Zenyatta-Outstanding

[smalltimer]

Cougar 2 had won 3 Grade 1\'s.

[nyc1347]

Ok he ran a great race in the Marlboro Cup but then he reacted off that effort next out and failed at that time losing 2 out of 3 dirt races (lost the whitney prior to Marlboro Cup and woodward right after the marlboro) so they switched him to turf to compromise.  Thats not the consistency I would look for when labeling a horse the best of all time.

Ghostzapper went undefeated from the Vosbourgh in 2003 all the way on to the end of his career in 2005 stretching out in distance AND got faster as he went longer beating some very fast horses.  

Fun fact:  Frankel was actually talking about throwing GZ on turf in 2005 but after the injury they just retired him.

[smalltimer]

Food for thought.  
IF Rachel and Zenyatta make it to the starting gate for the Classic, between them, without either winning another race (unlikely), they have 16 SIXTEEN Grade 1 wins between them.  Pretty strong stuff there.

[TGJB]

Riva Ridge, Onion, Key To The Mint, Cougar II, Kennedy Road.

[nyc1347]

JB

Taking your mention of the Marlboro Cup as a great win and him beating really good horses.. and me countering that by stating his losses prior and after that specific race.. wouldnt this most likely prove a little more inconsistency and vulnerability for him at this racing time against his competition at that age? (not being able to always run tops that were good enough to win, etc) Just because he popped a very nice race against nice horses he wasnt consistent enough to follow that up against the same competition.

Assuming you agreed that he was more vulnerable and inconsistent when he got older then the REAL question i have would be.. who exactly did he beat that was relevant during those triple crown races and the ones he ran at a younger age when he was proven to be MORE consistant and less vulnerable against his given competition?  

I mean we are comparing him to GZ who got better and better in time and remained undefeated through ALL the varibles, races and distances he encountered.

[richiebee]

NYC:

This doesn\'t mean anything, just food for thought.

In a few months, 37 years after he last raced, a movie will be released featuring
Secretariat. The winsome Diane Lane will be playing Penny Chenery.

Who are they getting to play the late Bobby Frankel in the Ghostzapper movie?

By the way, your statement about the dirt somehow being thinner (?) in the past is
mildly hillarious and wildly unscientific.

What it comes down to my friend is that I think you have been following the sport
for maybe what 10 years? The horses that you saw race-- very fast. The horses
that raced before you arrived on the scene-- not so fast. Mildly hillarious,
wildly unscientific and also a bit sad.

Why I am talking about greatness in the equine with someone who makes show wagers
at Mountaineer I do not know.

[richiebee]

NYC:

You keep arguing but you refuse to look at the record.

1) Look at Secretariat\'s race record as a 2YO.

2) Secretariat was syndicated early in his 3YO campaign. There was never any
thought of running him as a 4YO. Secretariat would have had the same problems
that Spectacular Bid had as a 4YO: not much competition willing to try him and a
lot of lead in the saddlepad.

(Speaking of lead, karma to you guys/gals in the Fantasy Lane Stable-- if Linda
White had saddled UTCB, you might be 30K richer).

3) Sham ran second to Secretariat in the Ky Derby. Do you know how many DERBY
WINNERS have run faster than Sham did that day in the 37 or so Derbys that
followed?

4) One of the horses in Secretariat\'s Derby was a not yet developed Forego. Ever
heard of him? And let me tell you something-- Forego 132 pounds, GZ 126 pounds
(not a match race though) Forego regularly beats GZ at distances from 7f to 10f.
I saw Forego and GZ. Whats your favorite Forego memory?

[nyc1347]

Comparing a great 2-3yo horse in the 70s to a great 4-5 year old in the 2000s is just bananas.  If you think a horse had the capability to run negative 6.5 back then at 3 years old then fine but il take GZ all day and label him as the best of all time beating horses who have proved to run those negative 3s to 6s at multiple distances.  I just dont think any of those horse mentioned beat THAT kind of negative running competition at such an early age.

As far as the amount of dirt on the tracks back then compared to today ask JB about it.. you may be surprised.

[ajkreider]

These sorts of sports debates between generations are

a) a fun past time that often gets people all worked up

b) almost never resolved because there isn\'t a way to compare apples to apples over time

The lone exception seems to be horse racing. This is exactly what the figs are supposed to be able to do. Talk of who carried what weight is factored in.

So, why isn\'t this resolved by going to the figs? And, I believe today\'s horses come out faster, on the whole.  Monarchos got a bet Rag number than Secretariat for the Derby. MONARCHOS!  

Either a serious rethink is in order concerning how great those older horses were, or we should toss fig analysis altogether.

[richiebee]

As to the surface issue, are you saying that there was more \"souping up\" of dirt
surfaces in the 70s than there was in the 80s and 90s? If you are saying that
there is more cushion on today\'s tracks than there was in olden days, I will
contend that track supers were quick to shave that cushion away on big race days
in recent years.

You seem to say that the quality of racing in the first decade of the 21st Century
is better than it was in the 1970s. You are one of the only ones who is saying so.

[nyc1347]

quality is down and I think the biggest factor to quality being garbage these days is the Polytrack surface.  Think about it.. the peak was really the time when GZ was racing.. every horse was running dirt or turf.. we even have Gorella run a negative turf effort!  AMAZING racing at the very top level and NY, kENTUCKY AND cALI WERE was AMAZING CARDS! once the addition of Polytrack came in EVERYTHING in racing started to level off and then go WAAAAY down.

[miff]

Bee,

Once Barbaro and Eight Belles broke down,the outcry from the fringe loons kinda forced tracks to add cushion which slowed raw.Up until 4-5 years ago you could bet that on Saturday in NY and other venues,the track was scraped. Like harness racing,flat tracks were looking for the \'wow\' factor, you know blazing splits with super fast final raw times.

Several years ago,I\'d guess 3 or 4, the computer geeks noticed a major difference in raw times from the prior years at the Spa and other NYRA tracks.I asked about it and was told that it was decided to add cushion for safety\'s sake.Seems they feel that harder surfaces lead to more injuries. There is evidence to the contrary that slow, dull, cuppy surfaces bring the onset of exhaustion much faster which alters a horses stride and promotes injury. Who knows!

If you follow NYRA tracks lately, you will see that most of the time, they keep the surface more to the slow side.


Mike

P.S. I\'d take Fager against any horse,equal weights,no rabbits!

[richiebee]

Please God please someone send NYC a program from Saratoga or the Fall Belmont
meet or Gulfstream or Santa Anita from the late 1970s...

[smalltimer]

Man, you guys need to let it go!!!  
   
So.. who\'s better Rachel or Z?   (lol, of course).

[richiebee]

smalltimer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

   
> So.. who\'s better Rachel or Z?   (lol, of course).

Personal Ensign?