Borel off Bird for Rachel in Preakness - Page 11

jpops757 · #**201** 05-08-2009, 08:27 AM

According to Privman in yesterdays drf, noone knows if Rachel can get into the Preakness field if more than 14 enter even with the supliment. Noone can understand the vague requirements.

Danzig · #**202** 05-08-2009, 08:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpops757

According to Privman in yesterdays drf, noone knows if Rachel can get into the Preakness field if more than 14 enter even with the supliment. Noone can understand the vague requirements.

so, it'd come down to how the officials read the requirements, right? i'd think they'll get rachel in the race.

tector · #**203** 05-08-2009, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

so, it'd come down to how the officials read the requirements, right? i'd think they'll get rachel in the race.

This is one bet you can take to the bank. Only a court order could stop them (which, I think, would be unlikely).

Bobby Fischer · #**204** 05-08-2009, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tector

This is one bet you can take to the bank. Only a court order could stop them (which, I think, would be unlikely).

true that

SniperSB23 · #**205** 05-08-2009, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I'm the most conservative person in the world when it comes to giving horses time between races. I hate running horses back quickly. But in this case, I would definitely run Rachel in the Preakness. She was under a strangle-hold in the Oaks. She wasn't even close to being all out. She could have won by another 5-10 lengths if she was asked. As others have said, that race was like a workout for her.

In addition, the Preakness should be an easy race for her. I don't think there will be a horse in there that can come within 8 lengths of her. I think she will be able to win under a strangle-hold again. I would have no concerns about bringing her back in 15 days in this case.

How can you possibly conclude that? Just cause she wasn't whipped? Have you looked at the fractions? She ran her last furlong in 12.16. To go 5 lengths faster she would have had to have gone in 11.36. To go 10 lengths faster she would have had to go in 10.56. Are we really to believe that is physically possible? If asked she may have moved up 2-3 lengths. This is like Bernardini all over. Everyone said he could have gone so much faster if asked even though the finishing fractions suggested that wasn't possible. Sure enough when finally asked he went no faster than he'd gone in his previous races.

Also, I love the idea of a 3yo filly doing the Whitney/Travers double. That would be awesome.

sumitas · #**206** 05-08-2009, 11:55 AM

Her mile time was 1.36 so that was being asked . Her unexpectedley coming in off 2 weeks rest just seems like Jackson needs a publicity fix .

Danzig · #**207** 05-08-2009, 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sumitas

Her mile time was 1.36 so that was being asked . Her unexpectedley coming in off 2 weeks rest just seems like Jackson needs a publicity fix .

is that why every derby starter that goes in the preakness is running? this seems to fall into the 'she's a filly, shouldn't face the colts' type of mindset. she's actually getting a day more in between than those colts-another advantage to go with a weight break.

ezgoerbaby · #**208** 05-08-2009, 12:14 PM

Simply ridiculous to run her back this quick. I don't see it happening. Hope they wait until late summer/early fall to go against the boys. I really hope she is not the ill fated type. Also...I honestly don't believe Calvin will get the chance to ride RA again...Jess only wants HIS trusted people to handle the horse. I"m probably wrong...happens all the time...but I'm willing to bet on that.

ezgoerbaby · #**209** 05-08-2009, 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danzig

is that why every derby starter that goes in the preakness is running? this seems to fall into the 'she's a filly, shouldn't face the colts' type of mindset. she's actually getting a day more in between than those colts-another advantage to go with a weight break.

She wasn't initially being pointed to a race in two weeks though by the original connections..I would imagine they were letting her rest a bit, not cranking her up to run again in 15 days.

ezgoerbaby · #**210** 05-08-2009, 12:28 PM

He's won the Preakness already...I don't think she wins the Preakness as easily as everyone thinks. I like her as much as the next person, but she's going to be facing some quick stakes colts, not future claiming fillies. Let her grow up and mature a bit. Save her for the big races that can make her more than just a 3 y.o. filly champ. That's just my take on it...

Antitrust32 · #**211** 05-08-2009, 01:11 PM

The more I think of it the more I love Blackthroats suggestion of a Belmont Stakes / Whitney / Travers triple.

Lovely Laurel · #**212** 05-08-2009, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackthroatedwind

I couldn't possibly care less.

Folks:

You have to understand that this guy doesn't care about racing, or life for that matter, beyond the Hudson River. Hell of a handicapper, but if it ain't NYRA related, forget bout it!

blackthroatedwind · #**213** 05-08-2009, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lovely Laurel

Folks:

You have to understand that this guy doesn't care about racing, or life for that matter, beyond the Hudson River. Hell of a handicapper, but if it ain't NYRA related, forget bout it!

Lauren,

Always good to hear from you. Inaccurate.....but good.

Danzig · #**214** 05-08-2009, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ezgoerbaby

She wasn't initially being pointed to a race in two weeks though by the original connections..I would imagine they were letting her rest a bit, not cranking her up to run again in 15 days.

she's already cranked up. you think horses are like a light switch? that she's been turned off? she's in top shape-just like the other horses.
mine that bird wasn't being considered for the preakness til he won the derby. you think the change in schedule will be his undoing? i doubt it.

Danzig · #**215** 05-08-2009, 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaHoss9698

I certainly understand the sentiment of not running back so quick. But, Hull's connections were planning on running in the Woody Stephens (a 7 furlong race) on the Belmont undercard and they switched plans after seeing the Derby. If she's doing well, why not? In my opinion you have to strike while the iron is hot. They might not get another chance like this.

yes, but he's not a fragile hot house flower of a filly. he's not a dwl horse either, so it's all good.

dagolfer33 · #**216** 05-08-2009, 01:53 PM

They just said it for sure, Borel...RA....Preakness....its a go.

mark2061mn · #**217** 05-08-2009, 01:58 PM

http://www.bloodhorse.com/article/50683.htm

Danzig · #**218** 05-08-2009, 02:06 PM

http://www.bloodhorse.com/horse-raci...683&source=rss

Edited press release

Stonestreet Stables and partner Harold T. McCormick announced May 8 that Calvin Borel has agreed to ride Kentucky Oaks (gr. I) winner Rachel Alexandra for the current racing season. Also, Stonestreet said it plans to run the filly in the May 16 Preakness Stakes (gr. I), contingent upon her continuing to train well up to the race.

In making the decision, Borel selected the filly over Mine That Bird, whom he rode to an upset victory in the Kentucky Derby Presented by Yum! Brands (gr. I) and is being pointed toward the preakness.

“It came down to the facts that he knows and loves this horse, that he knows how to get the most from her and he knows how to win,’’ said Jess Jackson of Stonestreet Stables and proprietor of Kendall-Jackson Wine Estates. “They were an amazing team at the Kentucky Oaks—winning by over 20 lengths. We think this is a perfect match of rider and horse.’’

Jackson said Rachel Alexandra will continue her workout schedule under trainer Steve Asmussen.

“If she continues to be in perfect condition, our intention will be to run her in the Preakness,” Jackson said, adding that the final decision would be made next week.

philcski · #**219** 05-08-2009, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cardus

And this is a bad thing?

4,5,5,3,7,8,5,3,5.

ALostTexan · #**220** 05-08-2009, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpops757

According to Privman in yesterdays drf, noone knows if Rachel can get into the Preakness field if more than 14 enter even with the supliment. Noone can understand the vague requirements.

I have my doubts that she will even make the field due to the requirements. If 14 that are originally nominated for the field are there then I don't believe she gets in. I am sure that Zayat and some others can find a couple of nags that were originally nominated, pushing her out.

I don't agree with it in any way, but if I had a horse like Pioneer of the Nile I would probably do the same.