you just said. You have said that the idea that huge efforts cause health problems is \"drinking the Kool-Aid\".

Nobody said that\'s the only thing that causes problems. I didn\'t even say they ALWAYS cause problems-- I said it\'s a matter of percentages, and the percentages go way up. And I showed you by way of example my record on calling this in advance.

Let\'s do this. We\'ll both pick 10 stake horses that are taking a regular turn and don\'t have a history of soundness issues. Neither of us will talk to the connections of the horses, or rely on anything but handicapping. The idea will be to predict which ones develop a problem in their next two starts that causes a layoff of 4 months or more after one of the next two starts. You don\'t get to pick horses that have recently run a new top of at least 2 points, I only do. I\'ll bet I beat you by at least two. It will probably take at least a year to play out. Want to bet? My first pick is RA if she doesn\'t get a break now.

[miff]

\"What you have said many times contradicts what you just said. You have said that the idea that huge efforts cause health problems is \"drinking the Kool-Aid\".


JB,

For the last time, huge efforts \"ALONE\" and that CERTAINLY has been your mantra.  

Since you are in a betting mood, I\'ll make a better one. For every horse that goes bad,4 MONTHS, because they ran  negative figs according to you,I\'ll identify TWO that went bad in the same time frame that never ran negative anything. NY racing only,name the bet, this can be arranged easily.


Mike

[Uncle Buck]

I found it interesting that MTB did not pass Rachel in the post Preaknes gallop out.

[TGJB]

MIff-- if you are willing to predict them in advance, you are on for as much as you want. If you are talking about naming them after they get hurt, that would be some bet-- I get the few that run giant figures, you get everybody else. Wait, let me think about it...

Let me make clear what I offered you again-- we each identify 10 horses, I HAVE TO BEAT YOU BY TWO. What more could you ask?

\"Only huge efforts\" and \"huge efforts by themselves\" are two different things. Yes, huge efforts, especially when not given extra time following, are far more likely to cause an injury than lesser efforts. But NO, I never said they are the only thing that causes injury. And you know it.

Suggest you drop it.